Districts that implement SRDT programs are urged to have schools with trained counselors and Student Assistance Programs (SAPs) in place and to facilitate referrals to treatment facilities as needed.
It was then further restricted to districts whose substance use prevention coordinators reported that they were conducting SRDT with students "in their high school grades," the definition of which was left up to the respondent.
Respondents were asked whether their district conducted SRDT with students in high school grades during the 2004-2005 school year.
However, responses were examined for logical inconsistencies, with the following results: (1) 1 respondent selected "SRDT testing" and "no testing" in the same question, (2) 2 respondents selected "no testing" but then provided responses in subsequent questions about SRDT; and (3) 1 respondent did not select SRDT but then provided responses in subsequent SRDT questions.
Table 2 displays prevalence estimates for actions that districts take in response to a student's first positive result from an SRDT.
Tests were performed according to the manufacturer's guidelines, using blood collected by a finger stick, one drop per cartridge for the SRDTs and one drop for the DRDTs.
The SRDTs were regarded as the control group for this study.
There were no reports of serious adverse events in patients or health workers related to the use of SRDTs or DRDTs during the study.
Our data also shows differences between SRDTs and DRDTs in terms of timely treatments when the effect was adjusted by region and period.
There are limited data that compare both SRDTs and DRDTs in terms of acceptability, testing, and timely treatment in the first 24 hours.