A quantitative risk metric to support individual sanitary measure reviews in international trade.

In order for the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) to make an equivalence determination for a foreign meat, poultry or egg products inspection procedure that differs from FSIS inspection procedures (an Individual Sanitary Measure or ISM), a country must demonstrate objectively that its food safety inspection system provides the same level of public health protection as the FSIS inspection system. To evaluate microbiological testing data that such countries may submit to this end, we present a possible risk metric to inform FSIS's assessment of whether products produced under an alternative inspection system in another country pose no greater consumer risk of foodborne illness than products produced under FSIS inspection. This metric requires evaluation of prevalence estimates of pathogen occurrence in products for the foreign country and the U.S. and determining what constitutes an unacceptable deviance of another country's prevalence from the U.S. prevalence, i.e., the margin of equivalence. We define the margin of equivalence as a multiple of the standard error of the U.S. prevalence estimate. Minimizing the margin of equivalence ensures the maximum public health protection for U.S. consumers, but an optimum choice must also avoid undue burden for quantitative data from alternative inspection systems in the foreign country. Across a wide range of U.S. prevalence levels and sample sizes, we determine margin of equivalence values that provide high confidence in conclusions as to whether or not the country's product poses no greater risk of foodborne illness from microbiological pathogens. These margins of equivalence can be used to inform FSIS's equivalence determination for an ISM request from a foreign country. Illustrative examples are used to support this definition of margin of equivalence. This approach is consistent with the World Trade Organization's concept of risk equivalence and is transparent and practical to apply in situations when FSIS makes an equivalence determination for an ISM requested by a foreign country.

Assessment of the Risk of Salmonellosis Linked to the Consumption of Liquid Egg Products Made from Internally Contaminated Shell Eggs Initially Stored at 65°F (18°C) Compared with Eggs Stored at 45°F (7°C).

ABSTRACT: According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) rule on "Prevention of Salmonella Enteritidis in Shell Eggs during Production, Storage, and Transportation," shell eggs intended for human consumption are required to be held or transported at or below 45°F (7.2°C) ambient temperature beginning 36 h after time of lay. Meanwhile, eggs in hatcheries are typically stored at a temperature of 65°F (18.3°C). Although most of those eggs are directed to incubators for hatching, excess eggs have the potential to be diverted for human consumption as egg products through the "breaker" market if these eggs are refrigerated in accordance with FDA's requirement. Combining risk assessment models developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service for shell eggs and for egg products, we quantified and compared Salmonella Enteritidis levels in eggs held at 65°F versus 45°F, Salmonella Enteritidis levels in the resulting egg products, and the risk of human salmonellosis from consumption of those egg products. For eggs stored 5 days at 65°F (following 36 h at 75°F [23.9°C] in the layer house), the mean level of Salmonella Enteritidis contamination is 30-fold higher than for eggs stored at 45°F. These increased levels of contamination lead to a 47-fold increase in the risk of salmonellosis from consumption of egg products made from these eggs, with some variation in the public health risk on the basis of the egg product type (e.g., whole egg versus whole egg with added sugar). Assuming that 7% of the liquid egg product supply originates from eggs stored at 65°F versus 45°F, this study estimates an additional burden of 3,562 cases of salmonellosis per year in the United States. A nominal range uncertainty analysis suggests that the relative increase in the risk linked to the storage of eggs at higher temperature estimated in this study is robust to the uncertainty surrounding the model parameters. The diversion of eggs from broiler production to human consumption under the current storage practices of 65°F (versus 45°F) would present a substantive overall increase in the risk of salmonellosis.

Food Safety Practices Linked with Proper Refrigerator Temperatures in Retail Delis.

Listeria monocytogenes (L. monocytogenes) causes the third highest number of foodborne illness deaths annually. L. monocytogenes contamination of sliced deli meats at the retail level is a significant contributing factor to L. monocytogenes illness. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Environmental Health Specialists Network (EHS-Net) conducted a study to learn more about retail delis' practices concerning L. monocytogenes growth and cross-contamination prevention. This article presents data from this study on the frequency with which retail deli refrigerator temperatures exceed 41°F, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended maximum temperature for ready-to-eat food requiring time and temperature control for safety (TCS) (such as retail deli meat). This provision was designed to control bacterial growth in TCS foods. This article also presents data on deli and staff characteristics related to the frequency with which retail delis refrigerator temperatures exceed 41°F. Data from observations of 445 refrigerators in 245 delis showed that in 17.1% of delis, at least one refrigerator was >41°F. We also found that refrigeration temperatures reported in this study were lower than those reported in a related 2007 study. Delis with more than one refrigerator, that lacked refrigerator temperature recording, and had a manager who had never been food safety certified had greater odds of having a refrigerator temperature >41°F. The data from this study suggest that retail temperature control is improving over time. They also identify a food safety gap: some delis have refrigerator temperatures that exceed 41°F. We also found that two food safety interventions were related to better refrigerated storage practices: kitchen manager certification and recording refrigerated storage temperatures. Regulatory food safety programs and the retail industry may wish to consider encouraging or requiring kitchen manager certification and recording refrigerated storage temperatures.

Listeria monocytogenes in Retail Delicatessens: An Interagency Risk Assessment-Risk Mitigations.

Cross-contamination, improper holding temperatures, and insufficient sanitary practices are known retail practices that may lead to product contamination and growth of Listeria monocytogenes. However, the relative importance of control options to mitigate the risk of invasive listeriosis from ready-to-eat (RTE) products sliced or prepared at retail is not well understood. This study illustrates the utility of a quantitative risk assessment model described in a first article of this series (Pouillot, R., D. Gallagher, J. Tang, K. Hoelzer, J. Kause, and S. B. Dennis, J. Food Prot. 78:134-145, 2015) to evaluate the public health impact associated with changes in retail deli practices and interventions. Twenty-two mitigation scenarios were modeled and evaluated under six different baseline conditions. These scenarios were related to sanitation, worker behavior, use of growth inhibitors, cross-contamination, storage temperature control, and reduction of the level of L. monocytogenes on incoming RTE food products. The mean risk per serving of RTE products obtained under these scenarios was then compared with the risk estimated in the baseline condition. Some risk mitigations had a consistent impact on the predicted listeriosis risk in all baseline conditions (e.g. presence or absence of growth inhibitor), whereas others were greatly dependent on the initial baseline conditions or practices in the deli (e.g. preslicing of products). Overall, the control of the bacterial growth and the control of contamination at its source were major factors of listeriosis risk in these settings. Although control of cross-contamination and continued sanitation were also important, the decrease in the predicted risk was not amenable to a simple solution. Findings from these predictive scenario analyses are intended to encourage improvements to retail food safety practices and mitigation strategies to control L. monocytogenes in RTE foods more effectively and to demonstrate the utility of quantitative risk assessment models to inform risk management decisions.

Listeria monocytogenes and Listeria spp. contamination patterns in retail delicatessen establishments in three U.S. states.

Postprocessing contamination in processing plants has historically been a significant source of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat delicatessen meats, and therefore a major cause of human listeriosis cases and outbreaks. Recent risk assessments suggest that a majority of human listeriosis cases linked to consumption of contaminated deli meats may be due to L. monocytogenes contamination that occurs at the retail level. To better understand the ecology and transmission of Listeria spp. in retail delicatessens, food and nonfood contact surfaces were tested for L. monocytogenes and other Listeria spp. in a longitudinal study conducted in 30 retail delis in three U.S. states. In phase I of the study, seven sponge samples were collected monthly for 3 months in 15 delis (5 delis per state) prior to start of daily operation; in phase II, 28 food contact and nonfood contact sites were sampled in each of 30 delis during daily operation for 6 months. Among the 314 samples collected during phase I, 6.8% were positive for L. monocytogenes. Among 4,503 samples collected during phase II, 9.5% were positive for L. monocytogenes; 9 of 30 delis showed low L. monocytogenes prevalence (<1%) for all surfaces. A total of 245 Listeria spp. isolates, including 184 Listeria innocua, 48 Listeria seeligeri, and 13 Listeria welshimeri were characterized. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was used to characterize 446 L. monocytogenes isolates. PFGE showed that for 12 of 30 delis, one or more PFGE types were isolated on at least three separate occasions, providing evidence for persistence of a given L. monocytogenes subtype in the delis. For some delis, PFGE patterns for isolates from nonfood contact surfaces were distinct from patterns for occasional food contact surface isolates, suggesting limited cross-contamination between these sites in some delis. This study provides longitudinal data on L. monocytogenes contamination patterns in retail delis, which should facilitate further development of control strategies in retail delis.

Review of various approaches for assessing public health risks in regulatory decision making: choosing the right approach for the problem.

Stakeholders in the public health risk analysis community can possess differing opinions about what is meant by "conduct a risk assessment." In reality, there is no one-size-fits-all risk assessment that can address all public health issues, problems, and regulatory needs. Although several international and national organizations (e.g., Codex Alimentarius Commission, Office International des Epizooties, Food and Agricultural Organization, World Health Organization, National Research Council, and European Food Safety Authority) have addressed this issue, confusion remains. The type and complexity of a risk assessment must reflect the risk management needs to appropriately inform a regulatory or nonregulatory decision, i.e., a risk assessment is ideally "fit for purpose" and directly applicable to risk management issues of concern. Frequently however, there is a lack of understanding by those not completely familiar with risk assessment regarding the specific utility of different approaches for assessing public health risks. This unfamiliarity can unduly hamper the acceptance of risk assessment results by risk managers and may reduce the usefulness of such results for guiding public health policies, practices, and operations. Differences in interpretation of risk assessment terminology further complicate effective communication among risk assessors, risk managers, and stakeholders. This article provides an overview of the types of risk assessments commonly conducted, with examples primarily from the food and agricultural sectors, and a discussion of the utility and limitations of these specific approaches for assessing public health risks. Clarification of the risk management issues and corresponding risk assessment design needs during the formative stages of the risk analysis process is a key step for ensuring that the most appropriate assessment of risk is developed and used to guide risk management decisions.

Application of quantitative microbial risk assessments for estimation of risk management metrics: Clostridium perfringens in ready-to-eat and partially cooked meat and poultry products as an example.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service is exploring quantitative risk assessment methodologies to incorporate the use of the Codex Alimentarius' newly adopted risk management metrics (e.g., food safety objectives and performance objectives). It is suggested that use of these metrics would more closely tie the results of quantitative microbial risk assessments (QMRAs) to public health outcomes. By estimating the food safety objective (the maximum frequency and/or concentration of a hazard in a food at the time of consumption) and the performance objective (the maximum frequency and/or concentration of a hazard in a food at a specified step in the food chain before the time of consumption), risk managers will have a better understanding of the appropriate level of protection (ALOP) from microbial hazards for public health protection. We here demonstrate a general methodology that allows identification of an ALOP and evaluation of corresponding metrics at appropriate points in the food chain. It requires a two-dimensional probabilistic risk assessment, the example used being the Monte Carlo QMRA for Clostridium perfringens in ready-to eat and partially cooked meat and poultry products, with minor modifications to evaluate and abstract required measures. For demonstration purposes, the QMRA model was applied specifically to hot dogs produced and consumed in the United States. Evaluation of the cumulative uncertainty distribution for illness rate allows a specification of an ALOP that, with defined confidence, corresponds to current industry practices.