Drug testing employees is common practice in many companies, but there are so many testing kits available that choosing the right one can be intimidating. It doesn’t help that there are few resources to help you decide which one is right for your company’s needs. Many of the less expensive and unbranded kits are not very accurate, making them unsuitable for workplace drug testing. The frequency of false results, both positive and negative, can mean that saving money on testing can cost you in the long run.
If you are looking for an accurate drug test kit for onsite testing, here are some questions to ask yourself.
What drugs are you looking for?
It may seem like a no-brainer that you would want to run a combination test, known as a multi-panel drug test. But there are still a wide range of these types of kits that test for various groups of drugs. Do you need a 3 panel test? 5 panel? 12 panel? What is the industry specific minimum? What is the expected baseline? Zoom Testing can help you determine all of this information and more and help you determine which drugs you should be looking for. The fact is, most companies don’t really need to test for more than 5 or 6 drug groups, some of which will be influenced by demographics and regional issues. Zoom Testing can walk you through all of this to help you avoid spending money on irrelevant tests.
What time frame do you want to look at?
Most drug testing kits analyze samples of either urine or saliva. Most drugs are detectable in the urine for significantly longer than they are in saliva. Urine is more appropriate for detecting recreational drug use, while saliva tests are better for identifying those employees who have drugs active in their systems while working. A full listing of drugs and how long they are detectable by various test types is available on our website, www.zoomtesting.co.uk.
Urine tests or saliva, what collection method is best for your company?
Many employers don’t want to handle urine samples. A primary reason for this is that the person conducting the test is not able to directly oversee the sample collection to ensure that the sample actually comes from the person being tested. Saliva sample collection is a good alternative, especially when a health care suite is unavailable for testing. When urine testing is the preferred method, cup drug tests are a good option. The collection cups have a temperature strip to deter or detect sample substitution or dilution. Some cup drug tests also include adulteration test strips. The testee is given the cup, provides a urine sample, and the original sample is sealed for confirmation testing.
Branded quality is important
All drug tests are not created equal. The biotechnology quality and the construction of the components are vital to a kit that provides reliable and accurate results. When you use a cheap, unbranded test kit, you run the risk of false results, both positive and negative. False positive results cause more problems than false negatives, but both compromise the integrity of your workforce. We recommend that you always use a branded professional test from well known distributors with many years of experience in drug test products. Don’t hesitate to ask questions about the product and how long they’ve carried it. Ask about how the product is stored and whether batch certification is available. CE and FDA are basic requirements and updated every three years. They are not, however, a guarantee of quality.
Customer support and post sales support based in the UK are important
The harsh truth is that, if you perform drug testing on employees, you will sooner or later have to deal with positive results, in which case, you will need additional information and support from the company that provided your test kit. Zoom Testing gives you direct phone access to knowledgeable customer support representatives who can answer any questions you may have. Zoom Testing is based in the UK and offers technical and product support for any customer using our kits.
Best Workplace Drug Testing Kits
This post has been updated since its original publication in 2014.