Drug monitoring in the workplace: Results from the California Commercial Laboratory Drug Testing Project.

Assessing Drug Use in the Workplace: A Comparison of Self- Report, Urinalysis, and Hair Analysis

“…Although those early studies generally supported the validity of self-reports, more recent research has cast considerable doubt on a worker's willingness to disclose drug use, despite assurances of confi-dentiality and anonymity (Cook 1989). Chemical testing methods, particularly urinalysis, have also been used to estimate drug use preva-lence (Anglin and Westland 1989). Selfreports and chemical testing methods would appear to offer contrasting strengths and weaknesses as prevalence assessment techniques.…”

Comments on D. Blaze‐Temple's ‘Drug testing in the Australian workplace: an overview of the issues’*

“…For example, it is stated that the "dramatic reductions" (p. 62) in performance deficits can be ascribed to the drug testing programs, that the program studied by Crouch et al [14] had been "... quite successful in reducing costs ..." (p. 63), and that "... drag testing is probably cost-effective" (p. 69). Other reviews have concluded that the cost-effectlveness of drug testing programs has not been demonstrated [6,18]. In addition, the limitations outlined by Crouch et al [14] do not appear to have been considered in interpreting the results of their study.…”

“…While no comparable published data appear to be available for Australia, results of urine testing at laboratories in the United States indicate that prevalence of illicit drug use is low in workplace populations compared with other populations tested. This is indicated by a rate of positive tests of only 1-2% for employment samples [6]. No support is provided for the statement that workplace alcohol problems are likely to be greater in the Australian context than in the United States, apart from references to two studies of prevalence of alcohol use in Australian worksite populations [7,8].…”

Drug testing in the Australian workplace: Response to the commentary by G. Webb

“…Webb summarizes Anglin and Westland's report of the proportion of positive illicit drug test results in California in 1988 to indicate that my article presents an inflated view of prevalence of alcohol and drug problems in Australia [11]. Anglin and Westland report first year findings from a drug testing project which collects data from four highvolume drug testing laboratories in California.…”