奶牛场个人防护装备中李斯特菌有效消毒程序的确定。

IF 2.1 4区 农林科学 Q3 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Karen Nieto-Flores, Luis Sabillón, Jayne Stratton, Andréia Bianchini
{"title":"奶牛场个人防护装备中李斯特菌有效消毒程序的确定。","authors":"Karen Nieto-Flores, Luis Sabillón, Jayne Stratton, Andréia Bianchini","doi":"10.1016/j.jfp.2025.100455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The presence of Listeria monocytogenes in the dairy environment remains a food safety challenge. The source of microbial contamination may include employees and their personal protective equipment (PPE). This study investigated the effectiveness of cleaning protocols (i.e., detergents and mechanical action) and three chemical sanitizers commonly employed at dairy facilities against Listeria innocua contamination on different types of gloves, aprons, and boots. Coupons made of PPE material were inoculated with a two-strain cocktail of L. innocua suspended in either Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS) or skim milk to determine the potential effect of organic matter. In general, peroxyacetic acid (0.20% (v/v)) was more effective at reducing Listeria counts on aprons and gloves compared to chlorine and quaternary ammonium at 200 ppm. Depending on the type of sanitizer, Listeria reductions ranged from 1.95 - 4.72 and 1.52 - 4.60 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> on aprons and gloves, respectively. In comparison, sanitizers achieved a 0.93 - 2.32 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> reduction on boot soles, with no significant differences observed among sanitizers. PVC (vinyl) gloves achieved lower Listeria log reductions than nitrile and latex gloves. Sanitizers were less effective on boots with wider and deeper lugs than those with shallow lugs. The presence of organic matter significantly reduced the antimicrobial efficacy of all sanitizers (<1 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> reduction). However, the inclusion of cleaning protocols with and without mechanical action achieved a ≥3 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> reduction in the different types of PPE. This study highlights the importance of scrubbing as an essential step to reduce Listeria on PPE.</p>","PeriodicalId":15903,"journal":{"name":"Journal of food protection","volume":" ","pages":"100455"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determination of an Effective Sanitizing Procedure for Listeria innocua in Personal Protective Equipment Used in Dairy Facilities.\",\"authors\":\"Karen Nieto-Flores, Luis Sabillón, Jayne Stratton, Andréia Bianchini\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jfp.2025.100455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The presence of Listeria monocytogenes in the dairy environment remains a food safety challenge. The source of microbial contamination may include employees and their personal protective equipment (PPE). This study investigated the effectiveness of cleaning protocols (i.e., detergents and mechanical action) and three chemical sanitizers commonly employed at dairy facilities against Listeria innocua contamination on different types of gloves, aprons, and boots. Coupons made of PPE material were inoculated with a two-strain cocktail of L. innocua suspended in either Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS) or skim milk to determine the potential effect of organic matter. In general, peroxyacetic acid (0.20% (v/v)) was more effective at reducing Listeria counts on aprons and gloves compared to chlorine and quaternary ammonium at 200 ppm. Depending on the type of sanitizer, Listeria reductions ranged from 1.95 - 4.72 and 1.52 - 4.60 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> on aprons and gloves, respectively. In comparison, sanitizers achieved a 0.93 - 2.32 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> reduction on boot soles, with no significant differences observed among sanitizers. PVC (vinyl) gloves achieved lower Listeria log reductions than nitrile and latex gloves. Sanitizers were less effective on boots with wider and deeper lugs than those with shallow lugs. The presence of organic matter significantly reduced the antimicrobial efficacy of all sanitizers (<1 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> reduction). However, the inclusion of cleaning protocols with and without mechanical action achieved a ≥3 log CFU/in<sup>2</sup> reduction in the different types of PPE. This study highlights the importance of scrubbing as an essential step to reduce Listeria on PPE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of food protection\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"100455\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of food protection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfp.2025.100455\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of food protection","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfp.2025.100455","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

乳制品环境中单核细胞增生李斯特菌的存在仍然是食品安全的挑战。微生物污染源可能包括员工及其个人防护装备。本研究调查了清洁方案(即洗涤剂和机械作用)和三种常用的化学消毒剂对不同类型的手套、围裙和靴子上的李斯特菌污染的有效性。用PPE材料制成的接种片接种悬浮在磷酸盐缓冲盐水(PBS)或脱脂牛奶中的两株无头乳杆菌鸡尾酒,以确定有机物的潜在影响。总的来说,与氯和季铵浓度为200 ppm时相比,过氧乙酸(0.20% (v/v))对减少围裙和手套上的李斯特菌计数更有效。根据消毒剂类型的不同,围裙和手套的李斯特菌减少量分别为1.95 - 4.72和1.52 - 4.60 log CFU/in2。相比之下,消毒剂对靴子鞋底的影响减少了0.93 - 2.32 log CFU/in2,不同消毒剂之间没有显著差异。PVC(乙烯基)手套比丁腈和乳胶手套减少的李斯特菌对数更低。与鞋耳较浅的靴子相比,鞋耳较宽、较深的靴子使用消毒剂效果较差。有机物的存在显著降低了所有消毒剂的抗菌功效(降低2)。然而,包括有和没有机械作用的清洁方案在不同类型的PPE中实现了≥3 log CFU/in2的减少。这项研究强调了洗涤作为减少个人防护用品上李斯特菌的重要步骤的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Determination of an Effective Sanitizing Procedure for Listeria innocua in Personal Protective Equipment Used in Dairy Facilities.

The presence of Listeria monocytogenes in the dairy environment remains a food safety challenge. The source of microbial contamination may include employees and their personal protective equipment (PPE). This study investigated the effectiveness of cleaning protocols (i.e., detergents and mechanical action) and three chemical sanitizers commonly employed at dairy facilities against Listeria innocua contamination on different types of gloves, aprons, and boots. Coupons made of PPE material were inoculated with a two-strain cocktail of L. innocua suspended in either Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS) or skim milk to determine the potential effect of organic matter. In general, peroxyacetic acid (0.20% (v/v)) was more effective at reducing Listeria counts on aprons and gloves compared to chlorine and quaternary ammonium at 200 ppm. Depending on the type of sanitizer, Listeria reductions ranged from 1.95 - 4.72 and 1.52 - 4.60 log CFU/in2 on aprons and gloves, respectively. In comparison, sanitizers achieved a 0.93 - 2.32 log CFU/in2 reduction on boot soles, with no significant differences observed among sanitizers. PVC (vinyl) gloves achieved lower Listeria log reductions than nitrile and latex gloves. Sanitizers were less effective on boots with wider and deeper lugs than those with shallow lugs. The presence of organic matter significantly reduced the antimicrobial efficacy of all sanitizers (<1 log CFU/in2 reduction). However, the inclusion of cleaning protocols with and without mechanical action achieved a ≥3 log CFU/in2 reduction in the different types of PPE. This study highlights the importance of scrubbing as an essential step to reduce Listeria on PPE.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of food protection
Journal of food protection 工程技术-生物工程与应用微生物
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
5.00%
发文量
296
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Food Protection® (JFP) is an international, monthly scientific journal in the English language published by the International Association for Food Protection (IAFP). JFP publishes research and review articles on all aspects of food protection and safety. Major emphases of JFP are placed on studies dealing with: Tracking, detecting (including traditional, molecular, and real-time), inactivating, and controlling food-related hazards, including microorganisms (including antibiotic resistance), microbial (mycotoxins, seafood toxins) and non-microbial toxins (heavy metals, pesticides, veterinary drug residues, migrants from food packaging, and processing contaminants), allergens and pests (insects, rodents) in human food, pet food and animal feed throughout the food chain; Microbiological food quality and traditional/novel methods to assay microbiological food quality; Prevention of food-related hazards and food spoilage through food preservatives and thermal/non-thermal processes, including process validation; Food fermentations and food-related probiotics; Safe food handling practices during pre-harvest, harvest, post-harvest, distribution and consumption, including food safety education for retailers, foodservice, and consumers; Risk assessments for food-related hazards; Economic impact of food-related hazards, foodborne illness, food loss, food spoilage, and adulterated foods; Food fraud, food authentication, food defense, and foodborne disease outbreak investigations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信