Ergebnisbericht der Task Force EHEC zur Aufklärung des EHEC O104:H4 Krankheitsausbruchs in Deutschland

Bernard, Helen; Bisping, Martin; Broschewitz, Bernd; Bucher, Michael; Fetsch, A.; Förster, Doris; Frandrup-Kuhr, Oliver; Fricke, Gerd; Greiner, Matthias; Gross, Stefan; Hänel, Christoph-Michael; Heusler, Katrin; Jähne, Julia; Kenntner, Norbert; Kliemant, Andreas; Kühn, Kristian; Kutzke, Manfred; Ladehoff, Wulf; Luber, Petra; Mosbach‐Schulz, Olaf; Müller, Britta; Rampp, Albert; Reinecke, Annette; Rosner, Bettina

doi:10.1007/s00003-011-0710-7

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Timeline of the enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) crisis in Germany in 2011. Abbreviations: RA, risk assessment; RM, risk management; RC, risk communication; RKI, Robert Koch Institute; BfR, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment; ECDC, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control; BVL, German Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety; EWRS, European Early Warning and Response System; HUS, Haemolytic Uremic Syndrome; RASFF, Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed Safety (Bernhard et al., 2011 ; BfR 2011a , 2011b , 2011c , 2011d , 2011e , 2011f , 2011h ; Brenner & Zacharis, 2011 ; ECDC, 2011a ; EFSA, 2011 ; Frank et al., 2011 ; Hamburg de, 2011 May 26, 2011 May 31; Hamburger Morgenpost, 2011 May 20, 2011 May 22; LAVES & NLGA, 2011 ; RKI, 2011 ; RASFF, 2011a , 2011b , 2011c , 2011d ; WHO, 2011 ; Zeit Online, 2011 May 26) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The timelines of the EHEC outbreak in Germany, the horsemeat scandal in Ireland, and the fipronil incident in the Netherlands are shortly described and summarized in Figures 4, 5 (Bernhard et al, 2011;BfR 2011aBfR , 2011bBfR , 2011cBfR , 2011dBrenner & Zacharis, 2011;ECDC, 2011a;EFSA, 2011;Frank et al, 2011;Hamburger Morgenpost, 2011May 20, 2011LAVES & NLGA, 2011;RKI, 2011;RASFF, 2011aRASFF, , 2011bRASFF, , 2011cRASFF, , 2011dWHO, 2011;Zeit Online, 2011 (DAFM, 2013;FSAI, 2013;EFSA, 2013aEFSA, , 2013bRASFF, 2013aRASFF, , 2013bFebruary 13, 2013February 14, 2013 but due to the type of hazard, the starting point of the incident and the organization of handling a food safety crisis in the respective country, RA, RM, and RC were approached differently in each case. Delays in response time occurred during all three incidents but due to different reasons.…”

Section: Differences In Ra Rm and Rc Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interactions between risk assessors and risk managers during three major food incidents in Europe

Focker

Borne

Fischer

et al. 2021

Journal of Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk analysis consists of risk assessment (RA), risk management (RM), and risk communication (RC). In most countries, RA and RM of food safety are separated to achieve a high scientific integrity, and typically occur in sequential order. However, in case of a food safety incident, even though being separate processes, RA and RM are performed simultaneously due to great time pressure and expected high impacts. The aim of this study was to analyze and evaluate the observed interactions between RA and RM processes, during three major food incidents in Europe, and to provide suggestions for possible improvement. Based on the differences observed between the three cases, strengths and weaknesses of each system have been identified. The enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) crisis in 2011 in Germany, the horsemeat scandal in 2013 in Ireland, and the fipronil incident in 2017 in the Netherlands were used as case studies. Timelines of these incidents and crisis management procedures in place in each of the three countries provided the basis for further analysis. First, results showed that details of the communication processes between RA and RM bodies were frequently lacking in crisis management protocols. Second, RA, RM, and RC processes differed for each incident, due to differences in estimated risk for public health, but also due to differences in the organization within a country. Based on our results, we recommend that crisis management protocols should contain a section on communication between RA, RM, and on communication between member states in the EU.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Differences In Ra Rm and Rc Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions between risk assessors and risk managers during three major food incidents in Europe

Focker

Borne

Fischer

et al. 2021

Journal of Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the aftermath, an international workshop held by the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) in November 2011 addressed lessons learned and future research needs (STEC Workshop Reporting Group, 2012). As the identification of the probable vehicle and source was unsuccessful through microbiological analysis, but through the restaurant cohort study of the RKI and the trace-back and trace-forward data analysis of the Task Force EHEC (Appel et al, 2011;Bernard et al, 2011;Buchholz et al, 2011;Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, 2011a;LAVES and NLGA, 2011;RKI, 2011), the importance of tools and concepts for trade network investigations was addressed as one major issue for future outbreak investigations. In general, it was emphasized that one should use this outbreak as an example to learn as much as possible to improve the handling of future outbreak situations (STEC Workshop Reporting Group, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trace-Back and Trace-Forward Tools DevelopedAd Hocand Used During the STEC O104:H4 Outbreak 2011 in Germany and Generic Concepts for Future Outbreak Situations

Weiser

Gross

Schielke

et al. 2013

Foodborne Pathogens and Disease

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O104:H4 outbreak in Germany in 2011 required the development of appropriate tools in real-time for tracing suspicious foods along the supply chain, namely salad ingredients, sprouts, and seeds. Food commodities consumed at locations identified as most probable site of infection (outbreak clusters) were traced back in order to identify connections between different disease clusters via the supply chain of the foods. A newly developed relational database with integrated consistency and plausibility checks was used to collate these data for further analysis. Connections between suppliers, distributors, and producers were visualized in network graphs and geographic projections. Finally, this trace-back and trace-forward analysis led to the identification of sprouts produced by a horticultural farm in Lower Saxony as vehicle for the pathogen, and a specific lot of fenugreek seeds imported from Egypt as the most likely source of contamination. Network graphs have proven to be a powerful tool for summarizing and communicating complex trade relationships to various stake holders. The present article gives a detailed description of the newly developed tracing tools and recommendations for necessary requirements and improvements for future foodborne outbreak investigations.

show abstract

Untersuchung von Lebensmitteln auf Mikroorganismen

Dombrowski

2012

Berichte Zur Lebensmittelsicherheit 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ergebnisbericht der Task Force EHEC zur Aufklärung des EHEC O104:H4 Krankheitsausbruchs in Deutschland

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Interactions between risk assessors and risk managers during three major food incidents in Europe

Interactions between risk assessors and risk managers during three major food incidents in Europe

Trace-Back and Trace-Forward Tools DevelopedAd Hocand Used During the STEC O104:H4 Outbreak 2011 in Germany and Generic Concepts for Future Outbreak Situations

Untersuchung von Lebensmitteln auf Mikroorganismen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About