Effects of drugs and alcohol on behavior, job performance, and workplace safety

A systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of workplace-based interventions for the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use

Employee alcohol and other drug use can negatively impact the workplace, resulting in absenteeism, reduced productivity, high turnover, and worksite safety issues. As the workplace can influence employee substance use through environmental and cultural factors, it also presents a key opportunity to deliver interventions, particularly to employees who may not otherwise seek help. This is a systematic review of workplace-based interventions for the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use. Five databases were searched for efficacy, effectiveness and/or cost-effectiveness studies and reviews published since 2010 that measured use of psychoactive substances (i.e., alcohol, cannabis, hallucinogens, inhalants, opioids, sedatives, hypnotics, anxiolytics, and stimulants) as a primary or secondary outcome, in employees aged over 18. Thirty-nine articles were identified, 28 describing primary research and 11 reviews, most of which focused solely on alcohol use. Heterogeneity between studies with respect to intervention and evaluation design limited the degree to which findings could be synthesized, however, there is some promising evidence for workplace-based universal health promotion interventions, targeted brief interventions, and universal substance use screening. The few studies that examined implementation in the workplace revealed specific barriers including lack of engagement with e-health interventions, heavy use and reluctance to seek help amongst male employees, and confidentiality concerns. Tailoring interventions to each workplace, and ease of implementation and employee engagement emerged as facilitators. Further high-quality research is needed to examine the effectiveness of workplace substance use testing, Employee Assistance Programs, and strategies targeting the use of substances other than alcohol in the workplace.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=227598, PROSPERO [CRD42021227598].

Random drug and alcohol testing for preventing injury in workers

BACKGROUND

Drug- and alcohol-related impairment in the workplace has been linked to an increased risk of injury for workers. Randomly testing populations of workers for these substances has become a practice in many jurisdictions, with the intention of reducing the risk of workplace incidents and accidents. Despite the proliferation of random drug and alcohol testing (RDAT), there is currently a lack of consensus about whether it is effective at preventing workplace injury, or improving other non-injury accident outcomes in the work place.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of workplace RDAT to prevent injuries and improve non-injury accident outcomes (unplanned events that result in damage or loss of property) in workers compared with no workplace RDAT.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search to identify eligible published and unpublished studies. The date of the last search was 1 November 2020. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, Google Scholar, and three trials registers. We also screened the reference lists of relevant publications known to us.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Study designs that were eligible for inclusion in our review included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomised trials (CRTs), interrupted time-series (ITS) studies, and controlled before-after (CBA) studies. Studies needed to evaluate the effectiveness of RDAT in preventing workplace injury or improving other non-injury workplace outcomes. We also considered unpublished data from clinical trial registries. We included employees working in all safety-sensitive occupations, except for commercial drivers, who are the subject of another Cochrane Review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Independently, two review authors used a data collection form to extract relevant characteristics from the included study. They then analysed a line graph included in the study of the prevalence rate of alcohol violations per year. Independently, the review authors completed a GRADE assessment, as a means of rating the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Although our searching originally identified 4198 unique hits, only one study was eligible for inclusion in this review. This was an ITS study that measured the effect of random alcohol testing (RAT) on the test positivity rate of employees of major airlines in the USA from 1995 to 2002. The study included data from 511,745 random alcohol tests, and reported no information about testing for other substances. The rate of positive results was the only outcome of interest reported by the study. The average rate of positive results found by RAT increased from 0.07% to 0.11% when the minimum percentage of workers who underwent RAT annually was reduced from 25% to 10%. Our analyses found this change to be a statistically significant increase (estimated change in level, where the level reflects the average percentage points of positive tests = 0.040, 95% confidence interval 0.005 to 0.075; P = 0.031). Our GRADE assessment, for the observed effect of lower minimum testing percentages associating with a higher rate of positive test results, found the quality of the evidence to be 'very low' across the five GRADE domains. The one included study did not address the following outcomes of interest: fatal injuries; non-fatal injuries; non-injury accidents; absenteeism; and adverse effects associated with RDAT.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the aviation industry in the USA, the only setting for which the eligible study reported data, there was a statistically significant increase in the rate of positive RAT results following a reduction in the percentage of workers tested, which we deem to be clinically relevant. This result suggests an inverse relationship between the proportion of positive test results and the rate of testing, which is consistent with a deterrent effect for testing. No data were reported on adverse effects related to RDAT. We could not draw definitive conclusions regarding the effectiveness of RDAT for employees in safety-sensitive occupations (not including commercial driving), or with safety-sensitive job functions. We identified only one eligible study that reflected one industry in one country, was of non-randomised design, and tested only for alcohol, not for drugs or other substances. Our GRADE assessment resulted in a 'very low' rating for the quality of the evidence on the only outcome reported. The paucity of eligible research was a major limitation in our review, and additional studies evaluating the effect of RDAT on safety outcomes are needed.

Impact of Alcohol on Occupational Health and Safety in the Construction Industry at Workplaces with Scaffoldings

The value, care, and customs of workers are essential in terms of occupational health and safety. The abuse of alcohol is widely regarded as a serious threat to the lives, health, and safety of employees. The aim of the research was to identify the main problems that are associated with alcohol abuse and consumption at work among employees in the construction industry, with particular emphasis on workstations where work is carried out on construction scaffoldings. Data for the analysis were obtained from two different sources. The first one was post-accident documentation on occupational accidents. The second one was surveys collected during the research project. This study confirmed that excessive and disproportionate alcohol consumption can be the cause of an accident, and consequently death at workplaces with scaffolding. Of 219 accident reports, 17.4% indicated alcohol as a contributing factor. Analysis of accident documentations shows that in cases where alcohol was indicated as a contributing factor in an accident, the alcohol was consumed during the workday. The results obtained on the basis of the conducted research were able to constitute a justification for the directions of preventive actions carried out in order to reduce the number of occupational accidents in the construction industry caused by alcohol.

The work environment of junior doctors: their perspectives and coping strategies

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the associations between psychological distress in junior doctors and their work environment and how they cope with work stressors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey designed by Health Education and Training Institute was delivered in 2014 to over 1900 junior doctors across 15 hospital networks through Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales. Psychological distress was evaluated using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale-10 (K10). Numerous variables were assessed for associations with psychological distress to identify the strongest relationships and the coping strategies used. Potential associations between work demands, coping strategies and psychological distress were explored.

RESULTS

540 responses were analysed. 414 (81%) thought their workload was reasonable, 376 (75%) were enjoying their current job and 446 (82.6%) were content with their work life. However, 85 (15.7%) reported that they would not study medicine if given their time again, and 146 (27%) reported workplace bullying. The mean K10 score was 17.2 (σ=6.3) and the prevalence of elevated psychological distress was between 63% and 80% higher than the general community. Variables most strongly associated with distress were: being discontented with workload, lack of enjoyment from current job, taking time off work and having experienced workplace bullying. There was a preference to use social activities as a method of coping but at higher levels of psychological distress there is a greater proportion who took time off work.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychologically distressed junior doctors need recognition, support and treatment. Future interventions should focus on improving work environment, job satisfaction, provision of supports, use of healthy coping strategies and improving work-related relationships. This could potentially reduce levels of psychological distress in junior doctors, optimise delivery of healthcare to patients and maximise workforce potential.

Results of a cluster randomised controlled trial to reduce risky use of alcohol, alcohol-related HIV risks and improve help-seeking behaviour among safety and security employees in the Western Cape, South Africa

Objective

To test the effectiveness of a programme aimed at reducing the risky use of alcohol and alcohol-related HIV risk and increase help-seeking behaviour among a sample of municipal employees in the Western Cape Province, South Africa.

Methods

A clustered randomised controlled trial was conducted in 2011–2012 among 325 employees. The eight hour intervention, Team Awareness (TA), addressing behavioural risk among employees was administered to 168 employees in the intervention arm and the 157 employees in the control arm who received a one-hour wellness talk.

Results

The results show that TA had the greatest impact on risky drinking practices and hangover effects. There was a significant group × time interaction (F (1, 117) = 25.16, p < 0.0001) with participants in the intervention condition reducing number of days on which they engaged in binge drinking. There was also a significant time effect with participants in the intervention condition reducing the likelihood of going to work with a hangover (F (1,117) = 4.10, p = 0.045). No reduction in HIV-related risk behaviours were found.

Conclusions

This intervention study was able to demonstrate a modest but significant reduction in risky drinking practices and hangover effects. This provides encouraging evidence for the effectiveness of interventions that address risky use of alcohol among employed persons, further providing a launch pad for strengthening and replicating future RCT studies on workplace prevention, especially in developing country settings.

Clinical Trial Registration Number

Pan-African Control Trial Registry (201301000458308).