Use of alcohol and drugs by Norwegian employees: a pilot study using questionnaires and analysis of oral fluid

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The use of alcohol and drugs may affect workplace safety and productivity. Little is known about the magnitude of this problem in Norway.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Employee recruitment methods with or without individual follow-up were compared. The employees filled in a questionnaire and provided a sample of oral fluid. Samples were analysed for alcohol, ethyl glucuronide (EtG; a biological marker of recent large alcohol intake), psychoactive medicinal drugs and illegal drugs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Participation rates with and without individual follow-up were 96% and 68%, respectively. Alcohol was negative (≤0.1 mg/ml) in all samples, but 21.0% reported the intake of alcohol during the last 24 h. EtG was positive (>2.2 ng/ml) in 2.1% of the samples. In-efficiency or hangover at work during the past year was reported by 24.3%, while 6.2% had been absent from work due to the use of alcohol. The combination of self-report and analytical testing indicated that medicinal or illegal drugs had been used during the last 48 h by 5.1% and 1.7% of the participants, respectively; while only 4.2% and 0.4% admitted the use in the questionnaire.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Self-reported data suggest that hangover after drinking alcohol appears to be the largest substance abuse problem at Norwegian workplaces, resulting in absence and inefficiency at work. Analysis of oral fluid revealed that the use of illegal drugs was more common than drinking alcohol before working or at the workplace. The analysis of oral fluid may be a valuable tool in obtaining additional information on alcohol and drug use compared to using questionnaires alone.</p

Alcohol and drugs among motorcycle riders compared with car and van drivers killed in road crashes in Norway during 2001-2010

Abstract Background Approximately 3.05 million motor vehicles are registered in Norway. Motorcycles and mopeds (MMs) represent 11% of the vehicles and 2% of the rides but as much as 21% of drivers killed in road traffic crashes

The implementation of per-se limits for driving under the influence of benzodiazepines and related drugs: No increased risk for arrest during therapeutic use in Norway

Objective: To investigate whether the use of recommended therapeutic doses of medicinal drugs has led to suspicion of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) after implementation of legislative limits for illicit and medicinal drugs in 2012. Methods: Data from suspected drug-impaired drivers apprehended by the police from 2013 to 2015 were selected from the Norwegian Forensic Toxicology Database. The blood samples had been analyzed for benzodiazepines (BZDs), z-hypnotics, opioids, stimulants, certain hallucinogens, and alcohol. Drivers who tested positive for one BZD or a z-hypnotic only, were included in the study. Drug concentrations measured in their blood samples were compared to the maximal obtainable steady state concentrations if the drug had been used in accordance with the recommendations set by the Norwegian Directorate of Health. Results: BZDs or z-hypnotics were found in 10 248 samples, representing 59.6% of the total number of drivers arrested for suspected DUID (n = 17 201). Only one BZD or z-hypnotic with a blood drug concentration above the legislative limit was detected in 390 (2.3%) of the total number of samples. Clonazepam was the most frequently detected BZD (n = 4656), while as a single drug above the legislative limit, it was detected in only 3.6% (n = 168) of the clonazepam-positive blood samples. For drivers testing positive for only one z-hypnotic, drug concentrations above the legislative limit were found in 27% (n = 55) of the blood samples that tested positive for zolpidem and 12.4% (n = 53) of the samples that tested positive for zopiclone. In total, 155 subjects out of 10 248 testing positive for BZDs or z-hypnotics displayed concentrations above the legislative limit but within the concentration ranges that are expected when taking recommended therapeutic drug doses, and 77 below the legislativel limit. Conclusions: The results show that the implementation of legislative limits for BZDs and z-hypnotics may have contributed to DUID suspicion for a small group of patients using therapeutic drug doses; only 1.3% of the suspected DUID offenders had concentrations of only one of those drugs in-line with recommended therapeutic dosing