Our Mission Contact Us Subscribe Media Kit Previous Issues Web Links
|
Substance Abuse Management |
|
It’s estimated that drugs-of-abuse costs the U.S. economy well over
$140 billion a year, due to employee theft, lost
productivity/employee turnover, absenteeism, increased healthcare
costs, workers’ compensation, accidents and workplace violence. More than 50 percent of workplace accidents are due to drug abuse, described as use of an illicit drug or prescription drug without a prescription, and 40 percent of all workplace fatalities are related to drug abuse, according to Peter Cholakis, a vice president with Avitar, Inc., a provider of employee drug testing programs. There are two reasons why so many workplace accidents result from drug abuse. First, the employee is impaired, but even when not impaired on the job, drug abusers are more likely to make bad decisions and are prone to risky behavior, not thinking through the ramifications of their behavior. If they were thinking it through, they’d consider what’s at stake, from their jobs, to their physical wellbeing and the safety of their coworkers. “If you know you’re going to be tested for illegal drug use, and can lose your job, you’ll think twice about using,” said Cholakis. For companies thinking about drug testing, new developments are making it more effective and easier to administer. Several innovative corporations have implemented successful drug-free workplace programs centered around oral-based, random, on site testing. “Random drug testing is truly the most effective, and has reduced drug use in the workplace by up to nine or 10 times,” said Cholakis. “Education or interdiction can’t do that.” It’s so effective, that Cholakis says he can make an argument that you don’t have to pre-employment test. However, till, random screening could not transpose effectively and done in the workplace because the traditional testing technique of urine-based lab services was typically considered to be unsuitable for widespread employee testing. An effective random testing program normally tests as many as 50 percent of employees a month. Because it requires observed collection, urine based random testing is not tolerated in many nenvironments. Plus, according to Cholakis, it only detects half of known drug abusers. As many as 4.5 percent of drug tests are positive, but the government states that 8-10 percent of workers abuse drugs. In the construction industry, the number may be as high as 15 percent or 25 percent. Alternatively, oral on-site screening delivers multiple advantages, including convenience, lower testing costs, removal of gender issues, and it can not be adulterated (no known method to “beat the test”). Cheating or beating the urine test is so prevalent, a bill was introduced in March to outlaw sale of adulterants. Adulteration or substitution takes place in two to four percent of tests, and is impossible for a lab to detect (provided test administrators are trained and certified). An innocuous process, oral testing can be used anywhere by anyone and provides a drug screen result within 15 minutes. Whichever method is used, Cholakis said there are issues and myths that need to be clarified before administering a testing program. One myth he works to dispel is the detection window. Most drug tests will only go back three or four days, even for marijuana or THC, not 30 days or longer. For habitual users of marijuana, the typical window is three or four days, for infrequent users, the window is two or three days. Yes, said Cholakis, it can be detected up to 30 days, but that’s a very rare occurrence. Anyway, marijuana is expensive and not the most commonly used drug. The current drug of choice is oxycontin, said Cholakis. But whatever the drug, multiple factors affect the detection window, including body type, metabolism and storage in fat cells. Brought to market in the late 1990s, oral testing has taken a while to take hold; but in the last several years, it has gone from a fraction of market share up to 3 to 5 percent, and will grow to 50 percent in three to five years. Another issue is you don’t want an environment where drug testing is punitive. A testing program must be established in concert with a drug free program. “We have found to set up an effective drug free workplace program you have to have a policy that is communicated well,” said Cholakis. “Testing is a critical measuring tool. You can’t manage what you can’t measure.” However, Avitar does not recommend a zero strike policy. Those who test positive should be entered into an employee assistance program and tested on a more frequent basis. When the results come in, no test should be called a “positive,” until a series of qualitative and analytical steps are completed. The first result is either a “negative” or “non-negative,” said Cholakis. After an analytical test determines quantity and type, a medical review officer looks at the information, and is the only person who can label a test a “positive.” “You need to provide every opportunity for an employee or job applicant to state their case.” Confidentiality and privacy must be guaranteed, too. “Privacy is the most important aspect. Only designated administrators should see the results, and no actions should be shared with others,” added Cholakis. Above all other concerns, safety supersedes all other factors. FSM
|
|
|
|
© 2008 Facility Safety
Management - All Rights Reserved - |
