Drug testing in the workplace--are methods legally defensible? A survey of experts, arbitrators, and testing laboratories.
Drug testing in the workplace--are methods legally defensible? A survey of experts, arbitrators, and testing laboratories.
复制标题
工作场所的药物检测——方法在法律上站得住脚吗？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1987
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. J. Butler
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Hoyt;R. Finnigan;T. Née;T. Shults;T. J. Butler
雇主越来越多地使用尿液分析结果来检测工作场所使用违禁物质的情况。基于尿液分析结果呈阳性而采取的行动可能对员工的生活和职业产生重大影响，并可能面临法律的挑战。尿液分析的重要方面是分析方法的选择及其法律的可辩护性。医学主任经常被要求选择检测实验室，但很少有数据相关的分析方法与法律的辩护。为了评估药物检测方法的法律的可辩护性，我们对技术专家、检测实验室和仲裁员进行了调查。专家们报告说，所评定的方法在法律的可辩护性方面存在很大差异。检验人员在药物使用病例中具有相当丰富的经验，并了解尿液分析结果的关键作用，但无法区分分析方法的法律的辩护性。商业实验室尿液分析实践在实验室之间差异很大。本文的目的是为公司的医疗主管提供信息，使他们能够在选择尿液分析实验室和方法时做出明智的决定。
Urinalysis results are increasingly being used by employers to detect use of prohibited substances in the workplace. Actions taken on the basis of positive urinalysis results can have a significant effect on employees' lives and careers, and may face legal challenge. Important aspects of urinalysis are choice of analytical methods and their legal defensibility. Medical directors are frequently required to select testing laboratories, but have had few data correlating analytical methods with legal defensibility. To evaluate the legal defensibility of the methods used for drug testing, we conducted a survey of technical experts, testing laboratories, and arbitrators. Experts reported wide differences in the legal defensibility of methods rated. Arbitrators had considerable experience in drug use cases and understood the critical role of urinalysis results, but were unable to distinguish legal defensibility of analytical methods. Commercial laboratory practice in urinalysis varies widely among laboratories. An objective of this article is to provide company medical directors with information that will enable them to make informed decisions when choosing urinalysis laboratories and methods.