A comparison of saliva testing to urinalysis in an arrestee population.

Past studies have concluded that individuals under criminal justice supervision often underreport their recent use of illicit drugs. To address this underreporting, objective biological measures, such as urine, saliva, and hair testing, have been used to gain better estimates of illegal drug use. While urinalysis is generally recognized as the reference standard, a method recently introduced in nonlaboratory settings for ascertaining drug use-saliva testing-may offer an alternative to urinalysis. To date, however, no studies have compared saliva testing to urinalysis among criminal justice populations. In the current study, urine and saliva specimens were collected from 114 adult arrestees interviewed as part of Maryland's Substance Abuse Need for Treatment among Arrestees (SANTA) project. With urinalysis as the reference standard, analysis of the saliva test results indicated sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 99% for cocaine and sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 100% for heroin. For marijuana, however, the saliva results indicated a sensitivity of only 5%. Anecdotal reports from the field suggest that saliva may have some advantages over urine because of the ease of collection, invulnerability to adulteration, and minimal personal invasiveness. These findings suggest that a more comprehensive study to evaluate the efficacy of saliva testing in field research may be warranted.

Beyond the theoretical rhetoric: a proposal to study the consequences of drug legalization.

Drug legalization is a frequently-debated drug control policy alternative. It should come as little surprise, therefore, that the arguments in favor of both legalization and prohibition have resulted in a conceptual stalemate. While theoretical deliberations are unquestionably valuable, they seem to have propelled this particular issue to its limit. To date, no works have suggested any empirical studies that might test the framework and potential consequences of drug legalization. In the current study, the arguments surrounding the drug legalization debate are synthesized into a proposal for future research. Such a proposal illustrates that the core elements surrounding drug legalization are not only testable, but that the time may be right to consider such an empirical effort.

A typology of St. Louis arrestees surveyed through the arrestee drug abuse monitoring (ADAM) program.

Past research has demonstrated that the characteristics of substance abusers vary considerably. Often, however, addicts are considered members of a single, homogeneous group. These erroneous designations may indeed prevent the successful rehabilitation of substance abusers. In the present study, hierarchical and K-means cluster analyses are used to identify a typology of substance users from a sample of 1,580 St. Louis arrestees surveyed through the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program. Five clusters are yielded in the present analysis. The analyses illustrate not only that drug-using classifications differ between criminal and non-criminal populations, but that arrestee populations themselves vary interjurisdictionally. Given these findings, implications for local and regional drug treatment programs are assessed.