 |
 
|
Campylobacter in Poultry – Risk Management Strategy 2007 - 2010
7 Annex 3: Campylobacter Intervention Table and Decision Tree
Introduction
This Annex is a resource document containing current information on Campylobacter interventions potentially capable of achieving a 2 log or greater reduction in the pathogen at a particular broiler chicken processing step.
It also contains a decision tree that enables risk managers to assess the available information in light of international and New Zealand science and industry practice when considering risk management options, and before making risk management decisions.
More background information on hazard-based control of Campylobacter is available from NZFSA upon request.
Explanation of the Table to Capture Campylobacter Intervention Decisions
The following should be considered and described as appropriate under the relevant table headings. It is anticipated that the Science Group completes all columns (as much as possible) except the 2 on the far right, which will be completed by the Risk Manager.
Name/description of control measure
Insert the normal name of the control measure, e.g. trisodium phosphate rinse.
Process step
Identify the process step or steps where this control measure is applied.
Critical limits / Equipment set up
Identify processing equipment settings (e.g. counterflow) and the critical limits for the process step e.g. minimum concentration, temperature, time, pH etc.
Log reduction capability
Insert the log reduction that most evidence supports (presumes comparison of initial loading with post intervention loading). This should be in the order of a 2 log reduction or greater as indicated within the decision tree.
Explain any known limitations, e.g. whether this has been shown only for a particular strain of Campylobacter.
Status
Insert one of the following:
• Parked – no further work being done at this point in time – with justification;
• Stage through decision tree (indicate number of the box from the tree corresponding to the work in progress or whether accepted by NZFSA as an intervention.)
International Science
Consider robustness of science including:
• Peer-reviewed and published
• Peer reviewed by Science Group (unpublished)
• Methodology robust
• Number of studies supporting the findings
• Natural contamination or lab strains inoculated into product
• Insert any details given re costs.
Insert any issues related to stakeholder (including consumer) acceptance.
NZ Science
As for international science but in NZ context.
Field Trials
Consider:
• Trials done in commercial conditions
• Number of premises
• Whether trial is representative of most premises
RM Practicality
Consider whether the control measure(s) are practical under NZ conditions:
• Cost
• Availability of equipment and consumables
• Issues re feasibility, e.g. changes to facilities
RM Options
Insert Risk Management Options for Consideration
• Education / Guidance
• COP
Specification / Regulation
Table to Capture Campylobacter Intervention Decisions (as at 11 September 2007)
Name/description of intervention |
Process step |
Critical limits & Equipment set up |
Log reduction capability |
Status |
International Science |
NZ Science |
Field Trials |
RM Practicality |
RM Options |
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
There is evidence that ASC can be applied effectively However, the reduction is not always > 2log10 In NZ it is not proven on a commercial scale but figures will be available after October 2007 |
||||||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
ASC spray cabinet after inside-outside-bird-washer before chiller (Sanova) |
1,100 ppm sodium chlorite 9,000 citric acid pH 2.5 ± 0.05 14 – 18oC 15s |
1.75 log10 |
Kemp et al., 2001 Peer reviewed and published Method appears robust Natural contamination |
Experiments were carried out in 5 US commercial plants Probably representative for US premises |
||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
Postchill dip (Sanova) |
15 seconds exposure 600 to 800 ppm ASC pH 2.5 2.7 |
2 experiments: 0.92 and 1.2 log10 |
Oyarzabal et al., 2004 Method appears robust Natural contamination |
Experiments were carried ou in 1 commercial US poultry-processing facility Cannot assess whether trial is representative |
||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
Post screw-chill dip (Sanova) |
900 – 1000 ppm pH 2.5 – 2.6 20 s |
3.8 log10 |
Sexton et al. 2007 Peer reviewed and published Methodology appears robust Natural contamination |
Experiment was 1 commercial Australian premises
Industry report Trial would not be representative for commercial conditions because dip would contain small number of birds only (600 l solution) |
||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
Spray |
0.1 % solution of ASC (vol/vol) Prepared with citric acid Misted onto skins at 2 mL/s for 3s Used within 5 min of mixing |
Reduction if applied: before treatment spray 1.52 log10 after treatment spray 0.93 log10 |
Arritt et al. 2002 Peer reviewed and published Laboratory experiment Known strains |
This experiment was not done under commercial conditions and not representative of these. |
||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
ASC spray (Sanova) |
1,100 ppm Prepared with citric acid pH 2.5 240 mL 12 s |
1.15 - 1.54 log10 2.12 log10 if preceded by chlorinated wash Description not clear whether post-chill achieved similar results anyway |
Kemp and Schneider 2002 Peer reviewed and published Method appears ok Natural contamination |
Experiments were performed in two commercial US processing plant Probably representative for US premises |
||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
Post chill dip (Sanova) |
15 seconds 400 ppm |
App. 2.8 log10 |
Roy Biggs (personal communication 2006) Results made available to NZFSA Methodology appears ok |
Commercial plant 1 premises Dipping not representative for large numbers of birds |
||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
Prechill dip (Sanova) |
15 seconds 700-800 ppm |
> 3 log10 |
Roy Biggs (personal communication 2007) Results made available to NZFSA Methodology appears ok |
Commercial plant 1 premises Dipping not representative for large numbers of birds |
||||
Acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) |
Post chill dip (Johnson Diversey) |
15 seconds 700 ppm |
0.5 - 2.5 log10 |
Roy Biggs (personal communication 2007) Results made available to NZFSA Methodology appears ok |
Commercial plant 1 premises Dipping not representative for large numbers of birds |
||||
Acetic Acid |
Scalding tank |
52oC 0.1% & 5 minutes 0.2% & 2 minutes |
App. 5 log10 > 2 log10 |
Collect more data |
Okrend et al. 1986 Peer reviewed and published Strain clinical isolate |
||||
Trisodium Phosphate (TSP) |
Post-chill dip |
10% TSP 50oC 15 s |
1 day storage: 1.5 log10 6 days storage: 1.2 log10 |
Dip and spray experiments showed insufficient reduction Number of disadvantages listed |
Slavik et al. 1994 Peer reviewed and published Known strains |
Laboratory conditions MPN estimates |
|||
Trisodium Phosphate (TSP) |
Cell suspensions |
37oC 10% TSP Only or in combination with nisin or lysozyme |
Maximum reductions > 2 log10 |
Caneiro de Melo 1998 Peer reviewed and published Known strains |
Laboratory conditions( cell suspensions) not representative for commercial conditions |
||||
Trisodium Phosphate (TSP) |
Spray on skin |
10% TSP |
Reduction if applied: before treatment spray 1.63 log10 after treatment spray 1.28 log10 |
Arritt et al. 2002 Peer reviewed and published Known strains Methodology appears ok |
Laboratory conditions, not representative for commercial conditions |
||||
Trisodium Phosphate (TSP) |
|||||||||
Cetylpyridium chloride (CPC) |
Spray on skin |
0.1 % CPC 0.5% CPC Misted onto skins at 2 mL/s for 3s |
Reduction if applied: before treatment spray 0.1% - 1.42 log10 0.5 % - 2.89 log10 after treatment spray 0.1% - 0.77 log10 0.5 % - 4.67 log10 |
Monitor the literature and pursue actively if not sufficient other options available |
Arritt et al. 2002 Peer reviewed and published Known strains Methodology appears ok |
Laboratory conditions, not representative for commercial conditions |
|||
Electrolysed water |
Washing |
10 and 30 minute treatments 4oC and 23oC |
App. 3 log10 |
Unclear how difficult to implement under commercial conditions. Monitor international literature |
Park et al. 2002 Peer reviewed and published Six-strain mixture Methodology appears ok |
N/A |
Experimental conditions, not representative for commercial conditions |
||
SonoSteam ® |
Before washing operation |
1 second |
1.9 – 3.1 log10 |
Equipment not known to be in NZ. Monitor international trends |
Rosenquist et al. Draft paper and website Natural contamination |
N/A |
Not reported |
||
Freezing |
-18oC to -30oC |
App 2 log10 |
There is information from various sources that freezing is effective in reducing Campylobacter counts. Degree of reduction varies |
A further ESR project has been commissioned by NZFSA to compare effectiveness of various temperatures |
|||||
NZ Domestic freezing and thawing |
Post primary processing |
app -18oC storage then thawing 28 days 56 days |
1.8 – 2.1 log10 1.9 – 2.2 log10 |
ESR project commissioned by NZFSA |
Simulated domestic freezing conditions |
||||
Freezing at – 18oC |
Post primary processing |
32 days Chicken skin Chicken juice |
2.2 log10 1.5 log10 |
Birk et al. 2006 Peer reviewed and published Methodology robust 1 laboratory strain |
Laboratory experiment, not representative for commercial conditions |
||||
Freezing at – 20oC |
Post primary processing |
2 week period Ground chicken Chicken skin |
0.56 – 1.57 log10 1.38 – 3.39 log10 |
Bhaduri and Cottrell 2004 Peer reviewed and published Methodology robust 3 laboratory strains |
Laboratory experiment, not representative for commercial conditions |
||||
Freezing at – 20oC |
Post primary processing |
31 days Thawed at 7oC Immersion chilled (1 flock) Spray chilled (4 flocks) |
0.65 log10 1.83 – 2.87 log10 |
Note low reduction of immersion chilled flock |
Georgsson et al. 2006 Peer reviewed and published Methodology robust Natural contamination |
Birds were commercially frozen as practised in Iceland |
|||
Freezing at – 20oC |
Post primary processing |
3 weeks Thawed at 4oC |
2 log10 |
Sandberg et al. 2005 Peer reviewed and published Methodology robust Natural contamination |
Frozen at a laboratory |
||||
Freezing at – 20oC |
Post primary processing |
48 hours |
2 - 3 log10 |
Solow et al. 2003 Peer reviewed and published Methodology robust 3 Campylobacter strains inoculated on skin |
Not a field experiment |
||||
Freezing at -30oC |
Post primary processing |
72 hrs |
1.8 log10 |
Zhao et al. 2003 Peer reviewed and published Methodology robust 3 strains of Campylobacter |
Laboratory conditions |
||||
References
Arritt FM, Eifert JD, Pierson MD and Sumner SS (2002) Efficacy of antimicrobials against Campylobacter jejuni on chicken breast skin. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 11:358 – 366
Bhaduri S and Cottrell (2004) Survival of cold-stressed campylobacter jejuni on ground chicken and chicken skin during frozen storage. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 7103-7109
Birk T., Rosenquist H., Brøndsted L., Ingmer H., Ysted A., and Christensen BB (2006) A comparative study of two food model systems to test the survival of Campylobacter jejuni at -18oC. Journal of Food Protection Vol. 69 No 11, 2635 – 2639
Carneiro de Melo AMS, Cassar CA and Miles RJ (1998) Trisodium phosphate increases sensitivity of gram-negative bacteria to lysozyme and nisin. Journal of Food protection Vol. 61, No. 7, P. 839-844
Georgsson F, Þorkelsson AE, Geirsdóttir M, Reiersen J and Stern NJ (2006) The influence of freezing and duration of storage on Campylobacter and indicator bacteria in broiler carcasses. Food Microbiology 23, p. 677 – 683
Kemp GK, Aldrich ML, Guerra ML and Schneider KR, (2001) Continuous online processing of fecal- and ingesta contaminated poultry carcasses using acidified sodium chlorite antimicrobial intervention. Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 64, No. 6, pp. 807 – 812
Kemp GK and Schneider KR (2002) Reduction of Campylobacter contamination on broiler carcasses using acidified sodium chlorite. Dair, Food and Environmental Sanitation. Vol 22, No 8, p. 599 – 606
Okrend AJ, Johnston RW, Moran AB (1986) Effect of acid on the death rates at 52oC of Salmonella typhimurium and Campylobacter jejuni in poultry scald water. Journal of Food Protection Vol. 49, No. 7, 500-503
Oyarzabal OA, Hawk C, Bilgill SF, Warf CC and Kemp GK (2004) Effects of postchill application of acidified sodium chlorite to control Campylobacter spp. and Escherichia coli on commercial broiler carcasses. Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 67, No. 10, pp. 2288 – 2291
Park H, Hung Y-C and Bracket RE (2002) Antimicrobial effect of electrolyzed water for inactivating Campylobacter jejuni during poultry washing. International Journal of Food Microbiology 72, pp. 77 - 83
Rosenquist H, Helwigh B and Boysen (2007) Reductions in numbers of thermotolerant Campylobacter on chicken carcasses following freezing or Sonosteam ® treatment.
Sandberg M, Hofshagen M., Østenvik Ø., Skerve E. and Innocent G (2005) Survival of Campylobacter on frozen broiler carcasses as a function of time. Journal of Food Protection Vol 68, No 8, 1600-1605
Sexton M., Raven G, Holds G, Pointon A, Kiermeier A, Sumner J (2007) Effect of acidified sodium chlorite treatment on chicken carcases produced in South Australia. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 115, 252 - 255
Solow BT, Cloak OM and Fratamico PM (2003) Effect of temperature on viability of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli on raw chicken or pork skin. Journal of Food Protection Vol 66, No 11, 2023 – 2031
Slavik MF, Kim J-E, Pharr MD, Raben DP, Tsai S and Lobsinger CM (1994) Effect of Trisodium Phosphate on Campylobacter attached to post-chill chicken carcasses. Journal of Food Protection. Vol. 57, No. 4, P. 324-326
Zhao T., Ezeike G., Doyle M, Hung Y-C, Howell R (2003) Reduction of Campylobacter jejuni on poultry by low-temperature treatment. Journal of Food Protection Vol. 66, No. 4, 652 – 655
Decision tree
New Zealand Food Safety Authority
68-86 Jervois Quay
PO Box 2835
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 2500
Fax: +64 4 894 2501
Contact this person