Saliva Drug Tests

Open1

Does anyone have any experience with using a saliva drug test kit as a screening tool for reasonable suspicion (to be followed up with a trip to a certified lab for positive results)?

Also, has anyone used a Breathalyzer or similar device to detect alcohol for reasonable suspicion?
My website search doesn't turn up much useful info on this topic, unless I were searching for 1001 ways to thwart a test... My search here and on shrm's site didn't prove fruitful either.

Irie

We have not used a saliva test for drugs but we do use a breathalyzer. Our drug testing is a urine test performed at a clinic.

We do have a breathalyzer on premises which we use. Our breathalyzer is used for screening only. Employees are given a breathalyzer if we have reasonable suspicion if their supervisor detects an odor, and we also do a preliminary breathalyzer before sending people for random testing. If an employee blows .04 or greater (Ohio's limit is .08) then they get a breathalyzer at the clinic which can be used in court. Hope this helps.

ACU Frank

I've used the saliva tests in the past and loved them. Results in 15 minutes, on-site testing, and a third of the price. Also, in three years I never had one single employee/applicant challenge the results. Because the testee is sitting right there throughout the entire process, you have no chain of custody complaints, and the testee can see the indicator just as well as you can.

Irie

Who administers these tests? Does someone come on premises to do them or does someone from your HR department administer them? I'm interested in knowing more information about this. Thanks.

ACU Frank

I trained all location managers to do it... Tests for HQ personnel would be performed by myself or my assistant.

I've been told by female managers that it's easier than a home pregnancy test.

Irie

Do you use these for random, for-cause, and post-accident testing? What do you do if you get a positive result for a legal/illegal drug? Do you have an MRO review the results and talk to the employee if you get a positive?

If our employees test positive from a drug test at the clinic, there is an MRO who contacts the employee to discuss the results prior to contacting us. This way if the employee is taking a prescribed medication and has a current prescription the results will be reported to us as a negative.

I don't think I would want to be responsible for drug testing my employees. There are too many legalities involved I'd not want to get caught up in.

ACU Frank

I used them for all pre-employment screenings and reasonable suspicion tests. We had a formal random test program through a 3rd party vendor.

If an applicant/employee tested positive, they were informed of their right to have a second test performed at a lab. That test would have to be done immediately, the subject would be accompanied and observed, and the subject would split the cost of that test with the company 50/50.

As I mentioned earlier, not once did anyone ever ask for the second test.

Open1

"I've used the saliva tests in the past and loved them. Results in 15 minutes, on-site testing, and a third of the price. Also, in three years I never had one single employee/applicant challenge the results. Because the testee is sitting right there throughout the entire process, you have no chain of custody complaints, and the testee can see the indicator just as well as you can."

Do you have any objective results on their reliability (false negatives and false positives), legal challenges, etc. to provide us for references?

With the product I was shown, the "indicator" is hard to read unless you've been trained on it. The "fifteen minutes" is spent with 10 minutes making sure the testee does not use the restroom, take a sip of water, chew gum, smoke, etc. Then they have to sit like a medical patient with a "thermometer-like" test swab in the mouth to absorb saliva (hopefully enough, otherwise the results are not valid) to soak the test swab, and next you put the test swab in the indicator device. The nice thing is that last part only takes two minutes.

Irie

Do you have a medical review officer review positive results at some point? What if the employee tests positive and they have a current rx for the meds? What do you do if they test positive and don't have a current rx for the meds? Do you as an employer really want to know what prescription drugs your employees are taking?

ACU Frank

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 02-12-07 AT 09:07AM (CST)[/font][br][br]As I said earlier, if they test positive, they go for a traditional lab test. This would include MRO involvement.

As for difficulty in reading the indicator, I didn't experience that... even though at least half our store managers were looking for any reason they could find not to use the product.

Open1

Does anyone have any objective results on their reliability (false negatives and false positives), legal challenges, etc. to provide us for references?

We have an MRO for standard urine tests.

I reviewed the instructions for reading the results. They would NOT be "easily" readable by the testee.

I hesitate because we'd have to escort a "positive" testee to a lab - once the saliva is positive they may be under the influence and shouldn't drive on their own... It would have been simpler just to drive them to the lab in the first place. Of course, we could always put them in a cab...and never see them again.

Still, the lack of scientific studies concerns me.

ACU Frank

>Does anyone have any objective results on their
>reliability (false negatives and false
>positives), legal challenges, etc. to provide us
>for references?
>
>We have an MRO for standard urine tests.
>
>I reviewed the instructions for reading the
>results. They would NOT be "easily" readable by
>the testee.
>
>I hesitate because we'd have to escort a
>"positive" testee to a lab - once the saliva is
>positive they may be under the influence and
>shouldn't drive on their own... It would have
>been simpler just to drive them to the lab in
>the first place. Of course, we could always put
>them in a cab...and never see them again.
>
>Still, the lack of scientific studies concerns
>me.



I think you've entirely missed the point... unless your percentage of positive tests is incredibly high.