9 replies to this topic

[QA trainee]

Hi all

I hope some one can help me on this one. i am looking for some help on a rapid test method to determine microbial load on machinery surfaces after cleaning.

Currently machinery at the plant is stripped and cleaned and released by a visual inspection by the microbiologist, however the final product counts after cleaning, still do become high from time to time.

so we are looking at a solution where a rapid test could be done to verify immediately or asap what the hygiene status of the machinery are after cleaning.

i do realise that microbial load may be very vague and a specific organism may be more accurate, but something along these lines to assist the production staff on verifying the effectiveness of cleaning.

any ideas guys??

Many thanks

[SaRaRa]

Hello!

I couldn't find much with a quick search...
I found this book: "Validation of Pharmaceutical Processes" and maybe you 'll find something useful in the following link. I know its about Pharmaceuticals but I think it describes methods there that might be applicable to Food Industries... no?


Viable Enviromental Microbiological Monitoring

I also found the following:

Sampling of Surfaces - Equipment and Physical Plant

Cheers!

[Simon]

Does anyone use rapid test equipment like Biotrace for quick micro results in production.

[Charles.C]

I would hv guessed that ATP kits were currently the most popular solution for rapid evaluation of surface cleanliness .

eg (there are many others) http://www.droptestk.../atp-meters.htm

Rgds / Charles.C

added - Simon's previously mentioned Biotrace also offers an ATP based "luminometer"

[AS NUR]

in my company (non dairy creamer produceer)..we use HYLITE, ATP test based equipment, The system using RLU (relative ligh unit) to conform the cleanlines of equipment after cleaning process (CIP or COP)... we only take 1 minutes to get the result.....

[Simon]

Any help QA Trainee?

[DavidB]

We use protein detection swabs to verifying cleaning. This is to determine the effectiveness of wet cleaning methods on food contact surfaces. The advantages of this over ATP method is that its inexpensive and easy to do as you can use more swabs per area sampled than ATP method, and also covers verifying removing traces of allergen proteins required for allergen management (we do an allergen clean before running a non allergen containing product). If there is no protein then cleaning is effective, allergens removed and microbial load is likely to be low (you could try both ATP and protein together as a means of validating the use of protein swabs).
good luck.

[Simon]

Is the feedback helpful QATrainee? Any further questions?

[GMO]

We use ATP swabs at the insistance of our Group. I think they're useful but the amount we use make it very expensive for the benefit. I've also had clear results on ATP swabs before and positive pathogen swabs. They're not foolproof but they are an indication. I think a good visual check if you can can be just as effective if not more so. I once had a low ATP score reported by a QA but she was concerned as she could see debris! I pointed out that the debris meant a reclean was necessary irrespective of the RLU reading. As soon as you have an official looking bit of kit like a luminometer, people sometimes forget their eyes and their brains!

[Tony-C]

I once had a low ATP score reported by a QA but she was concerned as she could see debris! I pointed out that the debris meant a reclean was necessary irrespective of the RLU reading. As soon as you have an official looking bit of kit like a luminometer, people sometimes forget their eyes and their brains!

I agree my staff were trained not to swab unless visibly clean in the first place.