Workplace Drug Testing As A Drug Prevention Strategy for Public Transport Drivers: A Cross-sectional Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17986/blm.1689Keywords:
workplace, drug testing, urine, hairAbstract
Objective: Workplace drug testing for public transport drivers is required to apply or renew their driver’s certificate as well as a psychological evaluation according to the decision taken by the Adana Municipality Transportation Coordination Center in May 2015. In the context of this study, our objective is to safeguard both the rights of public transportation drivers who have tested positive for illicit substances and the safety of passengers. To this end, we aimed to corroborate the presence of these substances in urine or hair samples through liquid chromatography/ tandem mass spectrometry and to provide a nuanced interpretation of the results.
Methods: The sample of the study consisted of 35 drivers who applied to the Forensic Toxicology Laboratory of Çukurova University, Department of Forensic Medicine, for confirmation analysis between January 2019 and December 2022. Opioids, cocaine, marijuana, amphetamines and their derivatives, benzodiazepine, buprenorphine, and synthetic cannabinoids were confirmed by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry in the urine or hair samples of 35 drivers.
Results: All of 35 public transport drivers were male in this study and the mean age was 48.8±9.1 years old. The most detected substance in urine by immunoassay test were benzodiazepine, amphetamine and opiate, respectively. However, 91.5% of drivers showed false positive results in confirmatory methods. Benzodiazepine was detected in only 5% by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry while more than half of the 35 samples were positive for benzodiazepine in screening test.
Conclusion: Immunoassay tests are susceptible to generating false positive results due to the cross-reactivity of analytes.
Downloads
References
Normand J, Lempert RO, O’Brien CP. Under the Influence? Drugs and the American Workforce. Washington DC (USA): National Academy Press; 1994.336 p
Carpenter CS. Workplace drug testing and worker drug use. Health Serv Res 2007; 42: 795–810. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00632. x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00632.x
Verstraete AG, Pierce A. Workplace drug testing in Europe. Forensic Science International 2001:121(1–2);2-6. doi: 1016/S0379-0738(01)00445-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(01)00445-5
Pidd K., Roche AM. How effective is drug testing as a workplace safety strategy? A systematic review of the evidence. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2014;71: 154–165. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2014.05.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.05.012
Lange WR, Cabanilla BR, Moler G, Bernacki, EJ, Frankenfield DL, Fudala PJ. Pre-employment drug screening at the Johns-Hopkins Hospital, 1989 and 1991. Am. J. Drug Alcohol Abuse 1994; 20 (1): 35–46. doi: 10.3109/00952999409084055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/00952999409084055
Verstraete A. Workplace Drug Testing. Pharmaceutical Press, London, UK pp 1-461
Levine B, Kerrigan S. Principle of Forensic Toxicology. 5th edition New York (USA): Springer; 2020. P. 709. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-42917-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42917-1
XXXX Municipality Transportation Coordination Center. Parliament decisions. Erişim adresi: https://www.adana.bel.tr/panel/uploads/mecliskararlari_v/files/ekim-meclis-karari-2016.pdf, Erişim tarihi:9.05.2023
Cashman CM, Ruotsalainen JJ, Greiner BA, Beirne BA, Verbeek JH. Alcohol and Drug Screening of Occupational Drivers for Preventing Injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;2. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006566.pub2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006566.pub2
Kazanga I, Tameni S, Piccinotti A, Floris I, Zancetti G, Polettini A. Prevalence of Drug Abuse Among Workers: Strengths and Pitfalls of the Recent Italian Workplace Drug Testing Legislation. Forensic Sci Int 2012;215(1-3):46-50. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.03.009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.03.009
Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Sağlık Bakanlığı. COVID-19(SARS-CoV-2 Enfeksiyonu): Genel Bilgiler, Epidemiyoloji ve Tanı. Erişim adresi: covid19.saglik.gov.tr/Eklenti/39551/0/covid19rehberigenelbilgilerepidemiyolojivetanipdf.pdf. Erişim tarihi: 10.05.2023
Edvardsen HME, Moan IS, Christophersen AS, Gierde H. Use of alcohol and drugs by employees in selected business areas in Norway: a study using oral fluid testing and questionnaires. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology 2015; 10:46. doi: 10.1186/s12995-015-0087-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-015-0087-0
James Price, DO, MPH, "Does Performing Preplacement Workplace Hair Drug Testing Influence US Department of Transportation Random and Post-accident Urine Drug Test Positivity Rates? J Addict Med 2018; 12(2): 163-166. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000000384
Kintz P. Drug testing in hair. Boca Raton (USA): CRC press. 1996. 304 p. doi: 10.4324/9781003068884 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003068884
Pawlowski J., Ellingrod V. Urine drug screens: When might a test result be false-positive? Current Psychiatry 2015;14(10): 17-24.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 The Bulletin of Legal Medicine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The Journal and content of this website is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) License. The Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) allows users to copy, distribute and transmit an article, adapt the article and make commercial use of the article. The CC BY license permits commercial and non-commercial re-use of an open access article, as long as the author is properly attributed.
