Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Mar 22;9(4):e14630.
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14630. eCollection 2023 Apr.

Roadside screening tests for cannabis use: A systematic review

Erica Wennberg  1   2 , Sarah B Windle  1   3 , Kristian B Filion  1   3   4 , Brett D Thombs  1   3   4   5   6 , Genevieve Gore  7 , Andrea Benedetti  3   4   8 , Roland Grad  1   9 , Carolyn Ells  1   4   6   9   10 , Mark J Eisenberg  1   3   4   11
Affiliations
Review

Roadside screening tests for cannabis use: A systematic review

Erica Wennberg et al. Heliyon. .

Abstract

As more countries legalize recreational cannabis, roadside screening programs are imperative to detect and deter driving under the influence of cannabis. This systematic review evaluated roadside screening tests for cannabis use. We searched six databases (inception-March 2020) and grey literature sources for primary studies evaluating test characteristics of roadside screening tests for cannabis use compared to laboratory tests for cannabinoids in blood or oral fluid. The synthesis was focused on sensitivity and specificity of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) detection. 101 studies were included. Oral fluid tests were higher in specificity and lower in sensitivity compared to urine tests when evaluated against blood laboratory tests. Oral fluid tests were higher in sensitivity and similar in specificity compared to observational tests when evaluated against blood and oral fluid laboratory tests. Sensitivity was variable among oral fluid tests; two instrumented immunoassays (Draeger DrugTest 5000 [5 ng/mL THC cut-off] and Alere DDS 2 Mobile Test System) appeared to perform best, but definitive conclusions could not be drawn due to imprecise estimates. Specificities were similar. Overall, oral fluid tests showed the most promise for use in roadside screening for blood THC levels over legal limits; their continued development and testing are warranted. Urine tests are generally inadvisable, and observational tests require sensitivity improvements.

Keywords: Cannabis; DUIC; Impaired driving; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow of study selection.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Summary of QUADAS-2 quality assessment results across all included studies by study design.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rogeberg O., Elvik R. The effects of cannabis intoxication on motor vehicle collision revisited and revised. Addiction. 2016;111(8):1348–1359. - PubMed
    1. Li M., Brady J., DiMaggio C., Lusardi A., Tzong K., Li G. Marijuana use and motor vehicle crashes. Epidemiol. Rev. 2012;34:65–72. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hartman R.L., Huestis M.A. Cannabis effects on driving skills. Clin. Chem. 2013;59(3):478–492. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Asbridge M., Hayden J., Cartwright J. Acute cannabis consumption and motor vehicle collision risk: systematic review of observational studies and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2012;344:e536. - PMC - PubMed
    1. AH E. Marijuana use and driving in Washington State: risk perceptions and behaviors before and after implementation of retail sales. Traffic Inj. Prev. 2019;20(1):23–29. - PubMed