CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Iwersen-Bergmann S, Stein S, Schmoldt A. Blutalkohol 2004; 41(6): 493-506. |
|
Affiliation |
Zentrum der Rechtsmedizin, Klin. der J.-W.-Goethe-Universitat, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, Germany |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2004, International Committee on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety and Bund gegen Alkohol und Drogen im Straßenverkehr, Publisher Steintor Verlag) |
|
DOI |
unavailable |
PMID |
unavailable |
|
Abstract |
Despite increased blood sampling there is a slightly increased tendency for police suspicion and actual detection of drug use to coincide. This would indicate a considerable number of undetected cases of driving under the influence of drugs in Hamburg. Over the last few years, the frequency of detection for methadone flunitrazepam, clonazepane and amphetamine derivates changed due to an increase in availability of these substances on the black market. Given the data it is impossible to determine whether the detection frequency of cannabis is merely a result of proper police training in the early recognition of signs for drug use or whether it is a result of an alteration in cannabis consumption. Cannabis consumption exceeds opiate consumption and it can be assumed that this was the case in the past. Therefore the improved police training would enable a more realistic picture of actual drug consumption in road traffic today than would have been possible only a few years ago. As a rule all psychoactive substances were abused in combination with other drugs regardless of whether they acted pharmacologically alike or not (> 80% in combination). The only exception here would be cannabis, where other psychotropic substances could be detected in less than half of the cases (42.4%). In comparison with other drugs, however, a proportionately large number of cases of cannabis use in combination with only alcohol could be detected (26.6 %). A mixed consumption of drugs was found most frequently in combination with methadone and it can be assumed, as with benzodiazepine, that in most cases these were not prescription drugs prescribed by a physician. Road traffic accident findings would indicate that mixed consumption of drugs increase the probability of accidents. Methadone and Benzodiazepine were detected more frequently in road traffic accidents than in merely suspected driving under the influence of drugs. This is not applicable to any other substance with the exception of barbiturates, which are no longer relevant in number. Substances other than methadone and benzodiazepine, which are not listed in the existing (section) 24a StVG (German Traffic Law) are largely irrelevant to traffic offences. This would imply that prescription medication- when used properly - does not affect safe driving. Conclusion: It is therefore recommended to follow the recommendations by SCHOCH [14] which state that proof of other drugs and alcohol (> 0.3(per mille)) should be recorded in the appendix of (section) 24a section 2 StVG (German Traffic Law) Furthermore, benzodiazepines as well as methadone used in conjunction with either alcohol (> 0.3(per mille)) or another psychoactive substance should be recorded in the latter. |