Background Little is known about the risk to patients’ health when using home‐prepared enteral tube feeding. The objective of this study was to explore the differences in hygiene conditions and microbial load of different types of home‐prepared enteral tube feeding and explore associations between those differences and food handlers’ characteristics. Methods We evaluated 96 enteral formulations, considering 3 types used by adult patients: homemade enteral preparations (HEPs), blended enteral preparations (BEPs), and commercial enteral formulas (CEFs). Enteral formulations were collected from homes and microbiologically analyzed. Hygiene criteria were assessed using a checklist, applied during the handling stages. The profile of the food handler was reviewed using a questionnaire. Results 82.3% (79/96) exceeded acceptable bacterial counts, which was 10³ colony‐forming units per gram for aerobic mesophilic microorganisms and for total coliforms (35 °C), Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus sp, and Staphylococcus coagulase‐positive, if present in the enteral formulations. The number of inadequate samples was higher in HEPs and BEPs than in CEFs. Considering the hygiene criteria, the home‐prepared enteral tube feedings did not differ significantly. There was a significant difference among hygiene conditions considering the variables “monthly family income” and “food training.” Conclusion Regardless of the type of enteral formulations used by patients, when handled at home, there was a risk of contamination. However, contaminants present in enteral formulations can be easily controlled with improvements in hygiene measures as well as with greater guidance and control during the handling stages.

Objective To evaluate the job satisfaction of nutritionists who work in food service in the state of Paraná (Brazil). Methods A survey was carried out with 249 nutritionists through a semi-structured online questionnaire, which assessed their profile, professional activities, and job satisfaction. The Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests and the ordinal logistic regression at a 5% significance level were applied to evaluate the differences and relationship between job satisfaction and the independent variables. Results The average age of the survey participants was 31.9±6.4 years, the majority was female (95.58%), and graduated between 2000 and 2016 (90.36%). The survey revealed that 55.41% of the nutritionists were satisfied at work, 33.68% were indifferent, 6.86% were highly satisfied, and 4.04% were dissatisfied. The variables that influenced job satisfaction the most were age, years of training, income, and workdays in the week. Income explained satisfaction positively. There was statistical difference in relation to the satisfaction of participants regarding their knowledge on food service (p=0.0350), completion of postgraduate courses (p=0.0082), and interest in working in an area of nutrition other than food service (p<0.0001). Conclusion Although most professionals are satisfied, many were indifferent to job satisfaction, which may reflect a low perspective on their current job or poor experience in the food service. These results suggest the need for further actions aiming at raising nutritionists’ perceived professional importance.

The purpose of the study was to identify the socioeconomic and professional profile of owners and food handlers of food trucks in a capital in the south of Brazil, as well as to evaluate the knowledge of these individuals regarding food safety. A total of 119 individuals in Curitiba, Brazil, participated in the study. For data collection, was elaborated a questionnaire about the socio-demographic, professional profile and food safety knowledge, which was filled by the participants during events. The majority of the individuals were owners (75.63%), of the male gender (69.75%), aged between 30 and 44 years-old (56.30%) and with complete/incomplete higher education (55.46%). The participants answered of the questions of food safety correctly (76.63%). There was a significant difference regarding food safety knowledge among the participants related to the level of education (p=0.0054), length of service in the food segment (p=0.0267), and the completion of courses related to the food area (p=0.0016). These results emphasize the need for continuous education and for the development of new strategies for food safety training, in order to improve the knowledge of street food workers.

No abstract

BackgroundIdentifying food safety risks when handling enteral formulations at home is important to restore and maintain the health of patients. Therefore, this study developed and validated a food safety assessment checklist for handling home enteral nutrition (HEN).MethodsThis methodological study developed a checklist based on a literature review and interviews with food safety professionals. The content validation, which was conducted by food safety and enteral feeding experts, assessed the relevance, clarity, and simplicity of the checklist using the content validity index of items (CVI‐I), categories (CVI‐C), and the entire instrument (CVI‐EI). Each item was rated as either essential, necessary, or recommended according to the risk in relation to foodborne diseases.ResultsThe Food Safety for Handling Home Enteral Nutrition checklist (FSHEN checklist) that was developed includes 40 items and the following eight categories: physical structure; cleaning of facilities, equipment, furniture, and utensils; pests and waste; water supply; food handlers; ingredients and packaging; handling of enteral formulations; and the bottling and storage of enteral formulations. The CVI‐EI was above the recommendation (≥0.93) for the three assessed criteria, as was the CVI‐C in terms of clarity (≥0.95), relevance (≥0.98), and simplicity (≥0.84). A total of 52.5% of the items were rated as essential, 32.5% as necessary, and 15% as recommended.ConclusionThe FSHEN checklist is relevant, clear, and easy to use. It can help health professionals and individuals working in the field to assess and prioritize items to improve food safety in the management of HEN.