Evaluation of DrugWipe® 6S with the WipeAlyser® reader for drug screening of drivers

Ragnhild Elén Gjulem Jamt; Hallvard Gjerde; Grethe Brennhovd Clausen; Lihn Bache-Andreassen; Elisabeth Leere Øiestad

doi:10.1093/jat/bkaf028

Evaluation of DrugWipe® 6S with the WipeAlyser® reader for drug screening of drivers

J Anal Toxicol. 2025 Apr 11:bkaf028. doi: 10.1093/jat/bkaf028. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Ragnhild Elén Gjulem Jamt¹, Hallvard Gjerde¹, Grethe Brennhovd Clausen², Lihn Bache-Andreassen¹, Elisabeth Leere Øiestad^{1

3}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Forensic Sciences, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950, Nydalen, Oslo 0424, Norway.
² Technical and Material Department, Norwegian National Road Policing Service, PO Box 100, Stavern 3291, Norway.
³ Department of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, PO Box 1068 Blindern, Oslo 0316, Norway.

PMID: 40354046
DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkaf028

Abstract

On-site drug screening of oral fluid samples has gained attention because of its convenience and rapid results. The aim of this investigation was to compare the results of preliminary screening for drugs in oral fluid samples collected from suspected drug-impaired drivers using DrugWipe 6S and WipeAlyser reader with the results obtained from blood samples. Additionally, we compared the DrugWipe test results with findings of drug traces detected within the used DrugWipe devices. Police officers selected a sample of 355 suspected drug-impaired drivers in 2023. They used DrugWipe 6S for preliminary drug screening of drivers. After the field drug testing of oral fluid, the apprehended drivers were brought to a physician for the collection of blood samples. The collected samples (DrugWipe devices and blood samples) were submitted to the Norwegian National Forensic Toxicology Laboratory for analysis. The proportion of positive DrugWipe results that were unconfirmed when analysing blood samples was 82% for opiates, 75% for cocaine, and ∼19%-20% for amphetamines, cannabis, and benzodiazepines. The proportion of negative DrugWipe results that were found positive in blood samples was for cannabis and benzodiazepines ∼13%-14%, and for other drugs <3%. Detected drug traces in the used DrugWipe devices corresponded well with DrugWipe readouts for cannabis, amphetamines, and cocaine. The lack of correspondence between DrugWipe test results for cocaine and findings in blood may be due to the fact that the concentration of cocaine in saliva is often much higher than in blood, and the DrugWipe test is very sensitive. In addition, degradation and elimination of cocaine before the blood sample is taken may contribute to cocaine concentrations below the cut-off concentration in blood. For opiates and benzodiazepines, traces of drugs were found in relatively few DrugWipe devices. Many unconfirmed positives for opiates were most likely due to cross-reaction with substances in 'snus' (snuff tobacco).