Campylobacter infections are one of the most prominent worldwide food-related diseases. The primary cause of these infections is reported to be improper food handling, in particular cross-contamination during domestic preparation of raw chicken products. In the present study, food handling behaviors in Austria were surveyed and monitored, with special emphasis on Campylobacter cross-contamination. Forty participants (25 mothers or fathers with at least one child ≤10 years of age and 15 elderly persons ≥60 years of age) were observed during the preparation of a chicken salad (chicken slices plus lettuce, tomato, and cucumber) using a direct structured observational scoring system. The raw chicken carcasses and the vegetable part of the salad were analyzed for Campylobacter. A questionnaire concerning knowledge, attitudes, and interests related to food safety issues was filled out by the participants. Only 57% of formerly identified important hygiene measures were used by the participants. Deficits were found in effective hand washing after contact with raw chicken meat, but proper changing and cleaning of the cutting board was noted. Campylobacter was present in 80% of raw chicken carcasses, albeit the contamination rate was generally lower than the limit of quantification (10 CFU/g). In the vegetable part of the prepared product, no Campylobacter was found. This finding could be due to the rather low Campylobacter contamination rate in the raw materials and the participants' use of some important food handling behaviors to prevent cross-contamination. However, if the initial contamination had been higher, the monitored deficits in safe food handling could lead to quantifiable risks, as indicated in other published studies. The results of the observational trial and the questionnaire indicated knowledge gaps in the food safety sector, suggesting that further education of the population is needed to prevent the onset of foodborne diseases.
Historical control data (HCD) are information about control animals of toxicity studies and clinically healthy animals that have not received any treatment. The term describes the spontaneous incidence of a finding or the background variation in continuous parameters, observed in the same species and the same type of toxicity study as the study under evaluation. Although the principles and general conditions for submission of HCD across different regulatory frameworks may sound very similar, understanding of the purpose and interpretation of these data is very heterogeneous, and can end up in differences in the interpretation of study results and final risk assessment for one and the same compound. EFSA has recognised the need for closer understanding on the criteria regarding the use, reporting and interpretation of historical control data in the evaluation of toxicity studies submitted under the substance classes primarily under the EFSA remit. Within the framework of this project and in order to better explore the community perception on HCD, three activities have been considered critical. Under the first activity, a literature search was conducted and retrieved relevant publications were summarised and allocated to thematic clusters. Most of the relevant papers were related to long‐term/carcinogenicity studies, developmental toxicity, and statistics. In addition, public databases containing HCD (Charles River, MARTA, NTP, RITA) and relevant OECD documents (Testing Guidelines, Guidance documents and Guidance Notes) were screened for further information concerning HCD. Topics identified from the literature have been used on the one hand to draft specific questions for a worldwide survey (second activity), in order to capture the experience of toxicologists and risk assessors on the use of HCD. On the other hand, the identified topics were aimed to explore the relevant points for discussion in the workshop organised with relevant stakeholders (third activity). The feedback captured by the survey showed that there is very high interest in the topic and strong need for more harmonisation on requirements for use of HCD has been expressed. This has been confirmed in the workshop, held as virtual event from May 3 to 5, 2022, where the main conclusions were that clear set of criteria need to be fulfilled before HCD are taken into account for interpretation of results, that high level of granularity in HCD is necessary when these are compiled and submitted and that close exchange between different domains (toxicology, statistics) is crucial when HCD are included in the interpretation of study results. Outcome of the project activities will be considered by EFSA PPR Panel in drafting a Scientific Opinion on use, reporting and interpretation of HCD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.