Literature DB >> 22362574

Workplace drug testing, different matrices different objectives.

Lolita M Tsanaclis1, John F C Wicks, Alice A M Chasin.   

Abstract

Drug testing is used by employers to detect drug use by employees or job candidates. It can identify recent use of alcohol, prescription drugs, and illicit drugs as a screening tool for potential health and safety and performance issues. Urine is the most commonly used sample for illicit drugs. It detects the use of a drug within the last few days and as such is evidence of recent use; but a positive test does not necessarily mean that the individual was impaired at the time of the test. Abstention from use for three days will often produce a negative test result. Analysis of hair provides a much longer window of detection, typically 1 to 3 months. Hence the likelihood of a falsely negative test using hair is very much less than with a urine test. Conversely, a negative hair test is a substantially stronger indicator of a non-drug user than a negative urine test. Oral fluid (saliva) is also easy to collect. Drugs remain in oral fluid for a similar time as in blood. The method is a good way of detecting current use and is more likely to reflect current impairment. It offers promise as a test in post-accident, for cause, and on-duty situations. Studies have shown that within the same industrial settings, hair testing can detect twice as many drug users as urine testing.
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22362574     DOI: 10.1002/dta.399

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Test Anal        ISSN: 1942-7603            Impact factor:   3.345


  3 in total

Review 1.  Alternative Sampling Strategies for Cytochrome P450 Phenotyping.

Authors:  Pieter M M De Kesel; Willy E Lambert; Christophe P Stove
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  National Survey Exploring Drug Screening in Pharmacy Programs.

Authors:  Patricia L Darbishire; Patricia S Devine; Alexa J Proctor; Wesley J Horner; Emily M Hoffman; Carol A Ott; David G Fuentes; Jeremy Hughes; Priya B Patel
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.047

3.  Oral fluid cannabinoid concentrations following controlled smoked cannabis in chronic frequent and occasional smokers.

Authors:  Sebastien Anizan; Garry Milman; Nathalie Desrosiers; Allan J Barnes; David A Gorelick; Marilyn A Huestis
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2013-08-17       Impact factor: 4.142

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.