scholarly journals Cross-Contamination on Atypical Surfaces and Venues in Food Service Environments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Goulter ◽  
Margaret Kirchner ◽  
Benjamin Chapman ◽  
James S. Clayton ◽  
Lee-Ann Jaykus
Keyword(s):  
Foodborne Pathogens ◽  
Food Service ◽  
Foodborne Illness ◽  
Cross Contamination ◽  
The Past ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Contact Surfaces ◽  
To Come ◽  
Service Environments

Cross-contamination of raw food to other surfaces, hands, and foods is a serious issue in foodservice.  With individuals eating more meals away from home, contracting a foodborne illness from a food service establishment is an increasing concern.  However, most studies have concentrated on hands or food contact surfaces and neglected atypical and unusual surfaces (surfaces that are not typically identified as a source of cross-contamination) and venues.  This review seeks to identify atypically cross-contaminated surfaces and atypical venues where cross-contamination could occur that have not been examined thoroughly in the literature.  Most surfaces that could be at risk for cross-contamination are frequently touched, rarely cleaned and sanitized, and can support the persistence and/or growth of foodborne pathogens.  These surfaces include, menus, spice and condiment containers, aprons and coveralls, mobile devices and tablets, and currency, among others.  Venues that are explored, temporary events, mobile vendors, and markets, are usually limited in space or infrastructure, have low compliance to proper handwashing, and provide the opportunity for raw and RTE foods to come into contact with one another. These factors all create an environment where cross-contamination can occur and potentially impact food safety.  A more comprehensive cleaning sanitizing regime encompassing these surfaces and venues could potentially help mitigate the cross-contamination described here.  This review highlights key surfaces and venues that have the potential to be cross-contaminated that have been underestimated in the past or are not fully explored in the literature.  These knowledge gaps demonstrate where further work is need to fully understand the role of these surfaces and venues in cross-contamination and how it can be prevented in the future.

Tracking Cross-Contamination Transfer Dynamics at a Mock Retail Deli Market Using GloGerm

2013 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 272-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
JESSICA MAITLAND ◽  
RENEE BOYER ◽  
DAN GALLAGHER ◽  
SUSAN DUNCAN ◽  
NATE BAUER ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Listeria Monocytogenes ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Direct Contact ◽  
Foodborne Illness ◽  
Cross Contamination ◽  
Sensory Panel ◽  
Safety Practices ◽  
Uv Illumination ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Contact Surfaces

Ready-to-eat (RTE) deli meats are considered a food at high risk for causing foodborne illness. Deli meats are listed as the highest risk RTE food vehicle for Listeria monocytogenes. Cross-contamination in the retail deli market may contribute to spread of pathogens to deli meats. Understanding potential cross-contamination pathways is essential for reducing the risk of contaminating various products. The objective of this study was to track cross-contamination pathways through a mock retail deli market using an abiotic surrogate, GloGerm, to visually represent how pathogens may spread through the deli environment via direct contact with food surfaces. Six contamination origination sites (slicer blade, meat chub, floor drain, preparation table, employee's glove, and employee's hands) were evaluated separately. Each site was inoculated with 20 ml of GloGerm, and a series of standard deli operations were completed (approximately 10 min of work). Photographs were then taken under UV illumination to visualize spread of GloGerm throughout the deli. A sensory panel evaluated the levels of contamination on the resulting contaminated surfaces. Five of the six contamination origination sites were associated with transfer of GloGerm to the deli case door handle, slicer blade, meat chub, preparation table, and the employee's gloves. Additional locations became contaminated (i.e., deli case shelf, prep table sink, and glove box), but this contamination was not consistent across all trials. Contamination did not spread from the floor drain to any food contact surfaces. The findings of this study reinforce the need for consistent equipment cleaning and food safety practices among deli workers to minimize cross-contamination.

scholarly journals Methods for cleaning & sanitizing food contact surfaces (countertops) to prevent cross contamination in restaurant kitchens

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Matthewson ◽  
BCIT School of Health Sciences, Environmental Health ◽  
Helen Heacock
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Health ◽  
Food Service ◽  
Cross Contamination ◽  
Bacterial Reduction ◽  
Step Method ◽  
Cleaning Method ◽  
Food Contact ◽  
Health Officer ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Contact Surfaces

  Background: Cross contamination can occur in restaurant kitchens when food contact surfaces such as countertops are inadequately cleaned between preparation of raw and ready to eat foods. Previous research has demonstrated that washing with detergent and water, rinsing, then applying a sanitizer solution is the most effective cleaning method. The second most effective cleaning method is to use detergent and water alone. In practice, the author has observed kitchen staff using sanitizer alone to clean kitchen countertops. This study surveyed British Columbia restaurant kitchen staff on current practices and makes recommendations to improve cleaning and sanitization practices for the purpose of preventing cross contamination. Methods: A survey was prepared using SurveyMonkey and distributed through Facebook to the author’s contacts in the restaurant industry. The Facebook post included a request for anyone to share the survey link with their contacts who work in BC restaurant kitchens. The survey was shared 21 times by 14 different people. The survey asked questions about restaurant type and position, Foodsafe level, and about cleaning practices such as frequency and cleaning compounds used. Results: When asked what cleaning compounds are most often used to clean work surfaces (countertops) in their restaurant, 56.5% of respondents reported sanitizer solution only, 30.4% of respondents reported soap & water followed by sanitizer solution, and 13.0% reported soap and water only. When asked why sanitizer solution only was used to clean countertops, 46.2% of respondents said it was company policy, 23.1% of respondents said time savings, and 15.4% of respondents indicated that an Environmental Health Officer had recommended sanitizer use and that is what lead to sanitizer alone being used to clean countertops. Conclusions: In practice, some restaurant staff do not use sanitizer effectively and may believe it is a substitute for detergent. Using sanitizer alone is not as effective as using detergent alone. Detergent alone can provide a 2-3 log bacterial reduction. If staff are busy and are only going to use one cleaning step, detergent alone is the best method. Environmental Health Officers should review sanitation plans and talk with operators to determine current cleaning practices in food service establishments. Operators and staff should be re-educated on the importance of the three-step method. It may be beneficial to recommend that sanitizer use be decreased overall to encourage the use of soap and water. It may only be necessary to use sanitizer after high-risk jobs such as preparing raw meat or at the end of the day.  

scholarly journals COVID-19: Anthropocene and Capitalocene Caused Pandemics

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 15-21
Author(s):  
Madhusudan Subedi
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Historical Inquiry ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Global Effect ◽  
The Past ◽  
Fundamental Causes ◽  
History Of ◽  
To Come

  Most epidemiological studies focus on the direct causes of diseases while wider, social causal factors are ignored. This paper briefly highlights the history of major epidemics and the role of Anthropocene and Capitalocene for the emergence and reemergence of pandemics like COVID-19. Books, journal articles, and statistics offer information that can explain the phenomena. A historical inquiry can inform us about the fundamental causes of pandemics. Human security and ecology are intertwined, and the global effect of pandemics responded to at the national level is inadequate. The lessons from the past and present help us devise effective ethically and socially appropriate strategies to mitigate the threats. If the present crisis is not taken seriously at the global level, the world has to face more difficult challenges in years to come.

Salmonella enterica Biofilm Formation and Density in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Biofilm Reactor Model Is Related to Serovar and Substratum

2013 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 662-667 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. CORCORAN ◽  
D. MORRIS ◽  
N. DE LAPPE ◽  
J. O'CONNOR ◽  
P. LALOR ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Salmonella Typhimurium ◽  
Foodborne Pathogens ◽  
Salmonella Enterica ◽  
Salmonella Enteritidis ◽  
Biofilm Reactor ◽  
Reactor Model ◽  
Food Contact ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Contact Surfaces ◽  
Production Areas

Foodborne pathogens can attach to, and survive on, food contact surfaces for long periods by forming a biofilm. Salmonella enterica is the second most common cause of foodborne illness in Ireland. The ability of S. enterica to form a biofilm could contribute to its persistence in food production areas, leading to cross-contamination of products and surfaces. Arising from a large foodborne outbreak of S. enterica serovar Agona associated with a food manufacturing environment, a hypothesis was formulated that the associated Salmonella Agona strain had an enhanced ability to form a biofilm relative to other S. enterica. To investigate this hypothesis, 12 strains of S. enterica, encompassing three S. enterica serovars, were assessed for the ability to form a biofilm on multiple food contact surfaces. All isolates formed a biofilm on the contact surfaces, and there was no consistent trend for the Salmonella Agona outbreak strain to produce a denser biofilm compared with other strains of Salmonella Agona or Salmonella Typhimurium. However, Salmonella Enteritidis biofilm was considerably less dense than Salmonella Typhimurium and Salmonella Agona biofilms. Biofilm density was greater on tile than on concrete, polycarbonate, stainless steel, or glass.

Concentration and Detection of Caliciviruses from Food Contact Surfaces

2002 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 999-1004 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANIL TAKU ◽  
BALDEV R. GULATI ◽  
PAUL B. ALLWOOD ◽  
KERRIN PALAZZI ◽  
CRAIG W. HEDBERG ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Food Service ◽  
Contact Period ◽  
Norwalk Virus ◽  
Buffer Solution ◽  
Simple Method ◽  
Food Contact ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Contact Surfaces ◽  
Elution Method

Outbreaks of human Norwalk virus (NV) and Norwalk-like viruses often originate in food service establishments. No reliable method is available for the detection of these human caliciviruses on food contact surfaces. We describe a simple method for the detection of NV from stainless steel work surfaces using cultivable feline calicivirus (FCV) as a model. Stainless steel surfaces were artificially contaminated with known amounts of FCV, followed by its elution in a buffer solution. Three methods of virus elution were compared. In the first method, moistened cotton swabs or pieces of nylon filter (1MDS) were used to elute the contaminating virus. The second method consisted of flooding the contaminated surface with eluting buffer, allowing it to stay in contact for 15 min, followed by aspiration of the buffer (aspiration method) after a contact period of 15 min. The third method, the scraping-aspiration method, was similar to the aspiration method, except that the surfaces were scraped with a cell scraper before buffer aspiration. Maximum virus recovery (32 to 71%) was obtained with the scraping-aspiration method using 0.05 M glycine buffer at pH 6.5. Two methods (organic flocculation and filter adsorption elution) were compared to reduce the volume of the eluate recovered from larger surfaces. The organic flocculation method gave an average overall recovery of 55% compared to the filter-adsorption-elution method, which yielded an average recovery of only 8%. The newly developed method was validated for the detection of NV by artificial contamination of 929-cm2 stainless steel sheets with NV-positive stool samples and for the detection of the recovered virus by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction.

Prevalence of Salmonella, Campylobacter, and Shiga Toxin–Producing Escherichia coli on the Surfaces of Raw Poultry Packages

2018 ◽  
Vol 81 (10) ◽  
pp. 1707-1712
Author(s):  
FUR-CHI CHEN ◽  
SANDRIA GODWIN ◽  
ANGELA GREEN ◽  
SHAHIDULLAH CHOWDHURY ◽  
RICHARD STONE
Keyword(s):  
Escherichia Coli ◽  
Foodborne Pathogens ◽  
Shiga Toxin ◽  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Chicken Breast ◽  
Packaging Materials ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Plate Counts ◽  
Contact Surfaces ◽  
Raw Poultry

ABSTRACT Contamination on the exterior surfaces of raw poultry packages can be transmitted to hands and food contact surfaces during shopping and handling. This study compared the level of microbial contamination and prevalence of foodborne pathogens on the surfaces of raw poultry packages as related to the types of products, types of packaging, and packaging conditions. Packages of whole chicken, cut-up chicken (breast and leg quarter), and ground turkey were purchased from retail stores. Aerobic plate counts (APCs) were significantly different (P < 0.05) among types of products and packaging materials, with ground turkey packages and the heat-sealed, high-walled containers being the lowest. APCs were significantly lower (P < 0.05) when the packages were intact and tight compared with intact and loose. Of the 105 packages, there were 10 (9.5%) with the presence of either Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli (STEC) or Campylobacter; of those packages, 6 (5.7%) were positive for STEC, 7 (6.7%) were positive for Campylobacter, and 3 (2.9%) were positive for both pathogens on the surfaces. Salmonella was not detected on the surfaces of all tested packages. Surfaces of whole chicken packages were significantly (P < 0.001) more likely to have detectable levels of Campylobacter and STEC than those of cut-up chicken packages. Packages that were positive for Campylobacter and/or STEC had significantly (P < 0.005) higher APCs than negative packages. The results suggested that STEC is another significant pathogen present on the surfaces of poultry packages in addition to Campylobacter. The presence of STEC on the external packaging of raw poultry raises a concern because consumers may not expect such pathogens on the surfaces of poultry packages.

scholarly journals Evaluating the effectiveness of cleaning with detergent soap alone verses detergent soap followed by sanitizer on reducing aerobic microorganism numbers that are present on food contact surfaces

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Man ◽  
BCIT School of Health Sciences, Environmental Health ◽  
Helen Heacock
Keyword(s):  
Research Study ◽  
Microbial Reduction ◽  
P Value ◽  
Cross Contamination ◽  
Food Contact ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Colony Forming Units ◽  
Contact Surfaces ◽  
Alfalfa Sprouts ◽  
Chlorine Bleach

  Background: Cross-contamination is one of the leading causes of foodborne illness which poses a massive burden to an individual’s health and to the healthcare system. One way to prevent cross-contamination is through the elimination of pathogens from surfaces by properly washing with a detergent soap followed by sanitizing with a sanitizer. However, as found from a previous research study, not all restaurants in British Columbia wash and sanitize their food contact surfaces. Thus, this study aims to compare the cleaning effectiveness between using detergent soap alone verses using detergent soap followed by sanitizer. Methods: Aerobic organisms were introduced to a cutting board by cutting alfalfa sprouts and then the surface was cleaned with Dawn Detergent soap and sanitized with 200ppm of chlorine bleach sanitizing solution. 3M™ Quick Swabs were used to sample the aerobic organisms (colony forming units) prior to and after each method of cleaning. The swabs were then transferred to 3M™ Petrifilm Plates, incubated at room temperature for 4 days, and then enumerated. Results: The results show that there is a statistically significant greater microbial reduction through cleaning with detergent soap followed by sanitizer (mean log microbial reduction of 4.10) as compared to cleaning with detergent soap alone (mean log microbial reduction of 3.53). The p-value obtained is 0.003843 when α=0.05. The power was determined to be 92%. Conclusions: This study was able to conclude that cleaning with detergent soap followed by sanitizer is 0.57 log (mean log microbial reduction of 4.10 - mean log microbial reduction of 3.53) more effective at cleaning than using detergent soap alone. However, the specific log microbial reduction value for the detergent soap followed by sanitizer achieved in this study is lower than what is found in the previous studies (Gilbert, 1970; Sores et al., 2012; Rossvoll et al., 2015). A possible reason for this discrepancy may be due to the presence of soil and food debris on the surface which may have had interfered with the sanitizing ability of the chlorine bleach (Lee et al., 2007).  

scholarly journals Prevalence of Listeria species on food contact surfaces in Washington State apple packinghouses

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blanca Ruiz-Llacsahuanga ◽  
Alexis Hamilton ◽  
Robyn Zaches ◽  
Ines Hanrahan ◽  
Faith Critzer
Keyword(s):  
Foodborne Pathogen ◽  
Economic Loss ◽  
Washington State ◽  
Total Production ◽  
Cross Contamination ◽  
Fresh Market ◽  
Public Health Burden ◽  
Food Contact ◽  
Food Contact Surfaces ◽  
Contact Surfaces

The 2014 caramel apple listeriosis outbreak was traced back to cross-contamination between food contact surfaces (FCS) of equipment used for packing and fresh apples. For Washington State, the leading apple producer in the U.S with 79% of its total production directed to the fresh market, managing the risk of apple contamination with Listeria monocytogenes within the packing environment is crucial. The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence of Listeria spp. on FCS in Washington State apple packinghouses over two packing seasons, and to identify those FCS types with the greatest likelihood to harbor Listeria spp. Five commercial apple packinghouses were visited quarterly over two consecutive year-long packing seasons. A range of 27 to 50 FCS were swabbed at each facility to detect Listeria spp. at two timings of sampling, (i) post-sanitation and (ii) in-process (three hours of packinghouse operation), following a modified protocol of the FDA’s Bacteriological Analytical Manual method. Among 2,988 samples tested, 4.6% (n=136) were positive for Listeria spp. Wax coating was the unit operation from which Listeria spp. were most frequently isolated. The FCS that showed the greatest prevalence of Listeria spp. were polishing brushes, stainless steel dividers and brushes under fans/blowers, and dryer rollers. The prevalence of Listeria spp. on FCS increased throughout apple storage time. The results of this study will aid apple packers in controlling for contamination and harborage of L. monocytogenes and improving cleaning and sanitation practices of the most Listeria-prevalent FCS. IMPORTANCE Since 2014, fresh apples have been linked to outbreaks and recalls associated with post-harvest cross-contamination with the foodborne pathogen L. monocytogenes. These situations drive both public health burden and economic loss and underscore the need for continued scrutiny of packinghouse management to eliminate potential Listeria spp. niches. This research assesses the prevalence of Listeria spp. on FCS in apple packinghouses and identifies those FCS most likely to harbor Listeria spp. Such findings are essential for the apple packing industry striving to further understand and exhaustively mitigate the risk of contamination with L. monocytogenes to prevent future listeriosis outbreaks and recalls.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document