[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Robert Swotinsky MD
Password: orange
Date: 12 Apr 2008
Time: 14:15:05 -0700
Remote Name: 72.255.54.201
I do not understand this question. The employer would conduct on-site tests at the same time as DOT tests so that it avoids stand down? Stand down is when an employer removes an employee with a lab-positive result from safety-sensitive duty prior to the MRO's completion of the verification process. I don't understand how on-site testing would effect this. Nevertheless, I'll address the issue of dual on-site/DOT tests:
Like Dr. Steve, I don't know how common this is among employers. In my opinion, an employer who tests more than one specimen per donor per testing event is inviting a challenge should one specimen test negative and the other test positive. For example, if the employer conducts an on-site test that is negative (e.g., due to use of an adulterant that goes nondetected) while simultaneously conducting a DOT drug test that is non-negative, any challenge by the donor will highlight the inconsistency between the two results. A decisionmaker who's not savvy about the tests may agree with this challenge and thereby nullify the test results. Performing multiple tests at the same time is not only confusing for employers, but also for collection sites. In 2004, when HHS proposed expanding its testing procedures to include on-site tests, hair tests, etc., it did not authorize use of more than one test per donor per testing event. I think any perceived benefit of conducting paired on-site/DOT tests is outweighed by the aforementioned problems.