Validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees

Guohua Li, Joanne E. Brady, Charles Dimaggio, Susan P. Baker, George Rebok

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aims: In the United States, transportation employees who are suspected of using alcohol and drugs are subject to reasonable-cause testing. This study aims to assess the validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees. Methods: Using reasonable-cause testing and random testing data from the Federal Aviation Administration for the years 1995-2005, we calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) and positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of suspected alcohol and drug violations. The true status of violations was based on testing results, with an alcohol violation being defined as a blood alcohol concentration of ≥0.04 mg/dl and a drug violation as a test positive for marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, phencyclidine or opiates. Results: During the 11-year study period, a total of 2284 alcohol tests and 2015 drug tests were performed under the reasonable-cause testing program. The PPV was 37.7% 95% confidence interval (CI), 35.7-39.7% for suspected alcohol violations and 12.6% (95% CI, 11.2-14.1%) for suspected drug violations. Random testing revealed an overall prevalence of 0.09% for alcohol violations and 0.6% for drug violations. The LR+ was 653.6 (95% CI, 581.7-734.3) for suspected alcohol violations and 22.5 (95% CI, 19.6-25.7) for suspected drug violations. Conclusion: The discriminative power of reasonable-cause testing suggests that, despite its limited positive predictive value, physical and behavioral observation represents an efficient screening method for detecting alcohol and drug violations. The limited positive predictive value of reasonable-cause testing in aviation employees is due in part to the very low prevalence of alcohol and drug violations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1771-1775
Number of pages5
JournalAddiction
Volume105
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2010

Fingerprint

Aviation
Alcohols
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Confidence Intervals
Opiate Alkaloids
Amphetamines
Phencyclidine
Cannabis
Cocaine

Keywords

  • Accuracy
  • aviation
  • epidemiology
  • positive likelihood ratio
  • positive predictive value
  • substance abuse

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees. / Li, Guohua; Brady, Joanne E.; Dimaggio, Charles; Baker, Susan P.; Rebok, George.

In: Addiction, Vol. 105, No. 10, 10.2010, p. 1771-1775.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Li, Guohua ; Brady, Joanne E. ; Dimaggio, Charles ; Baker, Susan P. ; Rebok, George. / Validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees. In: Addiction. 2010 ; Vol. 105, No. 10. pp. 1771-1775.
@article{52f11bc435284d48993102c6a5d0d4f4,
title = "Validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees",
abstract = "Aims: In the United States, transportation employees who are suspected of using alcohol and drugs are subject to reasonable-cause testing. This study aims to assess the validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees. Methods: Using reasonable-cause testing and random testing data from the Federal Aviation Administration for the years 1995-2005, we calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) and positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of suspected alcohol and drug violations. The true status of violations was based on testing results, with an alcohol violation being defined as a blood alcohol concentration of ≥0.04 mg/dl and a drug violation as a test positive for marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, phencyclidine or opiates. Results: During the 11-year study period, a total of 2284 alcohol tests and 2015 drug tests were performed under the reasonable-cause testing program. The PPV was 37.7{\%} 95{\%} confidence interval (CI), 35.7-39.7{\%} for suspected alcohol violations and 12.6{\%} (95{\%} CI, 11.2-14.1{\%}) for suspected drug violations. Random testing revealed an overall prevalence of 0.09{\%} for alcohol violations and 0.6{\%} for drug violations. The LR+ was 653.6 (95{\%} CI, 581.7-734.3) for suspected alcohol violations and 22.5 (95{\%} CI, 19.6-25.7) for suspected drug violations. Conclusion: The discriminative power of reasonable-cause testing suggests that, despite its limited positive predictive value, physical and behavioral observation represents an efficient screening method for detecting alcohol and drug violations. The limited positive predictive value of reasonable-cause testing in aviation employees is due in part to the very low prevalence of alcohol and drug violations.",
keywords = "Accuracy, aviation, epidemiology, positive likelihood ratio, positive predictive value, substance abuse",
author = "Guohua Li and Brady, {Joanne E.} and Charles Dimaggio and Baker, {Susan P.} and George Rebok",
year = "2010",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03051.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "105",
pages = "1771--1775",
journal = "Addiction",
issn = "0965-2140",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees

AU - Li, Guohua

AU - Brady, Joanne E.

AU - Dimaggio, Charles

AU - Baker, Susan P.

AU - Rebok, George

PY - 2010/10

Y1 - 2010/10

N2 - Aims: In the United States, transportation employees who are suspected of using alcohol and drugs are subject to reasonable-cause testing. This study aims to assess the validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees. Methods: Using reasonable-cause testing and random testing data from the Federal Aviation Administration for the years 1995-2005, we calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) and positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of suspected alcohol and drug violations. The true status of violations was based on testing results, with an alcohol violation being defined as a blood alcohol concentration of ≥0.04 mg/dl and a drug violation as a test positive for marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, phencyclidine or opiates. Results: During the 11-year study period, a total of 2284 alcohol tests and 2015 drug tests were performed under the reasonable-cause testing program. The PPV was 37.7% 95% confidence interval (CI), 35.7-39.7% for suspected alcohol violations and 12.6% (95% CI, 11.2-14.1%) for suspected drug violations. Random testing revealed an overall prevalence of 0.09% for alcohol violations and 0.6% for drug violations. The LR+ was 653.6 (95% CI, 581.7-734.3) for suspected alcohol violations and 22.5 (95% CI, 19.6-25.7) for suspected drug violations. Conclusion: The discriminative power of reasonable-cause testing suggests that, despite its limited positive predictive value, physical and behavioral observation represents an efficient screening method for detecting alcohol and drug violations. The limited positive predictive value of reasonable-cause testing in aviation employees is due in part to the very low prevalence of alcohol and drug violations.

AB - Aims: In the United States, transportation employees who are suspected of using alcohol and drugs are subject to reasonable-cause testing. This study aims to assess the validity of suspected alcohol and drug violations in aviation employees. Methods: Using reasonable-cause testing and random testing data from the Federal Aviation Administration for the years 1995-2005, we calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) and positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of suspected alcohol and drug violations. The true status of violations was based on testing results, with an alcohol violation being defined as a blood alcohol concentration of ≥0.04 mg/dl and a drug violation as a test positive for marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, phencyclidine or opiates. Results: During the 11-year study period, a total of 2284 alcohol tests and 2015 drug tests were performed under the reasonable-cause testing program. The PPV was 37.7% 95% confidence interval (CI), 35.7-39.7% for suspected alcohol violations and 12.6% (95% CI, 11.2-14.1%) for suspected drug violations. Random testing revealed an overall prevalence of 0.09% for alcohol violations and 0.6% for drug violations. The LR+ was 653.6 (95% CI, 581.7-734.3) for suspected alcohol violations and 22.5 (95% CI, 19.6-25.7) for suspected drug violations. Conclusion: The discriminative power of reasonable-cause testing suggests that, despite its limited positive predictive value, physical and behavioral observation represents an efficient screening method for detecting alcohol and drug violations. The limited positive predictive value of reasonable-cause testing in aviation employees is due in part to the very low prevalence of alcohol and drug violations.

KW - Accuracy

KW - aviation

KW - epidemiology

KW - positive likelihood ratio

KW - positive predictive value

KW - substance abuse

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77956754876&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77956754876&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03051.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03051.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 20712820

AN - SCOPUS:77956754876

VL - 105

SP - 1771

EP - 1775

JO - Addiction

JF - Addiction

SN - 0965-2140

IS - 10

ER -