Assessment of the Effectiveness of Pre-harvest Meat Safety Interventions to Control Foodborne Pathogens in Broilers: a Systematic Review

Abstract

Purpose of Review Ensuring broilers’ meat safety is a priority to policy makers, producers, and consumers. This systematic review aims to update the recent knowledge on pre-harvest interventions to control main foodborne pathogens in broilers and to assess their effectiveness. Recent Findings A total of 815 studies were retrieved from PubMed® and Web of Science for 13 pathogens. In total, 51 studies regarding Campylobacter spp., Salmonella spp., VTEC, ESBL-AmpC Escherichia coli, and Clostridium perfringens were included in this review. Summary Research mostly focused on Salmonella spp. and Campylobacter spp. Biosecurity and management interventions had mixed outcomes, while the effectiveness of feed additives, though intensively researched, remains controversial. Research on other pathogens (i.e. ESBL-AmpC E. coli/Salmonella, and Toxoplasma gondii) was scarce, with publications focusing on epidemiology and/or on source-attribution studies. This is also true regarding research on Listeria monocytogenes, Bacillus cereus, Clostridium botulinum, Clostridium perfringens, and Staphylococcus aureus as these are frequently controlled by post-harvest interventions. Overall, studies on recent developments of novel pathogen-specific immunisation strategies are lacking.

A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Pre-Harvest Meat Safety Interventions in Pig Herds to Control Salmonella and Other Foodborne Pathogens

“…Such work was framed in the context of the RIBMINS Cost Action (please refer to the Acknowledgements section). Likewise, the methods followed are similar to those described by Pessoa et al [4] and the work presented here was conducted by the same two review coordinators, and two volunteer researchers. The backbone of the methodology used followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement [5] and EFSA's guidelines for conducting systematic reviews for food and feed safety assessments [6].…”

“…The trials are repeated across different categories if they fit in more than one type of intervention. 4 Examples of other interventions tested are off-site early weaning, washing and disinfecting of lorries, split marketing approaches, and different space allowances. * Trials which reported at least one positive result (i.e., reduction of Salmonella shedding, increase of protective immunity).…”

“… Structure outline of text strings used for the searches conducted in PubMed ® and the Web of Science databases on 8 February 2021 (reproduced from Pessoa et al [ 4 ], which employed the same methods). The search strings used are available as Supplementary Material .…”

“…Eligibility (inclusion and exclusion) criteria used for the screening of title/abstracts and full texts. Reproduced and adapted from Pessoa et al[4], where the same set of exclusion and inclusion criteria were used.…”

Super Shedding in Enteric Pathogens: A Review

“…Depending on the host and pathogen, controlling for water and feed contamination may nevertheless achieve contrasting results. In a recent systematic review, Pessoa et al [99] demonstrated that biosecurity measures including those targeting water and feed contaminations might be inefficient in the case of Salmonella in chickens. In line with this, water disinfection and feed hygiene may also only slightly affect the epidemiology of E. coli O157:H7 in cattle [97].…”