Medium and message: Need to frequently change handwashing signs to be effective

Posted on March 25, 2016 by Douglas Powell

I’m a food safety voyeur.

Supermarkets, farmers markets, restaurants – fancy or not – kitchens, farms, I’ve been professionally watching people for 20 years.

Chapman likes to recount how he was invited to the GFSI Consumer Goods Forum as a last minute replacement speaker in 2013 to talk about food safety infosheets and how we evaluated them. He said that the literature shows surprise matters when it comes to communicating risks – and a message that is up all the time, like a hand washing sign, probably doesn’t do much after the day it was posted (when it is surprising to the food handler).

The level of surprise in a message determines how successfully the information is received. In 1948, the Bell Telephone Company commissioned a study on communication as a mathematical theory to aid in the design of telephones. In a study of brain function, Zaghloul and colleagues (2009) also showed the brain’s sensitivity to unexpected or surprising information plays a fundamental role in the learning and adoption of new behaviors.

During the Q&A session at the end of the session someone from a German retail store asked Chapman if he was suggesting that that they take down all the handwashing posters they had up, and Chapman said, yes, unless they plan on changing them every couple of days. The audience had an audible gasp.

We’ve found that posting graphical, concise food safety stories in the back kitchens of restaurants can help reduce dangerous food safety practices and create a workplace culture that values safe food.

It was the first time that a communication intervention such as food safety information sheets had been validated to work using direct video observation in eight commercial restaurant kitchens and was published in the Journal of Food Protection.

We found that infosheets decreased cross-contamination events by 20 per cent, and increased handwashing attempts by 7 per cent.

Based on observations of more than 5,000 patrons at a hospital-based cafeteria, we showed that an evidence-based informational poster can increase attempts at hand hygiene.

So we gladly welcome new work on food safety messages and media in poultry processing facilities.

Signs can provide repetitive training on specific food safety practices for multicultural food processing employees. Posted signs for workers in many food processing facilities tend to be text-heavy and focus specifically on occupational hazard safety. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of newly-developed hand washing pictograms on employees’ hand washing behavior using video observation.

Five employee hand washing behaviors (soap use, wash completeness, wash time, complete rinsing, and towel use) were evaluated with (a) no intervention, company signs posted and considered the baseline; and compared to (b) hand washing behavior the next day (short term) and two weeks (long term) after experimental hand washing signs were displayed at a raw poultry slaughter facility (Facility A) and a poultry further processing facility (Facility B).

Both facilities showed a significant increase (p < 0.05) in soap use after the new sign was introduced at both short and long term time periods. There was a significant increase (p < 0.05) in washing, time of washing, and rinsing observed by Facility B employees, when baseline data was compared to the short term. This indicates that a new sign could increase hand washing compliance at least in the short term. Sign color also had a significant effect (p < 0.05) on employee behavior for washing and time of washing. Behavior for four of the five variables (soap, wash, time of wash, and towel use) was significantly different (p < 0.05) between baseline and either experimental observation period.

While signs can be a useful tool to offer as recurring food safety training for food processing employees, employees tend to revert back to old habits after several weeks.

Evaluation of how different signs affect poultry processing employees’ hand washing practices

Food Control, Volume 68, October 2016, Pages 1–6

Matthew Schroeder, Lily Yang, Joseph Eifert, Renee Boyer, Melissa Chase, Sergio Nieto-Montenegro

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956713516301244

Nebraska health board recommends no bare hands for restaurants

Posted on March 22, 2016 by Douglas Powell

The No. 1 cause of what people often call food poisoning is not spoiled food. It is a flu-like illness called norovirus that comes with diarrhea and vomiting.

And the No. 1 cause of norovirus is people who have the virus on their hands touching food without gloves.

To help prevent outbreaks of the virus, a health-related advisory group to the Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department has recommended the city tighten restaurant rules, seriously limiting when staff can touch ready-to-serve food with their bare hands.

The City Council likely will hold a public hearing on the no-bare-hands policy April 11. The Health Department advisory board approved it in early March.

The idea behind the policy is that once food is cooked, no staffer should touch it before a customer eats it, said Scott Holmes, manager of the Environmental Health Division with the local health department.

The proposed rule does allow some exceptions.

Staff can touch ready-to-eat food before it’s cooked, garnish beverages and wash fruits and vegetables with bare hands.

Some eating establishments already follow a no-bare-hands policy, including those that serve vulnerable or high-risk populations — people in custodial care, assisted-living facilities, hospitals, nursing homes and senior centers, for example.

And many chain restaurants already have such policies, Holmes said.

The local proposal follows a national model, with some exceptions. The committee that developed the Lincoln policy eliminated a few of the rules, ones that created the most controversy in other communities.

Food Safety Talk 95: What’s the right number of logs?

Posted on March 16, 2016 by Ben Chapman

They talk about what’s on their minds or in the news regarding food safety, and popular culture. They strive to be relevant, funny and informative — sometimes they succeed. You can download the audio recordings right from the website, or subscribe using iTunes.

Episode 95 can be found here and on iTunes.

Show notes so you can follow along at home:

What are gloves protecting? The food or the handler?

Posted on March 7, 2016 by Ben Chapman

This one time, in graduate school, a harvester told me that he loved wearing gloves when he picked tomatoes because it kept his hands from getting dirty.

Another time, in graduate school, a greenhouse manager told me he had convinced his boss that food safety was really important and the company invested in installing full restrooms in the greenhouse — and fully stocked a closet with latex gloves.

The manager trained all the employees on why clean hands and gloves were important.

A week after the training session he saw an employee urinating on the outside wall of the restroom.

With his gloves on.

Or maybe gloves are there to protect the food handlers from the food (thanks to Carl Custer for the cartoon).

They said loads: reducing cross-contamination via hands

Posted on March 1, 2016 by Douglas Powell

Hand washing and glove use are the main methods for reducing bacterial cross-contamination from hands to ready-to-eat food in a food service setting. However, bacterial transfer from hands to gloves is poorly understood, as is the effect of different durations of soap rubbing on bacterial reduction.

To assess bacterial transfer from hands to gloves and to compare bacterial transfer rates to food after different soap washing times and glove use, participants’ hands were artificially contaminated with Enterobacter aerogenes B199A at ∼9 log CFU. Different soap rubbing times (0, 3, and 20 s), glove use, and tomato dicing activities followed. The bacterial counts in diced tomatoes and on participants’ hands and gloves were then analyzed.

Different soap rubbing times did not significantly change the amount of bacteria recovered from participants’ hands. Dicing tomatoes with bare hands after 20 s of soap rubbing transferred significantly less bacteria (P < 0.01) to tomatoes than did dicing with bare hands after 0 s of soap rubbing. Wearing gloves while dicing greatly reduced the incidence of contaminated tomato samples compared with dicing with bare hands. Increasing soap washing time decreased the incidence of bacteria recovered from outside glove surfaces (P < 0.05).

These results highlight that both glove use and adequate hand washing are necessary to reduce bacterial cross-contamination in food service environments.

Adequate hand washing and glove use are necessary to reduce cross-contamination from hands with high bacterial loads

Journal of Food Protection®, Number 2, February 2016, pp. 184-344, pp. 304-308(5)

Robinson, Andrew L.; Lee, Hyun Jung; Kwon, Junehee; Todd, Ewen; Rodriguez, Fernando Perez; Ryu, Dojin

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iafp/jfp/2016/00000079/00000002/art00016

Barf train: Irish Rail forced to pull train from service throughout

Posted on February 27, 2016 by Douglas Powell

During an outing on Monday, hundreds of members from two societies at Dublin City University boarded a train specifically chartered for them heading to Galway City.

Those on-board were allowed to bring their own alcohol, and according to reports, there were only two security guards present to deal with the mass of students.

“The train was left in a dreadful state,” said a spokesperson for Irish Rail.

“The train was not able to enter service on Tuesday as it had to be deep cleaned on Tuesday and overnight on Wednesday before going back into service.”

According to the rail service vomit and “other fluids” where discovered throughout the train.

First reported in the College View, DCU’s student newspaper, the Engineering Society and Science & Health Society took 300 students from Dublin to Galway City on the train.

According to the newspaper, only two stalls were in working order during the journey, though a student on the train claimed “It was more like one.”

“We were locked in there with one toilet between 300 people,” said Josh, speaking to RTÉ’s Liveline.

“I don’t know what they expected. There was no where for anyone to get sick.”

Food Safety Talk 89: On a scale from 1 to 11

Posted on February 24, 2016 by Ben Chapman

Food Safety Talk, a bi-weekly podcast for food safety nerds, by food safety nerds. The podcast is hosted by Ben Chapman and barfblog contributor Don Schaffner, Extension Specialist in Food Science and Professor at Rutgers University. Every two weeks or so, Ben and Don get together virtually and talk for about an hour. They talk about what’s on their minds or in the news regarding food safety, and popular culture. They strive to be relevant, funny and informative — sometimes they succeed. You can download the audio recordings right from the website, or subscribe using iTunes.

Show notes and links so you can follow along at home:

They said loads: Handwashing and glove use both necessary

Posted on February 2, 2016 by Douglas Powell

Handwashing and glove use are the main methods for reducing bacterial cross-contamination from hands to ready-to-eat food in a food service setting.

However, bacterial transfer from hands to gloves is poorly understood, as is the effect of different durations of soap rubbing on bacterial reduction. To assess bacterial transfer from hands to gloves and to compare bacterial transfer rates to food after different soap washing times and glove use, participants’ hands were artificially contaminated with Enterobacter aerogenes B199A at ∼9 log CFU. Different soap rubbing times (0, 3, and 20 s), glove use, and tomato dicing activities followed. The bacterial counts in diced tomatoes and on participants’ hands and gloves were then analyzed. Different soap rubbing times did not significantly change the amount of bacteria recovered from participants’ hands.

Dicing tomatoes with bare hands after 20 s of soap rubbing transferred significantly less bacteria (P < 0.01) to tomatoes than did dicing with bare hands after 0 s of soap rubbing. Wearing gloves while dicing greatly reduced the incidence of contaminated tomato samples compared with dicing with bare hands. Increasing soap washing time decreased the incidence of bacteria recovered from outside glove surfaces (P < 0.05).

These results highlight that both glove use and adequate hand washing are necessary to reduce bacterial cross-contamination in food service environments.

Adequate hand washing and glove use are necessary to reduce cross-contamination from hands with high bacterial loads.

J Food Prot. 2016 Feb; 79(2):304-8. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-15-342.

Robinson AL, Lee HJ, Kwon J, Todd E, Rodriguez FP, Ryu D

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26818993

Crappy bathrooms in NY’s JFK

Posted on January 27, 2016 by Douglas Powell

It was Australia Day, 33 C, so why not coach an exhibition hockey game.

We travelled to Toowoomba yesterday, about 100 minutes from Brisbane, where one of my fellow coaches lives, and put the younger kids on a makeshift ice surface to drum up local interest in the sport (they’re trying to build an arena). http://www.chrismccooey.photography

Afterwards, many of the families went to a park, where the one grilling had remembered to bring his tip-sensitive digital thermometer, and another asked me about the bathroom.

I explained how 29 years ago, when I was editor of the Ontarion, the University of Guelph student paper, my first story in my new role was to rate the bathrooms at local bars.

It cost the paper thousands in lost advertising revenue because many of the bars didn’t like the results. The story was popular, and we made up the lost revenue in no time.

Christine Negroni writes in The Huffington Post that women arriving on oneworld flights into New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport have one word for the condition of the bathrooms in Terminal 8, “Ewwww.”

Kisha Burgos stopped at the bathroom in the baggage claim area and was shocked to see paper-strewn floors, filthy toilets and empty and broken paper dispensers in the stalls. “It’s bad,” she told me comparing it to the airports she visited in in Bangkok, Vietnam and Laos on her recent five week trip.

“Everything was really clean,” she said of the bathrooms in places one might not expect to find them.

Airport workers know the secret is to use the toilets on the departure level because passengers are better cared for there. Keeping them happy encourages them to shop and dine while waiting to board their flights. Arriving passengers on the other hand, are in a hurry and on their way out.

The most customer-friendly airport is Singapore’s Changi where every bathroom has a touch screen survey enabling users to immediately register their satisfaction (is that before or after washing their hands?).

I reported back to the parent the bathroom had the essentials – running water, soap and paper towel (which isn’t that common in Australia).

As a coach, I like that – we had the basics covered.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/530692596955113/1090594804298220/?notif_t=group_activity

Air driers suck; just ask local graffiti artists

Posted on January 16, 2016 by Ben Chapman

I snapped this pic today (below, exactly as shown).

I don’t like blow dryers because the literature shows they accumulate microorganisms from toilet aerosols, and can cause contamination of hands as they are dried by the dryer (Coates et al., 1987; Knights, et al., 1993; Redway,et al., 1994). In 2010, Anna Snelling and colleagues at the University of Bradford (UK) also showed that drying with a blow dryer can recontaminate hands and rubbing with paper towel was the most effective method to reduce pathogens.

Handwashing and food service food safety guru Pete Snyder at the St. Paul-based Hospitality Institute of Technology and Management summarized key aspects of handwashing and drying . Pete says that after hands are washed and rinsed, they must be thoroughly dried and cites data that shows 1-2 log reduction of pathogens from drying. Water and soap loosen the attachment of pathogen to hands. A rinse step dilutes what has been loosened but drying (and the friction associated) is the next step that matters – and the bugs have to go somewhere; I’d rather have paper towel instead of shit bacteria blown all over my pants.

Coates, D., D. N. Hutchinson, and F. J. Bolton. 1987. Survival of thermophilic campylobacter on fingertips and their elimination by washing and disinfection. Epidem. Inf. 99:265-274.

Knights, B., C. Evans, S. Barrass, and B. McHardy. 1993. Hand drying – A survey of efficiency and hygiene. The Applied Ecology Research Group, University of Westminster. London, UK.

Redway, K., B. Knights, Z. Bozoky, A. Theobald, and S.Hardcastle. 1994. Hand drying: A study of bacterial types associated with different hand drying methods and with hot air dryers. Applied Ecology Research Group, University of Westminster. London, UK. 14. Brodie, J. 1965. Hand hygiene. Scot. Med. J. 10:1:115-125.

barfblog

safe food from farm to fork

Category Archives: Handwashing