Workplace drug testing in Italy – critical considerations

Vignali, Claudia; Stramesi, Cristiana; Morini, Luca; Pozzi, Fulvia; Collo, Giancarlo; Groppi, Angelo

doi:10.1002/dta.1458

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…professional drivers) tend to refrain from drugs‐of‐abuse more than other categories with lower responsibility . Though plausible, this explanation is not sufficient to justify the low meta‐analytical prevalence reported here, that probably ensues from pitfalls in the Italian law, already pointed out by several authors . Critical issues are: (1) WDT is usually performed without surprise effect (in a recent study, 50% of the subjects declared that they knew well in advance the day of the test).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…On the whole, 18 studies were included in the final review and meta‐analysis to estimate the overall prevalence of positivity at WDT (Table ). They were all cross‐sectional, for a total of 212 654 participants.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[13,20,[25][26][27][28]33] All of them answered and completed the missing data. On the whole, 18 studies [12][13][14][15]18,[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] were included in the final review and meta-analysis to estimate the overall prevalence of positivity at WDT (Table 1). They were all cross-sectional, for a total of 212 654 participants.…”

Section: Selected Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Seven years of workplace drug testing in Italy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Rosso

Montomoli

Morini

et al. 2017

Drug Testing and Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Italy, Workplace Drug Testing (WDT) has been compulsory by law for specific categories of workers since 2008, offering the opportunity to compare studies conducted within a single regulatory framework. The aims of this paper are to estimate the overall prevalence of WDT positivity (at screening survey) among Italian workers and evaluate the percentage of true and false positives at confirmation analysis. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the scientific literature on WDT in Italy from January 2008 to March 2015 was carried out, according to the MOOSE guidelines. A random effects model was utilized to calculate pooled prevalence. Potential sources of heterogeneity were explored using sensitivity test and subgroup analysis. The overall meta-analytical prevalence of positivity at WDT among Italian workers was 1.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.1-1.7%]. It was significantly lower among workers screened with an on-site test (1%; 95% CI = 0.5-1.5%), compared with a bench-top test (1.7%; 95% CI = 1.3-2.1%). Nine studies provided data on false positives at the screening test, with a combined prevalence estimate - calculated on positive cases - of 30% (95% CI = 16-44%). In Italy, the number of true positives at first-level workplace drug testing is low, while the frequency of false positives is relatively high. A revision of the Italian legislation on the subject seems advisable. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Selected Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Seven years of workplace drug testing in Italy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Rosso

Montomoli

Morini

et al. 2017

Drug Testing and Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Italy the expected WDT positivity rate was around 4–10% . However numerous publications have reported a positivity rate lower than 2% (diverging also significantly from similar experiences in the international arena), indicating a de facto failure of the aim set by Italian legislators, that is, to identify even the occasional drug consumer . As a matter of fact it is not realistic to think that the positivity rate for WDT among Italian workers is so low.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Workplace drug testing and alcohol policy in Italy; there is still a long way to go

Rosso¹,

Perotto

Feola³

et al. 2013

Drug Testing and Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effectiveness of workplace drug testing (WDT) in Italy has recently been questioned, while very little is known about the real consumption of alcoholic beverages among workers performing hazardous jobs, such as professional drivers (PDs). The aim of this study is to investigate the modality and frequency of WDT execution and of alcohol consumption in the above category. Anonymous questionnaires were used to collect information. Four hundred and ninety-seven questionnaires were collected; 50.1% declared that they know well in advance when they will be subjected to screening tests for drugs, while 19.5% claimed they have never been subjected to such a test. The greater the number of employees in a company, the greater the likelihood that the tests are performed with a genuinely surprise effect [odds ratio (OR) 2.41, 5.39 and 9.07, respectively, for businesses with 5-14 employees, 15-50 and more than 50, compared with companies with less than 5 employees, p < 0.01]. Twenty-one point four percent declared they drink alcoholic beverages during working hours or work breaks. This attitude is positively correlated with driver seniority [OR 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.11 p < 0.01] and is more common in those who operate on mainly international routes (OR 3.34 CI 1.30-8.59 p < 0.01) and only occasionally consume meals in restaurants (OR 4.27, CI 1.19-15.42 p < 0.05). Fifteen percent of the participants have an AUDIT C score ≥ 5. In conclusion WDT is largely ineffective, particularly in small businesses. The high percentage of PDs who claim to drink during working hours and who are hazardous drinkers requires a further strengthening of prevention strategies in this area.

show abstract

“…In Saudi Arabia, Bassiony [3] reported that cannabis, amphetamine and opiates were the most widely used illicit drugs detect in urine samples collected from suspects who were arrested for possessing and/or taking illicit drugs. Over the past few decades, preemployment drug testing has become a common mandatory routine practice in the world workplace [4][5][6][7][8]. Pre-employment drug testing poison control laboratories certified by the Saudi Arabia governmental authority are performing roughly 46,000 sample per year [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urine Samples Tampering Pattern for Drugs of Abuse Testing: Experience of the Saudi Arabia Poison Control Centers

Ragab¹,

Alkhayyal²,

Al-Mousa³

et al. 2017

J Addict Res Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, urine substance of abuse (SOA) testing in the pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings has become common in many countries all over the world. There have been multiple published research recommending the performance of the urine sample validity test (SVT) for substance of abuse testing administered in the pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings. On the opposite side, very little researches focusing on variable procedures of urine adulteration in (SOA) testing process, including diluted, substituted, adulterated, and invalid tests. The current research investigated 7985 submitted urine drug test samples for sample validity test from pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings in Saudi Arabia over one year. All preliminary immunoassay screen-positive urine sample drug tests were confirmed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry. This article found that the prevalence of tampering (diluted, substituted, or invalid tests) in urine samples from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected settings were 0.87% and 0.69%, respectively. The percentage of diluted, substituted, adulterated and invalid urine specimens from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected cases were 75%, 21.4%, 1.7%, 1.7% and 63.6%, 36.4%, 0%, 0% respectively. The most common substance of abuse detected from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected specimens were cannabis, followed by amphetamines. We recommend that all urine samples taken for substance of abuse testing from both the pre-employment/workplace and suspected settings need to be investigated for validity.

show abstract

Workplace drug testing in Italy – critical considerations

Cited by 13 publications

References 8 publications

Seven years of workplace drug testing in Italy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Seven years of workplace drug testing in Italy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Workplace drug testing and alcohol policy in Italy; there is still a long way to go

Urine Samples Tampering Pattern for Drugs of Abuse Testing: Experience of the Saudi Arabia Poison Control Centers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About