20 replies to this topic

[JesseG]

I work at a large bakery that produces doughs that are flash frozen and delivered to in-store bakeries. I microswab for APC in several places. It is measured by: cfu/cm2 APHA 4^th edition 2001 ch 7.

I am in New Zealand.

Am having trouble clarifying what “acceptable limits” are.

Can anyone help?

[Jean]

Dear Paulajgr,

What are the tests you check for?

[JesseG]

Hi Jean,
Aerobic Plate Count
Thanks,
Paula

[Charles.C]

Dear paula,

what were yr results ?

A lot of variation can be found in practice. A common ball-park limit for various situations is 100cfu/cm2 but some products / locations hv specific regulations which are much tighter.

One rule-of-thumb is that the surface levels after treatment must be substantially better than the typical levels for the products on them

There is an extensive data resource(s) here for this topic. try search "swab"

Rgds / Charles.C

[Tony-C]

A lot of variation can be found in practice. A common ball-park limit for various situations is 100cfu/cm2 but some products / locations hv specific regulations which are much tighter.

This ball park figure sounds about right but do you not want to test for typical spoilage organisms - moulds ?

Regards,

Tony

[Aegean]

Hi Tony ;

As all we know ( if its still like that ) there is no regulatory giving some limits for micro swabs , and I would lough if it was given :))

here the key point is the mico targets/limits for your product. Agree Charles that ; in order to minimise contamination to dough ; your environmental area or doughing equipment should be cleaner than the product . So , you can start with this .
Do not forget that ; you will decide on your micro swab limits depending on your product type and process conditions .

For mould or any other specific organisms; you find the answer from your previous test results. If you come across mould or any other specific microorganisms on equipments ; please take an average of your finding values . So that you can specify a limit for those ..Having monitorings on some microorganisms is a good practise ; even you do not have such a target micoorganism in your final product.

hope these would make a sense :)

best regards ,

Aegean

[Tony-C]

Hi Tony ;

As all we know ( if its still like that ) there is no regulatory giving some limits for micro swabs , and I would lough if it was given :))

here the key point is the mico targets/limits for your product.

For mould or any other specific organisms; you find the answer from your previous test results.

best regards ,

Aegean

Although you may find some guidance it is better to validate your own levels based on history.

If moulds are a spoilage organism and can affect the quality of your product then I am surprised that you do not routinely test for them. For example in yogurt manufacture we would test the environment for moulds and if we found that we were seeing increased levels then we would fog to reduce the levels in the environment.

Regards,

Tony

Edited by Tony-C, 20 February 2010 - 11:29 AM.

[Esther]

Dear Paulajgr

Here in Europe, and for most of the companies, the commonly accepted criteria is ( for APC on surfaces):

< 1 ufc/cm2----- excellet
2-10 ufc/cm2-----good
11-100 ufc/cm2 ---- surface needs to be cleaned
>101 ufc/cm2 ---- stop production

This is not regulatoru but a recommendation.

I remember once looking for a criteria for moulds. I cold not fng anything and the answer was what other member already said: the answer is in your previous test results.

Regards
Esther

[Charles.C]

Dear Esther,

Thks for the interesting numbers.

Can you give an accessible link for any of yr data ? Specific for bread or ?? The particular situation may hv relevance of course.

I did a semi-literature search for a previous thread and the fact is that an enormous variety of data / opinions exists in the global sense.

The only "general" accessible UK data I found at that time is quoted here -
http://www.ifsqn.com...m...ost&p=22352

Subsequently, I think Caz mentioned that Campden (not publicly accessible) suggests max. 100/cm2

Personally, the use of a sub-division within 1-10 cfu/cm2 seems rather meaningless to me considering the usual reliability of microbiological data.

Rgds / Charles.C

[JesseG]

Hi All,
Thank you for your answers, it gives me a guideline.
Cheers,
Paula

[abbie]

Here in Europe, and for most of the companies, the commonly accepted criteria is ( for APC on surfaces):

< 1 ufc/cm2----- excellet
2-10 ufc/cm2-----good
11-100 ufc/cm2 ---- surface needs to be cleaned
>101 ufc/cm2 ---- stop production

This is not regulatoru but a recommendation.

hi..i would like to use this as a basis for our company also, i'm just wondering where you got this is criteria, just in case they ask me. thanks:)

[Tony-C]

Here in Europe, and for most of the companies, the commonly accepted criteria is ( for APC on surfaces):

< 1 ufc/cm2----- excellet
2-10 ufc/cm2-----good
11-100 ufc/cm2 ---- surface needs to be cleaned
>101 ufc/cm2 ---- stop production

This is not regulatoru but a recommendation.

hi..i would like to use this as a basis for our company also, i'm just wondering where you got this is criteria, just in case they ask me. thanks:)

Since APC is retrospective I don't see many people having stop production at > 100 cfu, maybe schedule extra cleaning. I much prefer a proactive system to be in place like ATP swabbing where a pass is needed prior to the start of production.

Regards,

Tony

[GMO]

I know a lot of people like ATPs but I think they're expensive and not that accurate. I would rely on validating your cleaning process and then doing verification swabs, inspection and auditing. I once had an employee tell me "the ATP swab says it's ok but it looks dirty" I said "so get the guy to clean it again!" People forget to use their eyes sometimes!

We use TVCs at max 100 cfu over a 10cm2 swab area. This has been consistent in nearly every ready to eat or cooked factory I've worked in and is achievable. We also swab for yeasts, moulds, Listeria and Salmonella.

[Tony-C]

I know a lot of people like ATPs but I think they're expensive and not that accurate. I would rely on validating your cleaning process and then doing verification swabs, inspection and auditing. I once had an employee tell me "the ATP swab says it's ok but it looks dirty" I said "so get the guy to clean it again!" People forget to use their eyes sometimes!

We use TVCs at max 100 cfu over a 10cm2 swab area. This has been consistent in nearly every ready to eat or cooked factory I've worked in and is achievable. We also swab for yeasts, moulds, Listeria and Salmonella.

Fairly sure this has come up before.

Fair comment regarding something looking dirty, I have always instructed my staff not to swab any thing that looks dirty and request that it is recleaned.

For high risk foods I would expect to see a system in place to verify that the cleaning has been effective prior to start up. I have always seen a significant correlation between high ATP results and poor product quality which would probably expalin why I am quite keen on this type of system.

Regards,

Tony

[cazyncymru]

You also have to be careful with ATP swabs in that sanitisers, particularly Hypo, can give false results.

the first test should always be visual, if there is remnants of food debris etc, then rewash!

[Tony-C]

You also have to be careful with ATP swabs in that sanitisers, particularly Hypo, can give false results.

the first test should always be visual, if there is remnants of food debris etc, then rewash!

Agreed and this should be assessed in the validation process. I avoid hypo except for floors and drains as I have seen too many taint problems. Normally I would expect to see a flush with water after using hypo on a food contact surface.

Regards,

Tony

[FM Pang]

Hello....

I joined as a member couple of days ago. My search here is really fruitful, indeed.
I am working in a powder creamer company (QA Dept).
It's newly established that I need to start everything from zero.
Currently I am working on the hygiene monitoring program; need to set the control limit for air swab and surface swabs..
Prior to that, I need to clarify:

For air swab (open plate method), what is the exposure time required ? 15 min exposure is a norm? How about 30min's ?

For surface swab, how do we determine the area swab ? Is it restricted by the targeted area? Coz it ranked from cm2 to 100cm2.

I have limited micro knowldege and hope that I can get some advice here...Thanks..

[GMO]

I'm no microbiologist but we do settle plates for 30 mins and we swab a 10 by 10 cm (so 100cm2) area. Consistency is key. I would suggest asking the lab which will test your samples for advice on this, they should be able to help.

[FM Pang]

Thanks... GMO...
I am waiting for the reply from the lab...

I'm no microbiologist but we do settle plates for 30 mins and we swab a 10 by 10 cm (so 100cm2) area. Consistency is key. I would suggest asking the lab which will test your samples for advice on this, they should be able to help.

[Pavan.rcr]

Hi to all...

I work in the spice mixes and masala curry mix processing industry. need to set the critical limits for both equipment hygiene and also personnel hygiene. i have searched for the swab limits and i got it as 100cfu/cm2. is this limit same for all kinds of food processing industry???

 

[Charles.C]

Hi to all...

I work in the spice mixes and masala curry mix processing industry. need to set the critical limits for both equipment hygiene and also personnel hygiene. i have searched for the swab limits and i got it as 100cfu/cm2. is this limit same for all kinds of food processing industry???

 

Hi Pavan,

 

It may depend on the textual context of the limit, eg Regulatory.

 

The ability for a given surface to comply with such a limit after cleaning/sanitizing may relate to factors such as sampling chronology / surface composition  / initial microbiological condition of the surface / applied  cleaning procedure, eg highly contaminated surfaces may be more difficult to clean than lthe opposite

 

Some comparitive data is compiled here -

 

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