Celebrating 40 Years of Compliance Leadership
For employers with safety-sensitive workers, drug testing can help supervisors understand risk, strengthen workplace safety, and make more informed hiring decisions.
But not every drug test answers the same question. That was one of the main messages of DISA Global Solutions’ recent webinar, “What the Data Says: Drug Testing for Today’s Safety-Sensitive Workforce.” During the discussion, our hosts examined recent drug-testing data and explained why employers may benefit from looking beyond a single testing method.
This article summarizes what the data showed, how hair, urine, and oral fluid testing differ, and where dual-methodology testing may help safety-sensitive employers identify potential risks before they're on-site.
Many employers approach the many drug-testing solutions out there and (naturally) ask which one is “better.” But the data suggests this may be the wrong question altogether.
Urine and oral fluid testing are generally designed to detect more recent drug use, and they can therefore be especially useful after an accident, during reasonable-suspicion testing, or in other situations where recent use is the main concern.
Hair testing, on the other hand, provides a much longer detection window. According to the webinar, hair testing can identify patterns of drug use up to roughly 90 days. As drugs circulate through the bloodstream, evidence of that use is incorporated into growing hair.
Shannon Shoemaker, Chief Revenue Officer for Psychemedics, compared the difference to a photo versus a movie: A short-term test provides a closer look at a recent point in time, while hair testing can provide a broader view of behavior over several months.
Many safety-sensitive employers, our presenters argued, care about both.
| Testing method | Primary detection value | Best-fit situations | Important limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hair testing | Longer-term patterns, roughly 90 days | Pre-employment and random programs where broader detection or deterrence is a goal | May miss very recent or infrequent use, may miss drugs that are only on short-term panels |
| Urine testing | Recent use of many substances, up to 30 days (depending on substance) | Post-accident, reasonable-suspicion, and short-term detection needs | Shorter window may miss longer-term patterns |
| Oral fluid testing | Recent use, especially near-term detection, up to 72 hours | Post-accident, reasonable-suspicion, and other recent-use questions | Shorter window may miss longer-term patterns |
| Dual methodology | Short- and long-term coverage together | Pre-employment or random programs seeking best coverage | Requires TPA with experience managing multiple methodologies and policies |
The data presented during the webinar showed a significant difference in the number of positive results identified through long-term testing.
According to Psychemedics, research involving more than one million paired pre-employment hair and urine tests found that hair testing identified about nine times more drug positives overall. In the 2025 data discussed during the webinar, hair testing identified up to 12 times as many positives as urine testing.
The difference was especially noticeable for certain drugs. The webinar data showed that a hair test was about nine times more likely to return a cocaine positive than short-term testing alone. Hair testing also identified substantially more positives for amphetamines and opioids.
Marijuana, on the other hand, was somewhat different. Because marijuana metabolites can remain detectable in urine longer than many other substances can, the difference between short- and long-term testing was not as large.
Even so, one trend stood out in the webinar data: cocaine has exceeded marijuana as the most commonly identified drug in DISA’s hair-testing data for the past three years.
Although hair testing identifies more long-term patterns of use, the presenters cautioned against simply replacing urine testing with hair testing.
According to DISA data, about 30% of urine positives are found only through short-term testing and would not be identified in longer-term hair testing. A person may have used a drug recently or infrequently, for example, or the substance may not be included on a standard hair-testing panel. In other cases, drug concentrations may fall below a hair-testing cutoff.
As a result, replacing one method with another could close one gap while opening another.
Instead, the webinar focused on dual-methodology testing, which combines short-term testing with long-term testing.
DISA conducted roughly 700,000 short-term-only drug tests during 2024 and 2025, along with more than 100,000 tests using a dual-methodology program. Based on the historical positivity rate among for dual-methodology tests, taking into account all 700,000 short-term-only tests with dual methodologies, there would have been approximately 19,000 additional positives identified that short-term testing alone would not have flagged.
The difference becomes even easier to see when looking at results per 1,000 tests. In the 2025 data presented during the webinar, oral fluid testing produced about eight positives per 1,000 tests, while urine produced about 12. A combined short- and long-term testing program produced about 40 positives per 1,000 tests.
In other words, a broader testing strategy can provide employers with a more complete picture of the potential risk facing their workforce.
Detection is only part of the story.
The presenters also discussed the deterrence effect of long-term testing: Applicants who know that an employer uses a test with a 90-day detection window may recognize that temporarily stopping drug use for several days will not erase a longer pattern of use.
Moreover, because hair collections are directly observed, the webinar presenters noted that opportunities for sample substitution or adulteration are greatly reduced.
Over time, that knowledge can affect applicant behavior. Some candidates may choose not to apply to employers that use hair testing, while existing employees may be less willing to risk drug use when they know a long-term testing program is in place. Especially in the trucking industry, it is common for candidates who cannot pass a hair drug test to ask online before even applying at a company, saving you the time, cost, and hassle of their application and subsequent failed drug test.
For employers, the value of a testing program begins before a sample is ever collected.
During the webinar’s Q&A, the presenters recommended considering dual-methodology testing for pre-employment and random testing, particularly when employers want both broader detection and a stronger deterrence effect.
For post-accident and reasonable-suspicion situations, however, short-term testing may be more appropriate because the main question is whether recent use occurred.
Ultimately, the webinar’s message was not that every employer should choose one test over another. Rather, employers should understand what each method can (and cannot) show, and that combining both methods creates the strongest program.
Building the right drug-testing program requires more than selecting a test; employers must consider their workforce, testing situations, company policies, regulatory requirements, and the level of risk they are trying to manage.
DISA can help employers navigate those decisions and build a program that fits their needs. Whether an organization is looking to add hair testing, create a dual-methodology approach, or better understand how short- and long-term testing can work together, DISA’s team can help evaluate available options and support implementation.
If your organization manages a safety-sensitive workforce, contact DISA, and let us help you build a more complete approach to identifying your potential risk and supporting your workplace's safety.
DISA Global Solutions aims to provide accurate and informative content for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The reader retains full responsibility for the use of the information contained herein. Always consult with a professional or legal expert.
August 24, 2026
5
min read
