Premium
Accuracy of Consumer‐marketed smartphone‐paired alcohol breath testing devices: A laboratory validation study
Author(s) -
Delgado Mucio Kit,
Shofer Frances,
Wetherill Reagan,
Curtis Brenda,
Hemmons Jessica,
Spencer Evan,
Branas Charles,
Wiebe Douglas J.,
Kranzler Henry R.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
alcoholism: clinical and experimental research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.267
H-Index - 153
eISSN - 1530-0277
pISSN - 0145-6008
DOI - 10.1111/acer.14597
Subject(s) - blood alcohol , phlebotomy , medicine , blood alcohol content , confidence interval , alcohol , mobile device , poison control , injury prevention , medical emergency , surgery , computer science , biochemistry , chemistry , operating system
Background Although alcohol breath testing devices that pair with smartphones are promoted for the prevention of alcohol‐impaired driving, their accuracy has not been established. Methods In a within‐subjects laboratory study, we administered weight‐based doses of ethanol to two groups of 10 healthy, moderate drinkers aiming to achieve a target peak blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.10%. We obtained a peak phlebotomy BAC and measured breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) with a police‐grade device (Intoxilyzer 240) and two randomly ordered series of 3 consumer smartphone‐paired devices (6 total devices) with measurements every 20 min until the BrAC reached <0.02% on the police device. Ten participants tested the first 3 devices, and the other 10 participants tested the other 3 devices. We measured mean paired differences in BrAC with 95% confidence intervals between the police‐grade device and consumer devices. Results The enrolled sample ( N = 20) included 11 females; 15 white, 3 Asian, and 2 Black participants; with a mean age of 27 and mean BMI of 24.6. Peak BACs ranged from 0.06–0.14%. All 7 devices underestimated BAC by >0.01%, though the BACtrack Mobile Pro and police‐grade device were consistently more accurate than the Drinkmate and Evoc. Compared with the police‐grade device measurements, the BACtrack Mobile Pro readings were consistently higher, the BACtrack Vio and Alcohoot measurements similar, and the Floome, Drinkmake, and Evoc consistently lower. The BACtrack Mobile Pro and Alcohoot were most sensitive in detecting BAC driving limit thresholds, while the Drinkmate and Evoc devices failed to detect BAC limit thresholds more than 50% of the time relative to the police‐grade device. Conclusions The accuracy of smartphone‐paired devices varied widely in this laboratory study of healthy participants. Although some devices are suitable for clinical and research purposes, others underestimated BAC, creating the potential to mislead intoxicated users into thinking that they are fit to drive.