No abstract

Transmission of viruses, bacteria, and parasites to food by way of improperly washed hands is a major contributing factor in the spread of foodborne illnesses. Field observers have assessed compliance with hand washing regulations, yet few studies have included consideration of frequency and methods used by sectors of the food service industry or have included benchmarks for hand washing. Five 3-h observation periods of employee (n = 80) hand washing behaviors during menu production, service, and cleaning were conducted in 16 food service operations for a total of 240 h of direct observation. Four operations from each of four sectors of the retail food service industry participated in the study: assisted living for the elderly, childcare, restaurants, and schools. A validated observation form, based on 2005 Food Code guidelines, was used by two trained researchers. Researchers noted when hands should have been washed, when hands were washed, and how hands were washed. Overall compliance with Food Code recommendations for frequency during production, service, and cleaning phases ranged from 5% in restaurants to 33% in assisted living facilities. Procedural compliance rates also were low. Proposed benchmarks for the number of times hand washing should occur by each employee for each sector of food service during each phase of operation are seven times per hour for assisted living, nine times per hour for childcare, 29 times per hour for restaurants, and 11 times per hour for schools. These benchmarks are high, especially for restaurant employees. Implementation would mean lost productivity and potential for dermatitis; thus, active managerial control over work assignments is needed. These benchmarks can be used for training and to guide employee hand washing behaviors.

Through direct marketing of their products, many farmers are forming a stronger connection with their customers and obtaining premium prices for those products. Potential direct marketing customers for food producers are local restaurants and institutional foodservice operations. Benefits and challenges do exist for both foodservice operators and food producers interested in exploring this method of purchasing. A project tracking local food purchasing by nine Iowa restaurants and institutions is described.

No abstract

Limited studies have explored employees' perceptions of food safety culture in onsite foodservices, despite the growing recognition of the impact of improving food safety practices. A cross-sectional paper-based survey was conducted with nonsupervisory employees (n = 582) from health care and school foodservice operations (n = 51) in three Midwest states to assess food safety culture using an instrument developed and validated in this specific context. This study aimed to investigate the extent to which employees' perceptions of food safety culture differ based on demographic variables and operation characteristics (management system, size, and type of operation). Employees' perceptions of food safety culture were evaluated on factors of management and coworkers support, communication, self-commitment, environment support, work pressure, and risk judgment. Areas of strength and potential improvement were identified; significant differences found in employees' perceptions can guide development of interventions that support safe food handling practices in onsite foodservices.

During 2009–2010, a total of 1,527 foodborne disease outbreaks were reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2013). However, in a 2011 CDC report, Scallan et al. estimated about 48 million people contract a foodborne illness annually in the United States. Public health officials are concerned with this under-reporting; thus, the purpose of this study was to identify why consumers and healthcare professionals don’t report foodborne illness. Focus groups were conducted with 35 consumers who reported a previous experience with foodborne illness and with 16 healthcare professionals. Also, interviews with other healthcare professionals with responsibility of diagnosing foodborne illness were conducted. Not knowing who to contact, being too ill, being unsure of the cause, and believing reporting would not be beneficial were all identified by consumers as reasons for not reporting foodborne illness. Healthcare professionals that participated in the focus groups indicated the amount of time between patients’ consumption of food and seeking treatment and lack of knowledge were barriers to diagnosing foodborne illness. Issues related to stool samples such as knowledge, access and cost were noted by both groups. Results suggest that barriers identified could be overcome with targeted education and improved access and information about the reporting process.

No abstract

Foodservice managers are responsible for making sure employees follow safe food handling practices so customers do not become ill from unsafe food. Therefore, this study ascertained managers' perspectives using two methods of data analysis to answer the question, "What would make managers more effective in their role of assuring safe food practices are followed in the workplace?" Focus groups with current and future foodservice managers were conducted. The software program, Atlas.ti™ was used to complement researchers' analyses of focus group transcripts and develop visual representations of qualitative data. Major thematic categories identified by the managers in this study included: role identification, food safety training, and manager effectiveness. Using Atlas.ti™, data are visually mapped and relationships between different themes and theoretical ideas are represented. Based on the three major theme areas identified, foodservice operations should focus on improving manager effectiveness, role understanding and training to promote a safe food climate. Understanding why safe food practices are not followed can help operators delegate resources accordingly. Visual mapping helps clarify areas to improve workplace food safety practices and illustrates linkages. Originality/value -The use of qualitative analysis software in conjunction with researcher review in food safety research is novel. In addition, although other researchers have evaluated reasons for following or not following safe food handling practices, most have done so by assessing employees' perspectives rather than managers' perspectives. Keywords Structured AbstractPurpose -Foodservice managers are responsible for making sure employees follow safe food handling practices so customers do not become ill from unsafe food. Therefore, this study ascertained managers' perspectives using two methods of data analysis to answer the question, "What would make managers more effective in their role of assuring safe food practices are followed in the workplace?" Design/methodology/approach -Focus groups with current and future foodservice managers were conducted. The software program, Atlas.ti™ was used to complement researchers' analyses of focus group transcripts and develop visual representations of qualitative data. Findings -Major thematic categories identified by the managers in this study included: role identification, food safety training, and manager effectiveness. Using Atlas.ti™, data are visually mapped and relationships between different themes and theoretical ideas are represented.Research limitations/implications -Based on the three major theme areas identified, foodservice operations should focus on improving manager effectiveness, role understanding and training to promote a safe food climate. Practical implications -Understanding why safe food practices are not followed can help operators delegate resources accordingly. Visual mapping helps clarify areas to improve workplace food safety practices and illustrates linkages. Originality...