Costs and benefits of preemployment drug screening.
OBJECTIVE
This study provides a cost-benefit analysis of preemployment drug screening and evaluates the sensitivity of this analysis to variation in its underlying assumptions.


METHODS
Cost-benefit analysis, based on a cohort analytic study previously reported.


METHODS
Employees of the US Postal Service in Boston, Mass.


METHODS
Estimates of costs and benefit are based on a cohort of 2533 postal workers in Boston and on average costs for the Postal Service in Boston and nationwide.


RESULTS
Drug screening would have saved the Postal Service $162 per applicant hired. However, these results were sensitive to the assumptions in the model. If the prevalence of drug use in the population screened were 1% rather than 12%, the program would lose money. Similarly, if the cost per urine sample screened were $95 rather than the $49 assumed, then the program would lose money, even if the prevalence of drug positives was as high as 9%.


CONCLUSIONS
Because of the sensitivity of this analysis to changes in its underlying assumptions, any company considering preemployment drug screening should carefully weigh the costs and benefits in its own industry.
Zwerling
C
C
Department of Preventive Medicine and Environmental Health, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242.
Ryan
J
J
Orav
E J
EJ
D000328:Adult; D001900:Boston; D015331:Cohort Studies; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004651:Employment; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D017059:Models, Econometric; D011177:Postal Service / Q000191:economics*; D015995:Prevalence; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D015813:Substance Abuse Detection / Q000191:economics*