Evaluation of a workplace alcohol and other drug policy

BACKGROUND The current impetus for developing alcohol and/or other drugs (AODs) workplace policies in Australia is to reduce workplace AOD impairment, improve safety, and prevent AOD-related injury in the workplace. For these policies to be effective, they need to be informed by scientific evidence. Evidence to inform the development and implementation of effective workplace AOD policies is currently lacking. There does not currently appear to be conclusive evidence for the effectiveness of workplace AOD policies in reducing impairment and preventing AOD-related injury. There is also no apparent evidence regarding which factors facilitate or impede the success of an AOD policy, or whether, for example, unsuccessful policy outcomes were due to poor policy or merely poor implementation of the policy. It was the aim of this research to undertake a process, impact, and outcome evaluation of a workplace AOD policy, and to contribute to the body of knowledge on the development and implementation of effective workplace AOD policies. METHODS The research setting was a state-based power-generating industry in Australia between May 2008 and May 2010. Participants for the process evaluation study were individuals who were integral to either the development or the implementation of the workplace AOD policy, or both of these processes (key informants), and comprised the majority of individuals who were involved in the process of developing and/or implementing the workplace AOD policy. The sample represented the two main groups of interest—management and union delegates/employee representatives—from all three of the participating organisations. For the impact and outcome evaluation studies, the population included all employees from the three participating organisations, and participants were all employees who consented to participate in the study and who completed both the pre-and post-policy implementation questionnaires. Qualitative methods in the form of interviews with key stakeholders were used to evaluate the process of developing and implementing the workplace AOD policy. In order to evaluate the impact of the policy with regard to the risk factors for workplace AOD impairment, and the outcome of the policy in terms of reducing workplace AOD impairment, quantitative methods in the form of a non-randomised single group pre- and post-test design were used. Changes from Time 1 (pre) to Time 2 (post) in the risk factors for workplace AOD impairment, and changes in the behaviour of interest—(self-reported) workplace AOD impairment—were measured. An integration of the findings from the process, impact, and outcome evaluation studies was undertaken using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. RESULTS For the process evaluation study Study respondents indicated that their policy was developed in the context of comparable industries across Australia developing workplace AOD policies, and that this was mainly out of concern for the deleterious health and safety impacts of workplace AOD impairment. Results from the process evaluation study also indicated that in developing and implementing the workplace AOD policy, there were mainly ‗winners', in terms of health and safety in the workplace. While there were some components of the development and implementation of the policy that were better done than others, and the process was expensive and took a long time, there were, overall, few unanticipated consequences to implementing the policy and it was reported to be thorough and of a high standard. Findings also indicated that overall the policy was developed and implemented according to best-practice in that: consultation during the policy development phase (with all the main stakeholders) was extensive; the policy was comprehensive; there was universal application of the policy to all employees; changes in the workplace (with regard to the policy) were gradual; and, the policy was publicised appropriately. Furthermore, study participants' responses indicated that the role of an independent external expert, who was trusted by all stakeholders, was integral to the success of the policy. For the impact and outcome evaluation studies Notwithstanding the limitations of pre- and post-test study designs with regard to attributing cause to the intervention, the findings from the impact evaluation study indicated that following policy implementation, statistically significant positive changes with regard to workplace AOD impairment were recorded for the following variables (risk factors for workplace AOD impairment): Knowledge; Attitudes; Perceived Behavioural Control; Perceptions of the Certainty of being punished for coming to work impaired by AODs; Perceptions of the Swiftness of punishment for coming to work impaired by AODs; and Direct and Indirect Experience with Punishment Avoidance for workplace AOD impairment. There were, however, no statistically significant positive changes following policy implementation for Behavioural Intentions, Subjective Norms, and Perceptions of the Severity of punishment for workplace AOD impairment. With regard to the outcome evaluation, there was a statistically significant reduction in self-reported workplace AOD impairment following the implementation of the policy. As with the impact evaluation, these findings need to be interpreted in light of the limitations of the study design in being able to attribute cause to the intervention alone. The findings from the outcome evaluation study also showed that while a positive change in self-reported workplace AOD impairment following implementation of the policy did not appear to be related to gender, age group, or employment type, it did appear to be related to levels of employee general alcohol use, cannabis use, site type, and employment role. Integration of the process, impact, and outcome evaluation studies There appeared to be qualitative support for the relationship between the process of developing and implementing the policy, and the impact of the policy in changing the risk factors for workplace AOD impairment. That is, overall the workplace AOD policy was developed and implemented well and, following its implementation, there were positive changes in the majority of measured risk factors for workplace AOD impairment. Quantitative findings lend further support for a relationship between the process and impact of the policy, in that there was a statistically significant association between employee perceived fidelity of the policy (related to the process of the policy) and positive changes in some risk factors for workplace AOD impairment (representing the impact of the policy). Findings also indicated support for the relationship between the impact of the policy in changing the risk factors for workplace AOD impairment and the outcome of the policy in reducing workplace AOD impairment: positive changes in the risk factors for workplace AOD impairment (impact) were related to positive changes in self reported workplace AOD impairment (representing the main goal and outcome of the policy). CONCLUSIONS The findings from the research indicate support for the conclusion that the policy was appropriately implemented and that it achieved its objectives and main goal. The Doctoral research findings also addressed a number of gaps in the literature on workplace AOD impairment, namely: the likely effectiveness of AOD policies for reducing AOD impairment in the workplace, which factors in the development and implementation of a workplace AOD policy are likely to facilitate or impede the effectiveness of the policy to reduce workplace AOD impairment, and which employee groups are less likely to respond well to policies of this type. The findings from this research not only represent an example of translational, applied research—through the evaluation of the study industry's policy—but also add to the body of knowledge on workplace AOD policies and provide policy-makers with evidence which may be useful in the development and implementation of effective workplace AOD policies. Importantly, the findings espouse the importance of scientific evidence in the development, implementation, and evaluation of workplace AOD policies.

Drug discovery approaches utilizing three-dimensional cell culture

Historically, two-dimensional (2D) cell culture has been the preferred method of producing disease models in vitro. Recently, there has been a move away from 2D culture in favor of generating three-dimensional (3D) multicellular structures, which are thought to be more representative of the in vivo environment. This transition has brought with it an influx of technologies capable of producing these structures in various ways. However, it is becoming evident that many of these technologies do not perform well in automated in vitro drug discovery units. We believe that this is a result of their incompatibility with high-throughput screening (HTS). In this study, we review a number of technologies, which are currently available for producing in vitro 3D disease models. We assess their amenability with high-content screening and HTS and highlight our own work in attempting to address many of the practical problems that are hampering the successful deployment of 3D cell systems in mainstream research.

Prostate cancer organoids: A potential new tool for testing drug sensitivity

Recent technical advances have enabled for the first time, reliable in vitro culture of prostate cancer samples as prostate cancer organoids. This breakthrough provides the significant possibility of high throughput drug screening covering the spectrum of prostate cancer phenotypes seen clinically. These advances will enable precision medicine to become a reality, allowing patient samples to be screened for effective therapeutics ex vivo, with tailoring of treatments specific to that individual. This will hopefully lead to enhanced clinical outcomes, avoid morbidity due to ineffective therapies and improve the quality of life in men with advanced prostate cancer.

Developing an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) multi-sensor payload carrier for air quality monitoring

Emissions of gases and particles from sea-faring ships have been shown to impact on the atmospheric chemistry and climate. To efficiently monitor and report these emissions found from a ship’s plume, the concept of using a multi-rotor or UAV to hover inside or near the exhaust of the ship to actively record the data in real time is being developed. However, for the required sensors obtain the data; their sensors must face into the airflow of the ships plume. This report presents an approach to have sensors able to read in the chemicals and particles emitted from the ship without affecting the flight dynamics of the multi-rotor UAV by building a sealed chamber in which a pump can take in the surrounding air (outside the downwash effect of the multi-rotor) where the sensors are placed and can analyse the gases safely. Results show that the system is small, lightweight and air-sealed and ready for flight test.

Significance of a short-term test drive for prospective plug-in electric vehicle consumers: An exploratory study

The test drive is a well-known step in car buying. In the emerging plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) market, however, the influence of a pre-purchase test drive on a consumer's inclination to purchase is unknown. Policy makers and industry participants both are eager to understand what factors motivate vehicle consumers at the point-of-sale. A number of researchers have used choice models to shed light on consumer perceptions of PEVs, and others have investigated consumer change in disposition toward a PEV over the course of a trial, wherein test driving a PEV may take place over a number of consecutive days, weeks or months. However, there is little written on the impact of a short-term test drive - a typical experience at dealerships or public "ride-and-drive" events. The impact of a typical test drive, often measured in minutes of driving, is not well understood. This paper first presents a synthesis of the literature on the effect of PEV test drives as they relate to consumer disposition toward PEVs. An analysis of data obtained from an Australian case study whereby attitudinal and stated preference data were collected pre- and post- test drive at public "ride-and-drive" event held Brisbane, Queensland in March 2014 using a custom-designed iPad application. Motorists' perceptions and choice preferences around PEVs were captured, revealing the relative importance of their experience behind the wheel. Using the Australian context as a case-study, this paper presents an exploratory study of consumers' stated preferences toward PEVs both before and after a short test drive.

Review of Diagnostic Screening Instruments for Alcohol and Other Drug Use and Other Psychiatric Disorders

In recent years there has been a growing recognition that many people with drug or alcohol problems are also experiencing a range of other psychiatric and psychological problems. The presence of concurrent psychiatric or psychological problems is likely to impact on the success of treatment services. These problems vary greatly, from undetected major psychiatric illnesses that meet internationally accepted diagnostic criteria such as those outlined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) of the American Psychiatric Association (1994), to less defined feelings of low mood and anxiety that do not meet diagnostic criteria but nevertheless impact on an individual’s sense of wellbeing and affect their quality of life. Similarly, the presence of a substance misuse problem among those suffering from a major psychiatric illness, often goes undetected. For example, the use of illicit drugs such as cannabis and amphetamine is higher among those individuals suffering from schizophrenia (Hall, 1992) and the misuse of alcohol in people suffering from schizophrenia is well documented (e.g., Gorelick et al., 1990; Searles et al., 1990; Soyka et al., 1993). High rates of alcohol misuse have also been reported in a number of groups including women presenting for treatment with a primary eating disorder (Holderness, Brooks Gunn, & Warren, 1994), individuals suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (Seidel, Gusman and Aubueg, 1994), and those suffering from anxiety and depression. Despite considerable evidence of high levels of co-morbidity, drug and alcohol treatment agencies and mainstream psychiatric services often fail to identify and respond to concurrent psychiatric or drug and alcohol problems, respectively. The original review was conducted as a first step in providing clinicians with information on screening and diagnostic instruments that may be used to assess previously unidentified co-morbidity. The current revision was conducted to extend the original review by updating psychometric findings on measures in the original review, and incorporating other frequently used measures that were not previously included. The current revision has included information regarding special populations, specifically Indigenous Australians, older persons and adolescents. The objectives were to: ● update the original review of AOD and psychiatric screening/diagnostic instruments, ● recommend when these instruments should be used, by whom and how they should be interpreted, ● identify limitations and provide recommendations for further research, ● refer the reader to pertinent Internet sites for further information and/or purchasing of assessment instruments.