Risk assessment of Listeria monocytogenes in poultry and beef

Abstract

Purpose-A quantitative microbiological risk assessment (QMRA) was developed to estimate the probability of getting listeriosis as a consequence of chicken and beef consumption in Chile. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach-As a first step a deterministic retail-to-home model was constructed for the Chilean susceptible population, including storage, cross-contamination and cooking. Next, two probabilistic models were developed, including variability and/or the uncertainty of some of the parameters. The probabilistic models were analyzed by Monte Carlo simulations with 100,000 iterations. Findings-Of the total susceptible population used in the model (2.81 million people), the deterministic model estimated 11 and two listeriosis cases because of beef and poultry consumption, respectively and the variability model estimated a mean of 322 and 7,546 cases for beef and poultry consumption, respectively. The uncertainty analysis showed large ranges, with realistic estimates made with an initial concentration of Listeria monocytogenes of 0.04-1 CFU/g and a dose-response parameter r ranging from 10-14 to 10-10. Research limitations/implications-The lack of information was the major limitation of the model, so the generation of it has to be a priority in Chile for developing less uncertain risk assessments in the future. Practical implications-Raw animal products can be the cause of listeriosis cases if they are not stored, cooked and/or handled properly. Consumer education seems to be an essential factor for disease prevention. Originality/value-This is the first QMRA made in Chile, and also the first study of listeriosis in non-processed meat.

A Systematic Review of Beef Meat Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Models

“…− risks of illness and health burden associated with consumption of beef meat and preparations [16,21,22,24,25,[32][33][34][35][36]38,39,42,44]; − the effect of mitigation interventions [16,27,28,36,39,40,43,47,48]; − all or part of the farm-to-fork chain [18,20,24,[29][30][31]37]; − transmission pathways or contribution to the public health burden [17,26,43,46]; − impact of manufacturing and consumption practices [23]; − investigation on outbreaks [41].…”

“…The preparation step corresponds to the meal preparation through meat handling or mixing with other ingredients, for example, along with meal cooking. This step may involve a high risk of microbial transfer from meat to vegetables and vice versa [19,24,35,38,46] from improperly cleaned hands or from meat to meat if the same cutting media is shared [19]. As an example, Evers et al [19] considered microbial transfers from meat to vegetables, cutting board, and washed hands.…”

“…Some studies performed a hazard characterization to describe the outcomes of a consumer exposure to the pathogen [16,17,20,[22][23][24][25][26]29,30,[32][33][34][35][36][40][41][42]44,46,48]. A dose-response relationship is expressed as the probability of illness according to the ingested dose.…”

“…Probability of infection and severity of disease outcomes are different for healthy adults and "sensitive" populations including children under 16, pregnant women, elderly, or immunodeficient people. This statement is especially true when considering L. monocytogenes risk assessments for pregnant women [46] or EHEC risks associated with hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) for young children [29].…”

“…In the case of microbial growth, predictive microbiology models are considered to estimate the increase in the pathogen concentration in the product. These situations mainly depend on temperature during cold storage without freeze (≥4 • C), temperature abuse during storage [16,17,19,20,[24][25][26][30][31][32][33][34][35][36]42,44,46,48], or transport times [17,24,33,34]. Models used here can be of a different nature, namely stochastic or deterministic (see Table 2.…”