Assessing Drug Use in the Workplace: A Comparison of Self-Report, Urinalysis, and Hair Analysis (From The Validity of Self-Reported Drug Use: Improving the Accuracy of Survey Estimates, P 247-272, 1997, Lana Harrison and Arthur Hughes, eds. - See NCJ 167339)

• NCJ Number: 167350
• Author(s): R F Cook; A D Bernstein; C M Andrews
• Date Published: 1997
• Length: 26 pages
• Grant Number(s): 5-R01-DA05691
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute on Drug Abuse
• Sale Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Publication Type: Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: DCC

Annotation

This study compares self-reporting and chemical testing for their validity in measuring illicit drug use in the workplace.

Abstract

Twelve-hundred employees of a steel plant in the western United States were randomly assigned to four different self-report methods of assessing illicit drug use: individual interview in the workplace; group-administered questionnaire in the workplace; telephone interview; and individual interview off the worksite. Urine specimens on all 928 participating subjects were collected and analyzed, and hair analysis was conducted on 307 subjects. Although self-reports produced higher prevalence rates than the chemical tests, analyses combining the results of the three assessment methods showed that the actual prevalence rate was approximately 50 percent higher than the estimate produced by self-reports alone. The group-administered questionnaire method produced prevalence rates that were roughly half those of the other self-report methods. The findings cast doubt on the validity of self-reports as a means of estimating drug use prevalence and suggest the need for multiple assessment methods. Tables, references