21 replies to this topic

[althene]

hello everyone!

another question again...does anyone have any limit or reference standard for microbial load in personnel's hands during swabbing.

the current standard i am using right now is at 100cfu for total plate count, negative for e.coli/salmo/staph and <1 for coliforms, this was what i was used to when i worked at a hotel before or should i set it higher?

how about your companies? what are your limits for personnel swabs? could anyone suggest a standard which would be applicable to food manufacturing?

cheers!

[cazyncymru]

hello everyone!

another question again...does anyone have any limit or reference standard for microbial load in personnel's hands during swabbing.

the current standard i am using right now is at 100cfu for total plate count, negative for e.coli/salmo/staph and <1 for coliforms, this was what i was used to when i worked at a hotel before or should i set it higher?

how about your companies? what are your limits for personnel swabs? could anyone suggest a standard which would be applicable to food manufacturing?

cheers!

That looks about right as to the levels i use in a dairy

Caz x

[Biss]

Hi,


please see the internal standard we used for our company.

regards

Attached Files

•  micro.doc   32KB   2226 downloads

[Charles.C]

Dear Biss,

Thank you very much for the data.

The TPC (temperature / time ?) figure for gloves (inter alia) frankly seems rather amazing to me. Is this for new re-usable gloves prior to use or gloves after cleaning with ??? I hypothesise that you hv a very "clean" product / process as compared to, for example, a slaughterhouse. Please elaborate a little if possible.

Rgds / Charles.C

[Charles.C]

Dear Althene,

In practice, I believe many people use a generalised set of limits for assessing “food contact surfaces”. If this can be extended to include hands, I submitted a quick survey in Walabies thread as –

 micro._surfaces.jpg   48.06KB   820 downloads
(thread http://www.ifsqn.com...?showtopic=9365 )
I can now add one more -
 micro.surfaces2.jpg   21.31KB   713 downloads
taken from this interesting project –

 cleanliness_survey.pdf   419.57KB   1642 downloads

The latter swab area is, I think, 100cmexp2 so divide the cfus by 100 to compare to first jpeg.
(the second picture seems to approximately agree with yr own current settings )

As noted in first thread, the exact product / process is of relevance.

The large variations shown maybe explain the scarcity of official standards.

Rgds / Charles.C

[okido]

Dear Althene,

I use the standard less than 100cfu and need to review this shortly.
An official standard would be nice, is there one???

Have a nice day, Okido

[cazyncymru]

Dear Althene,

I use the standard less than 100cfu and need to review this shortly.
An official standard would be nice, is there one???

Have a nice day, Okido

Campden do "Hand hygiene in the food industry" review 18 (2000) for £30 (if your a member)

c x

[Biss]

Dear Biss,

Thank you very much for the data.

The TPC (temperature / time ?) figure for gloves (inter alia) frankly seems rather amazing to me. Is this for new re-usable gloves prior to use or gloves after cleaning with ??? I hypothesise that you hv a very "clean" product / process as compared to, for example, a slaughterhouse. Please elaborate a little if possible.

Rgds / Charles.C

Dear Charles,

Single use gloves we are using. swabing is done after the fumigation activity, thats why our limits are very low. we are manufacturing microbial sensitive products like 'green tea'

regards

[BVRC]

Thanks folks! Whenever I come here I learn something.
Great job!
Bennii

[okido]

Campden do "Hand hygiene in the food industry" review 18 (2000) for £30 (if your a member)

Hi Cazyncymru,

Can you explain a little further about Campden do...... a google search did not help me further.

Have a nice day, Okido

[Charles.C]

Dear Okido,

In advance of Caz replying in more detail, I guess she was referring to this -

http://www.campden.c...ubfiles/r18.htm

The organisation involved is the very well-known CCFRA who issue documents over a huge range of food related aspects as detailed on their site. Very sadly, money is required.

You refer to seeking "official" standards. IMO, this is similar to microbiological limits, they exist but they vary . Do you mean for a "typical" food packaging production environment ? Strangely, I think the only recommended limits I saw so far were solely for food handling situations. Anybody ?

Rgds / Charles.C

PS - have a nice day also

[AS NUR]

hello everyone!

another question again...does anyone have any limit or reference standard for microbial load in personnel's hands during swabbing.

the current standard i am using right now is at 100cfu for total plate count, negative for e.coli/salmo/staph and <1 for coliforms, this was what i was used to when i worked at a hotel before or should i set it higher?

how about your companies? what are your limits for personnel swabs? could anyone suggest a standard which would be applicable to food manufacturing?

cheers!

Dear Althene...

You can use standard from EU GMP (pharmacetical grade).. there are :



Hope the data can help you....

Attached Files

•  EU_GMP.doc   31.5KB   1130 downloads

Edited by AS NUR, 19 August 2008 - 07:39 AM.

[althene]

Dear Althene...

You can use standard from EU GMP (pharmacetical grade).. there are :



Hope the data can help you....

Thank you AS NUR. But isn't the standard for particulate content for pharmaceutical companies rather than hand and equipment swabs?

[althene]

Dear Althene,

In practice, I believe many people use a generalised set of limits for assessing “food contact surfaces”. If this can be extended to include hands, I submitted a quick survey in Walabies thread as –

 micro._surfaces.jpg   48.06KB   820 downloads
(thread http://www.ifsqn.com...?showtopic=9365 )
I can now add one more -
 micro.surfaces2.jpg   21.31KB   713 downloads
taken from this interesting project –

 cleanliness_survey.pdf   419.57KB   1642 downloads

The latter swab area is, I think, 100cmexp2 so divide the cfus by 100 to compare to first jpeg.
(the second picture seems to approximately agree with yr own current settings )

As noted in first thread, the exact product / process is of relevance.

The large variations shown maybe explain the scarcity of official standards.

Rgds / Charles.C

Thank you for the information charles! you and everyone here have been of great help!
i agree, it seems that the standard would have to fit the type of food and process involved, for pharmaceauticals (since I've worked in one before) we've had stricter limits set at <50cfu/2.5cm2 for equipment and 100 cfu for personnel.

Since we are producing low water activity and moisture products such as biscuits and instant noodles, shouldn't i increase the limit for equipment? or should i just set it as is?

Last question to the auditors here, since majority of swabbing is done for personnel and equipment validation, is a standard really necessary? or should a company just establish one for which would be more applicable to them?

Based from our current results here, the RLU which is from the Accupoint Rapid Swab kits that we use to measure organic debris together with the micro swabs, the current limit is at 300RLU and most of the time, if the RLU fails, the micro result fails also.

Is this then enough as justification?

best regards,

hahz

[gogogo888]

I still can not find answer

[Charles.C]

Dear gogo,

What was the question ?

Rgds / Charles.C

BTW - Welcome to the forum !

[Abdul Qudoos]

For surface, hands swabs:

Aerobic colonycount & Coliforms ≤100 CFU/50cm² (according to US Public Health ServiceRecommendation)

^{CFU –Colony Forming Units}

[althene]

@abdul: can you give me a copy of the link on the public health service site? is this an actual standard? i think this can also be used in food service and catering establishments as well am i right?

to everyone:
just wanted to let you know that the validation and verification procedures from my last company when i started this thread went on smoothly. They got their certification for ISO22000, and the validation and verification limits for hand swabs were actually honored, our justification during audit was that it was based on what we deemed fit for our process, the standards for pharmaceauticals and dairy which were posted here also helped alot.

kudos everyone!

[Abdul Qudoos]

@abdul: can you give me a copy of the link on the public health service site? is this an actual standard? i think this can also be used in food service and catering establishments as well am i right?

to everyone:
just wanted to let you know that the validation and verification procedures from my last company when i started this thread went on smoothly. They got their certification for ISO22000, and the validation and verification limits for hand swabs were actually honored, our justification during audit was that it was based on what we deemed fit for our process, the standards for pharmaceauticals and dairy which were posted here also helped alot.

kudos everyone!

copy of the link on the US public health service site: http://www.hhs.gov/

Here we follow the same, yes it may used in food service and catering establishments.

CONGRATS! for getting ISO 22000 certification and being with us in IFSQN Family.

[Simon]

Congratulations Althene.

[clenette]

hello everyone!

another question again...does anyone have any limit or reference standard for microbial load in personnel's hands during swabbing.

the current standard i am using right now is at 100cfu for total plate count, negative for e.coli/salmo/staph and <1 for coliforms, this was what i was used to when i worked at a hotel before or should i set it higher?

how about your companies? what are your limits for personnel swabs? could anyone suggest a standard which would be applicable to food manufacturing?

cheers!

In my previous company we were using <10 cfu/hand as limit for coliforms and <100 for APC. =)

 

I think <1 result/ limit for conventional testing of hand swabbing is wrong since in this procedure swab samples are being diluted to at least to 10-1 (dilution factor=10).  

So the minimum result that we can declare using this method of testing should be <10 cfu per area swabbed. 

[Charles.C]

In my previous company we were using <10 cfu/hand as limit for coliforms and <100 for APC. =)

 

I think <1 result/ limit for conventional testing of hand swabbing is wrong since in this procedure swab samples are being diluted to at least to 10-1 (dilution factor=10).  

So the minimum result that we can declare using this method of testing should be <10 cfu per area swabbed. 

 

Hi clenette,

 

Thks yr input and Welcome to the forum !

 

This link may give some idea of the Global variations -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...ces/#entry60958

 

The  level of detection limit might relate to the methodology used perhaps.