"Drug and alcohol testing continues to be an important part of screening both before and after hire. Fifty-eight percent of respondents indicated their organization conducted drug and/or alcohol screening, and this number jumped to 62% for respondents with organizations of more than 4,000 employees.
"The vast majority of organizations (95%) that indicated they conducted drug testing, perform urine tests. Breath alcohol tests (23%), hair (9%), saliva (8%), and blood testing (6%) were also conducted, but much less frequently.
"Fifty percent of the organizations that conducted drug and alcohol screening used an electronic Chain-of-Custody (eCOC) form to track results with 10% indicating they would adopt the form if it became acceptable by federal regulation."

"Amphetamines (which includes amphetamine and methamphetamine) positivity continued its year-over-year upward trend, increasing more than eight percent in urine testing in both the general U.S. and federally-mandated, safety-sensitive workforces compared to 2015. Throughout the last decade, this rise has been driven primarily by amphetamine use which includes certain prescription drugs such as Adderall®.
"Although methamphetamine positivity in urine testing declined between 2005 and 2008, the positivity rate plateaued between 2008 and 2012, and has increased steadily since. Between 2012 and 2016, it climbed 64 percent in the general U.S. workforce and 14 percent among federally-mandated, safety-sensitive workers. In oral fluid, methamphetamines positivity increased 75 percent between 2013 (0.24%) and 2016 (0.42%)."

"The majority of human resource professionals surveyed in this brief study report that their organizations have a drug testing program; furthermore a majority of those respondents report some perceived benefits in reduced absenteeism and workers’ compensation claims, and increased worker productivity/performance. More than half of employers surveyed conduct drug tests on all job candidates, while only 29% do not conduct drug tests on any job candidates. In addition, most employers who use tests on job candidates have done so for seven years or more. When employers do post-employment drug tests, the most common tests are post-accident testing, random testing, and reasonable suspicion testing."

"Methamphetamine Positivity Increases Across All Testing Types
"Amphetamines are a class of central nervous system stimulants that includes methamphetamine (best known for being produced in clandestine labs) and prescription medications for conditions such as ADHD and narcolepsy.
"Continuing a multi-year upward trend, amphetamines use – specifically the use of methamphetamine – showed an increase across all three specimen types. Combined U.S. workforce data in urine showed a 10 percent (0.85% vs. 0.77%) year-over-year increase in amphetamines positivity in 2013 compared to 2012. In the U.S. general workforce, methamphetamine positivity in urine drug tests increased 27 percent (0.14% vs. 0.11%); oral fluid methamphetamine positivity increased by 50 percent (0.24% vs. 0.16%). In addition, the positivity rate in hair testing jumped by 55 percent (1.2% vs. 0.77%). Amphetamines positivity rates are now at their highest levels on record and methamphetamine positivity rates are at their highest levels since 2007, across all specimen types.
"Oxycodones Positivity Declines for the Second Consecutive Year
"The DTI data also reported declines for prescription opiates positivity in urine drug tests. Prescription opiates refer to drugs used for pain management, such as hydrocodone and oxycodones. The current data shows oxycodones positivity declined 8.3 percent (0.88% vs. 0.96%) between 2013 and 2012 and 12.7 percent (0.96% vs. 1.1%) between 2012 and 2011 in the combined U.S. workforce. Four states experienced double-digit declines in oxycodones positivity rates in both 2013 and 2012: Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Ohio. Hydrocodone positivity remained at 1.3 percent between 2012 and 2013."

"• An estimated 6.4 percent, or 7.3 million, of full-time workers reported use of marijuana during the past month (Tables 2.2 and 2.3).
"• Adults aged 26 to 34 were only about half as likely as 18- to 25-year-olds to be past month marijuana users (8.0 vs. 15.9 percent). Past month use of marijuana was lower with increasing age (Table 2.2).
"• The prevalence of past month marijuana use was higher for males than females (7.9 vs. 4.3 percent, respectively) (Table 2.2).
"• An estimated 11.0 percent of workers reporting two or more races used marijuana during the past month. This was higher than among non-Hispanic white adults (6.9 percent). Fewer Hispanic adults (4.6 percent) reported past month marijuana use than non-Hispanic white adults who reported two or more races (Table 2.2).
"• Higher educational attainment and higher family income were associated with a lower prevalence of current marijuana use (Table 2.3)."

"• Workers with a college education had a lower prevalence of current illicit drug use compared with those without a college education. The prevalence of past month use of illicit drugs was lower among those with higher levels of education than those with less education (college graduate [5.7 percent] vs. less than high school [11.2 percent]) (Figure 2.6 and Table 2.3).
"• The prevalence of current illicit drug use was lower among workers with higher family incomes than among workers with lower family incomes. An estimated 13.2 percent of workers who reported family income that was less than $20,000 had used illicit drugs during the past month. In contrast, 6.0 percent of workers who reported income in the highest category––$75,000 or more––had used illicit drugs during the past month (Figure 2.7 and Table 2.3).
"• Residents of noncore counties had a lower prevalence of current illicit drug use (4.5 to 6.2 percent) compared with residents of micropolitan statistical area (7.1 percent), small metropolitan statistical area (MSA; 8.8 percent), and large MSA (8.3 percent) counties (Table 2.3)."

"• An estimated 8.8 percent, or 10.1 million, of full-time workers reported past month heavy alcohol use (Figure 2.3 and Tables 2.2 and 2.3).
"• Past month heavy alcohol use was related to age. Among younger workers (18 to 25 years old), 16.3 percent reported past month heavy alcohol use compared with 10.4 percent of 26- to 34-year-olds, 8.1 percent of 35- to 49-year-olds, and 4.7 percent of 50- to 64-year-olds (Figure 2.3 and Table 2.2).
"• Males were three times as likely as females to be past month heavy alcohol users (12.3 vs. 4.1 percent) (Figure 2.4 and Table 2.2).
"• An estimated 10.1 percent of white adults reported heavy alcohol use in the past month. This was higher than the percentage among black adults (5.4 percent), Asian adults (2.9 percent), Hispanic adults (6.9 percent), and adults reporting two or more races (7.5 percent) (Figure 2.5 and Table 2.2).
"• Residents of noncore rural counties had a lower prevalence of past month heavy alcohol use (7.5 percent) compared with residents of micropolitan statistical area (9.2 percent), small MSA (9.8 percent), and large MSA (8.1 percent) counties (Table 2.3).
"• Workers with a college education had a lower prevalence of past month heavy alcohol use compared with those without a college education. Past month heavy alcohol use was lower among those with higher levels of education than those with less education (college graduate [6.7 percent] vs. less than high school [10.8 percent]) (Figure 2.6 and Table 2.3)."

The American Management Association conducted surveys of workplace surveillance and medical testing throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s. In 1991, drug testing of some kind was conducted by 63% of companies surveyed, growing to 81% in 1996, falling to 66% in 2000 and then to 62% in 2004. Drug testing of new hires was conducted by 48% of companies in 1991, growing to 68% in 1996, falling to 61% in 2000 and then to 54.5% in 2004. Drug testing of current employees was conducted by 52% of companies surveyed in 1991, rising to 70% in 1996, falling to 47% in 2000 and then to 44.3% in 2004.

"Collecting information about the performance of impairment testing proved extremely difficult because the field is so small. Only a handful of companies have ever marketed impairment testing systems and there is no list of their names. However, the Institute conducted an extensive networking program based on our contacts in the field that identified what we believe to be every company that has ever marketed impairment tests. There are only 10 such companies. Of these, only 6 manufactured systems for employers. Three of these 6 are now out of business. This means that there are only 3 companies currently in business that provide impairment testing systems for employers.
"By contacting these employers, we were able to identify 18 employers who had used impairment testing. Of these, 14 employers participated in our study. One employer that had used impairment testing is now out of business. The remaining 3 employers declined to participate."