Studies on the hygienic status of animal carcasses and their contact surfaces in some butchery shops

Abstract

Cross-contamination of animal carcasses and their contact surfaces at any stage of meat handling is one major aspect in production of meat of high keeping quality. Thus, the objective of this study was to investigate the hygienic status of the animal carcasses (cattle, buffaloes, camel and sheep) and their contact surfaces (cutting boards, walls, knives, and butcher hands) in butchery shops among urban and rural areas in Sharkia province, Egypt. Microbial indicators for the hygienic measures adopted at butchery shops including total bacterial counts (TBC), total Enterobacteriacae counts (TEC), most probable number (MPN) of coliforms, total Staphylococcus aureus counts (TSC), total mould counts (TMC) and total yeast counts (TYC) were investigated. The results achieved in this study declared that cross-contamination of animal carcasses and their contact surfaces is well-observed and should be considered as an important factor that should be included in the microbiological risk assessments. Therefore, we recommend adoption of strict hygienic measures in all handling steps of animal carcasses.

Evaluation of the hygienic status at El-Qurein abattoir

“…APC of the examined wall samples was higher than 4.71 ± 1.2 log10 CFU/cm 2 that recorded in Algeria [30], 1 log10 CFU/cm 2 in Texas, United States [16], and 4.5 ± 0.09 in Egypt [31]. Higher results of 13.48 log10 CFU/cm 2 and 8.50 log10 CFU/cm 2 were reported in Nigeria [24] and in Egypt [29], respectively. Higher bacterial count obtained from floor swab samples may be attributed to the presence of accumulated blood, animals' internal organs, and polluted water on the floor [25].…”

“…Nonetheless, abattoir effluents and floors can provide an encouraging environment for microbial activity, as well as, an essential source of spreading and maintenance of microbial cells, particularly if cleaned with high-pressure water. This practice has the potential to propagate contamination by suspending microorganisms in the air through water droplets [29]. APC of the examined wall samples was higher than 4.71 ± 1.2 log10 CFU/cm 2 that recorded in Algeria [30], 1 log10 CFU/cm 2 in Texas, United States [16], and 4.5 ± 0.09 in Egypt [31].…”

“…Regarding floor samples, the total Staphylococcus count in this study was nearly similar to 5.98 ± 0.07 log10 CFU/cm 2 in Ethiopia [36], higher than 3.85 ± 0.42 log10 CFU/cm 2 in India [37], and lower than 7.0 ± 5.0 log10 CFU/cm 2 in Nigeria [35] and 100 ± 18 log10 CFU/cm 2 in Egypt [38]. For wall swab samples, the total Staphylococcus count was lower than 18.7 and 5.4 log10 CFU/cm 2 in Egypt [29,38], respectively. The variations of the results may be attributed to how the carcasses were handled and unsanitary practices observed during data collection [26].…”

Bacteriological Quality of Raw Meat, Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Bacterial Isolation and Associated Risk Factors Among Butcher Houses of Adama Town, Oromia, Ethiopia, 2020

“…The average TAPC was 5.89log CFU/g (95% CI: 5.7,6.1).Finding of this result is higher than East Java,Indonesia where mean of TAPC was 4.158 CFU/g and Chennai city, India(4.78log10) (28,82).However it is less than Addis Ababa,Ethiopia (6.44 log CFU/g ) (31). The variations of bacterial load observed in different studies might be due to lack of good processing, handling practices,sampling and sanitary standard operating procedures of meat handlers.Raw meat collected from butchers who trained on meat safety hygiene was 5.8 times more likely to be acceptable than those who did not receive training(AOR=5.8,1.99-17.34).This is because training of food handlers about the basic concept and requirements of personal hygiene and its environment plays an important part in safeguarding the safety of products to consumers (83).Regarding collecting money,in the current study,raw meat which were collected from butcher SHOPS in which meat handlers handle money while selling meat was 86% less likely to be acceptable than their counter part(AOR=0.14,0.04-0.43).According to WHO/FAO report, handling of foods with bare hands result in cross contamination and high microbial load. Furthermore, WHO recommends food handlers should be educated, encouraged or supervised to stop their business promptly if at any time, they suffer from diarrhea, vomiting, fever, sore throat or have visibly skin lesions.Eventhough it is not independent predictor in this study, fty percent of meat handlers had practice of working while they were ill. With regard to contamination by Total coliform, the average is 4.27 logCFU/g (95% CI: 4.1,4.4).…”

Bacteriological Quality of Raw Meat, Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Bacterial Isolation and Associated Risk Factors among Butcher Houses of Adama Town, Oromia, Ethiopia, 2021

“…The variations of bacterial load observed in different studies might be due to lack of good processing, handling practices,sampling and sanitary standard operating procedures of meat handlers. Raw meat collected from butchers who trained on meat safety hygiene was 5.8 times more likely to be acceptable than those who did not receive training(AOR=5.8,1.99-17.34).This is because training of food handlers about the basic concept and requirements of personal hygiene and its environment plays an important part in safeguarding the safety of products to consumers [83].Regarding collecting money,in the current study,raw meat which were collected from butcher SHOPS in which meat handlers handle money while selling meat was 86% less likely to be acceptable than their counter party (AOR=0.14,0.04-0.43).According to WHO/FAO report, handling of foods with bare hands result in cross contamination and high microbial load. Furthermore, WHO recommends food handlers should be educated, encouraged or supervised to stop their business promptly if at any time, they suffer from diarrhea, vomiting, fever, sore throat or have visibly skin lesions.…”