U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Screening and Assessing Adolescents for Substance Use Disorders. Rockville (MD): Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (US); 1999. (Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series, No. 31.)

Cover of Screening and Assessing Adolescents for Substance Use Disorders

Screening and Assessing Adolescents for Substance Use Disorders.

Show details

Appendix C --Drug Identification and Testing in The Juvenile Justice System

This appendix on laboratory testing is an excerpt from Drug Identification and Testing in the Juvenile Justice System, by Ann H. Crowe, American Probation and Parole Association, and Shay Bilchik, Administrator, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Published by the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice in May 1998.

The full text is available at http://www.ncjrs.org/ojjdp/drugid/contents.html (this excerpt accessed August 10, 1998).

Drug Recognition Techniques

Drug recognition techniques were developed originally by the Los Angeles Police Department to help law enforcement officers identify drug-impaired motorists in a traffic arrest situation. The Orange County, California, Probation Department later applied and adapted the techniques for use in community corrections settings, using their findings to expand the period for detecting illicit drug use.

Drug recognition techniques are systematic and standardized evaluation techniques for detecting signs and symptoms of substance abuse. All the areas evaluated are observable physical reactions to specific types of drugs. Three key elements in the process are

  • Verifying that the person's physical responses deviate from normal
  • Ruling out a cause that is not drug related
  • Using diagnostic procedures to determine the category or combination of substances that are likely to cause the impairment

A skilled practitioner can determine, with a high degree of accuracy, whether a youth has used some substances recently. Drug recognition techniques include the identification of the category of chemical substances ingested, although it is not possible to identify specific drugs within a classification. These techniques can determine whether a youth currently is under the influence of substances or has used a particular drug or combination of drugs within 72 hours of ingestion. However, it is not possible to determine the amount of the substance consumed.

Using drug recognition techniques is cost efficient because they often can eliminate the need for costly urinalysis by screening out those youth who do not show symptoms of current or recent substance use. This does not mean these youth have not used illicit drugs; however, if the symptoms are not apparent through drug recognition techniques, it is unlikely there is a sufficient quantity of most drugs, or their metabolites, left in the body for urinalysis to produce a positive test result. (Marijuana and PCP may be exceptions, as low levels sometimes can be detected through urinalysis for as long as 3 to 4 weeks.) Initial training for staff to become proficient in using these techniques can be costly, but once the staff are trained, ongoing expenses are minimal.

Use of drug recognition techniques provides immediate results with which to confront youth. These techniques are minimally intrusive in detecting illicit drug use, compared with the collection of body fluids required for urinalysis. The process is systematic and standardized, reducing the possibility of bias or error by trained staff.

Not all categories of drugs are equally detectable using drug recognition techniques, and the specific drugs ingested cannot be determined. Thus, the techniques used alone may not be conclusive in determining the exact substance used or in detecting the effects of illicit drugs that have minimal influence on the physical responses measured by the techniques.

There are 12 steps in the drug recognition process:

  • Drug history
  • Breath alcohol test
  • Divided-attention psychophysical tests
  • Medical questions and initial observations
  • Examination for muscle rigidity
  • Examination for injection sites
  • Examination of vital signs
  • Darkroom examination
  • Examination of the eyes
  • Youth's statements and additional observations by staff
  • Opinions of the evaluator
  • Toxicological examination

It is imperative that practitioners be well trained in using these techniques and that each step be followed precisely to preserve the credibility and integrity of the drug recognition process.

Chemical Testing

Chemical testing is the most physically intrusive and the most expensive of the three methods of identifying illicit drug use; however, it is also the most accurate. Several scientific methods are available for detecting illicit drug use in individuals, including urinalysis, blood analysis, hair analysis, and saliva tests. However, saliva and breath analysis for alcohol and urinalysis for drugs other than alcohol are the methods currently recommended because they are reliable and relatively inexpensive compared with other methods of chemical testing.

Immunoassay tests generally are used for initial tests, and they are considered reliable for detecting the presence of illicit drugs in a person's system. These tests depend on naturally occurring reactions between antibodies and antigens. A specific antibody can be produced to react with a particular antigen, such as a drug. A "tag" is chemically attached to a sample of the illicit drug to be detected.

Immunoassay procedures vary primarily in the tag used to produce the reaction. The following immunoassay methods of urinalysis have been developed. Often, the type of tag used to produce the chemical reaction is reflected in the name of the test:

  • Radioimmunoassay (RIA)
  • Latex agglutination immunoassay (LAIA)
  • Enzyme immunoassay (EIA)
  • Fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA)
  • Kinetic interaction of microparticles in solution (KIMS)
  • Ascent multi-immunoassay (AMIA)

During an immunoassay process, the reagent (the tagged drug), the urine, and the antibody are combined. The tagged drug and the untagged drug (if present in the urine) compete for binding sites with the antibody. If a sufficient concentration of drug is in the urine, little of the tagged drug can bind with the antibody. The results will indicate the amount of tagged drug that either was or was not bound with the antibody. These results are compared with a sample containing a known amount of a drug to determine whether the urine contained a measurable amount of the substance.

Immunoassay tests provide qualitative results that indicate the presence or absence of a chemical relative to a certain cutoff level. However, except for the RIA method used primarily by the military, which provides quantitative results, they cannot indicate the actual amount of the illicit drug in the system or when it was ingested.

Chromatography methods of urinalysis extract the drug from the urine in a concentrated form. This is then processed by laboratory instruments using heat or liquids, causing the drug metabolites to separate. These methodologies include gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry (GC/MS), gas chromatography (GC), and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). They are the only other procedures providing a quantitative reading of the level of drugs in one's system. GC/MS is considered the "gold standard" of urinalysis testing, and although it is the most expensive, it is often used to confirm positive results of initial tests. Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) was one of the earliest methods developed, but it has been found to be extremely unreliable and is not recommended for use in the criminal or juvenile justice system (Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1990).

Breath analysis is the most commonly used and most cost-effective method of detecting levels of alcohol intoxication. Because alcohol evaporates quickly from urine, urinalysis generally is not used to test for alcohol.

The cutoff level is the amount of drug or metabolite that must be in the specimen for a test to show a positive result. A positive test indicates the amount of drug present is above the cutoff level; negative results show there is no drug or the amount is below the cutoff level. The cutoff level is usually measured in nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml), and recommended cutoff levels for illicit drug categories have been developed by the Division of Workplace Programs, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) (see table below). Cutoff levels for confirmation tests are generally set lower than those for initial tests (see table on the following page). Agencies are encouraged to establish cutoff levels consistent with those recommended by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) guidelines (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1994), as they are more likely to be accepted by courts if the results of drug tests are challenged.

It is important that agencies conducting urinalysis have well-defined policies and procedures for doing so. Following are some issues that should be considered in developing policies. The documents listed in the references and suggested readings section of this Summary are sources of additional information on these topics.

Recommended Cutoff Levels for Initial Tests

Recommended Cutoff Levels for Initial Tests
Cannabinoids*50 ng/ml
Cocaine*300 ng/ml
Opiates*300 ng/ml
Amphetamines/Methamphetamines*1,000 ng/ml
PCP*25 ng/ml
Benzodiazepines**100 ng/ml
Barbiturates**300 ng/ml
Methadone**300 ng/ml
*U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Mandatory Guidelines for Testing Levels.

**Cutoff levels for these drugs are not included in the HHS. guidelines because they may be legally prescribed. The cutoff levels cited are those recommended by the scientific community.
Sources: Federal Register 59(11):29922.

American Probation and Parole Association. Drug Testing Guidelines and Practices for Juvenile Probation and Parole Agencies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1992.

Frequency of testing

Staff and monetary resources can be wasted if tests are conducted more often than necessary. However, testing should occur with sufficient frequency to ensure there is a reasonable opportunity to detect youth who are using illicit drugs. Policies should establish minimum frequencies for testing (e.g., once per week, three times per month). These should be flexible enough that personnel could test any youth if circumstances so dictated. For example, a youth whose behavior seems erratic might be tested before the next random test time occurs.

Because different drugs of abuse stay in the body for varying lengths of time, ranging from a few hours to several days (see table on following page), it is helpful to know the youth's drug(s) of choice to decide how often he or she should be tested. Many programs test youth initially and periodically during their time in the program for a broad range of illicit drugs, but most of the time they test only for those substances the youth has been known to use. Another factor to consider is the youth's progress in the program. Initially, testing may be performed much more often, with testing frequency being reduced for youth whose results are consistently negative. A response to the youth should always be made following testing, whether the results are positive or negative. A realistic appraisal of staff tasks also is important. Thus, caseloads and other responsibilities of staff must be considered when deciding how often to test.

Some agencies conduct testing at set times, while others advise youth that they are subject to testing at any time. Scheduling tests can help staff members organize their tasks and time efficiently. However, when juveniles know they will be tested at certain times, they may learn to schedule their substance abuse accordingly to avoid detection. Therefore, random testing is generally recommended.

Recommended Cutoff Levels for Confirmation Tests
Cannabinoids*15 ng/ml
Cocaine*150 ng/ml
Opiates*300 ng/ml
Amphetamines/
Methamphetamines*
500 ng/ml
PCP*25 ng/ml
Benzodiazepines**250 ng/ml
Barbiturates**250 ng/ml
Methadone**250 ng/ml
*U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Mandatory Guidelines for Testing Levels.

**Cutoff levels for these drugs are not included in the HHS guidelines because they may be legally prescribed. The cutoff levels cited are those recommended by the scientific community.
Sources: Federal Register 59(11):29922.

American Probation and Parole Association. Drug Testing Guidelines and Practices for Juvenile Probation and Parole Agencies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1992.

Observed specimen collection

To avoid the possibility of specimens being adulterated or otherwise tampered with, urination should be observed by a staff member who is the same sex as the youth. There are two ways youth may attempt to taint a urine sample: by ingesting something before giving the sample or by adding something to the specimen after it leaves the body. Examples of substances youth might try to ingest before a drug test include large quantities of water, acidic liquids (such as lime or lemon juice or vinegar), diuretics, pectin, and oriental tea. Water, bleach, toilet bowl cleaner, and soap are examples of substances youth might try to add to a specimen during or after urination. Most of these substances will not affect the accuracy of most drug tests unless the amount of drug remaining in the youth's system is already very close to the cutoff level. Test manufacturers also have taken steps to design tests that detect adulterants or ensure specimens are brought to the proper pH level before they are analyzed. Another ploy some youth might use if not supervised is to substitute a specimen they have taken earlier or one from another individual. A substitution should be easily detectable by the temperature of the sample; some collection cups now have temperature strips to ensure the sample is consistent with body temperature. Youth also might make a sample useless by punching a hole in the collection cup. Because of all these possibilities, it is recommended that collection of specimens be observed to rule out any potential for adulteration, switching of samples, or tampering with collection cups.

Approximate Duration of Detectability of Selected Drugs*
Drug Duration of Drug Detectability
AlcoholVery short**
Amphetamine2-4 days
Methamphetamine2-4 days
Barbiturates
  • Most types
2-4 days
  • Phenobarbital
Up to 30 days
BenzodiazepinesUp to 30 days
Cocaine metabolites12-72 hours
Methadone 2-4 days
Opiates
(heroin, codeine, morphine)
2-4 days
Cannabinoids (marijuana)
  • Casual use
2-7 days
  • Chronic use
Up to 30 days
Phencyclidine (PCP)
  • Casual use
2-7 days
  • Chronic use
Up to 30 days
*These provide only general guidelines. Many variables should be considered in interpreting duration of detectability. These include drug metabolism and half-life, the youth's physical condition, the youth's fluid balance and state of hydration, and the route and frequency of ingestion.

**The period of detection depends on the amount consumed. Approximately 1 ounce of alcohol is excreted per hour.

Source: Division of Workplace Programs, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Chain of custody

There must be a record of the whereabouts and persons handling the urine specimen and test results at all times. This includes documentation of the specimen collection; handling, storage, transportation, and testing; and dissemination of results. All drug-testing specimens, supplies, and equipment should be kept in a locked storage area.

Onsite testing or contracting for services

There are both instruments and field kits that can be used by agency personnel to conduct initial immunoassay tests. If used according to manufacturer's directions, these provide accurate qualitative results. However, it is also possible to contract with a laboratory to analyze the specimens collected from youth. Volume of testing, staff time, training level for processing tests, the time required to obtain results, and the availability of laboratories will be factors to consider in selecting either onsite or laboratory services. Some programs use a combination of onsite and laboratory testing. For example, they may conduct initial tests onsite and, if necessary, send positive tests to a laboratory for confirmation. Using commercial laboratories, health departments, and forensics laboratories might be explored.

Safety measures

One aspect of safety includes procedures for handling and testing urine specimens. There are no known cases of transmission of HIV through laboratory contact with urine. However, it is wise for personnel to take standard precautions when handling urine to protect themselves from any potential disease transmission. Safety procedures should include wearing rubber gloves, lab coats, and goggles.

Safety measures also should be employed to protect the specimens. Therefore, rules should include no smoking, eating, or drinking in the area where specimens are stored or handled. No food should be in the same refrigerator with specimens.

Safety concerns also should be related to the youth in the program. Staff should be trained to identify the possible withdrawal symptoms or side effects of chemical use that might endanger a youth's health and safety. Some substances may lead to erratic behavior that could endanger the youth or others. Staff should know how to intervene appropriately if these are noticed. If youth have injected drugs, it may be important for them to receive counseling and testing for HIV/AIDS and other blood-borne infections.

Finally, safety also refers to the development of guidelines for staff and youth when revealing positive results to juveniles. When working with potentially violent youth, staff should be trained to use designated procedures in case of an emergency.

Quality assurance and quality control

Steps should be taken by agency personnel or laboratories to document the accuracy and reliability of the testing program regularly. Without such measures, the program may be subject to legal liability issues.

Report of results

Onsite noninstrument tests will yield virtually instant results. However, onsite instrument and laboratory testing procedures will take longer. For youth, timely responses to their behavior are important. The type of agency and the way results will be used also will affect how soon results may be needed. For detention programs, results may be needed before the youth goes to court. Thus, the ACA/IBH project recommends "[s]pecimen collection should take place during the intake process, and testing should occur before the pre-hearing or within 48 hours of detention" (American Correctional Association/Institute for Behavior and Health, 1995, p. 4). Initial information also is needed for case planning. The American Probation and Parole Association Guidelines state the turnaround time for receiving a report of results "should be 72 hours or less from the time the specimen reaches the laboratory until the results are received by agency personnel" (APPA, 1992, p. 49).

Confirmation

A positive result may be confirmed in three ways: a statement of admission by the youth, a second test using the same methodology, or a second test using a different methodology. For legal proceedings, especially if a youth's freedom may be limited, a second test using a different methodology may be necessary. Confirmation by GC/MS is required in some jurisdictions because it is the most accurate test. If results are going to be used for treatment planning or for internal program procedures, the other methods of confirmation may be acceptable.

Responding to results

Unless a response follows every test administered, youth may receive an unintended message that drug testing is simply procedural and does not have much impact. Chemical testing, assessments, and drug recognition techniques are tools available to juvenile justice agencies and practitioners to identify and monitor substance abuse among youth. The most critical element of any program is how the results are used to intervene with the youth.

References

  1. American Correctional Association/Institute for Behavior and Health, Inc. Testing Juvenile Detainees for Illegal Drug Use. Final report. Laurel, MD: American Correctional Association. 1995.
  2. American Probation and Parole Association. Drug Testing Guidelines and Practices for Juvenile Probation and Parole Agencies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1992.
  3. Bureau of Justice Assistance. A Comparison of Urinalysis Technologies for Drug Testing in Criminal Justice. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance. 1990.
  4. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Mandatory guidelines for Federal workplace drug testing programs. Federal Register. 1994;59(110):29921–29922.

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (1.9M)

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...