RESUMO
Drug use within prisons is increasingly complex and unpredictable. Benzodiazepines are currently one of the most common drugs detected in individuals leaving Scottish prisons; however, understanding illicit benzodiazepine use within prisons and assessing the potential harm to individuals is challenging due to the lack of available analytical data on the substances circulating. Increasingly, materials, such as paper and clothing, infused with novel benzodiazepines have been identified as a smuggling route into Scottish prisons. Methods were developed for the qualitative and quantitative analysis of benzodiazepines using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and applied to 495 seized samples from 11 Scottish prisons, including papers, cards, blotters, powders, tablets, and clothing. Evolution in the benzodiazepines being detected was demonstrated, with etizolam being the most prevalent throughout 2020/2021 following which flubromazepam and bromazolam detections increased. Additionally, significant changes in the smuggling methods and drug formats detected occurred over time following policy changes within prisons. These data represent the first reported widescale etizolam quantitation data and demonstrate high levels of variability across all sample types, most notably within tablets (0.34-2.33 mg per tablet). Additionally, concentration mapping of a whole seized card sample revealed the total concentration of drug present (312.5 mg) and demonstrated variability across the surface of the card (1.16-1.87 mg/cm2 ). These data highlight the challenges of consistent dosing for individuals and the high risks of unintentional overdose. Increased understanding of the challenge of such drug smuggling and benzodiazepine use will aid in the development of strategies to reduce supply and mitigate harm.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ion mobility spectrometry is used for the rapid detection of drugs at points of security but are unable to differentiate some drugs leading to the instrument alarming for a drug not present in the sample. This can be particularly problematic for samples that alarm for fentanyl. In this study, fentanyl immunoassay strips were evaluated for use as a secondary test for fentanyl, including for the testing of alternative matrices, such as powders, e-liquids, and infused papers and textiles. METHODS: The limit of detection of fentanyl immunoassay strips was examined along with their selectivity to 18 fentanyl analogsand 72 other drugs and cutting agents. The effectiveness of the test strips at the detection of fentanyl in the presence of other drugs was examined by testing a series of concentrations of fentanyl in solution in combination with other drugs. The testing of alternative matrices was explored with laboratory prepared samples through sampling with cotton buds and extraction in water. RESULTS: The fentanyl immunoassay strips detected fentanyl at concentrations of 45 ng/mL and reacted with 16 of 18 tested fentanyl analogs with carfentanil and norfentanyl being the only analogs to not react. There was no reactivity with other drugs or cutting agents. The effectiveness of the fentanyl test strips was not reduced when fentanyl was mixed with other drugs. Fentanyl was successfully detected with high sensitivity in all alternative matrices. CONCLUSION: The fentanyl immunoassay strips were found to be an effective secondary test for fentanyl and at least 16 fentanyl analogs in seized drug samples, including when mixed with other drugs. The effectiveness of the sampling methods for alternative matrices should be further evaluated using fentanyl and fentanyl analog casework samples. The use of this method by law enforcement and other agencies should be examined to assess its effectiveness and ease of use in operational settings.
