Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Medical Screening - U.S. - BRC Code 7.4

Share this

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic
- - - - -

Chris @ Safefood 360°

    Associate - AIFSQN

  • Corporate Sponsor
  • 104 posts
  • 51 thanks
5
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 06 April 2011 - 07:29 PM

Good afternoon. I have been looking through the forums for any previous discussions regarding BRC 7.4 - Medical Screening. I have noticed a lot of input from people outside of the U.S.. I am very interested to hear input from someone within the U.S. regarding whether anyone is actually using questionnaires, or citing HIPPA/ADA laws as restrictive and suggesting that (and relying upon) employees/visitors take it upon themselves to disclose the information. I am getting ready for an upcoming BRC audit and we are at an impasse regarding this situation. Are American companies following suit and enforcing screening? My HR guys are hesitant to move forward.
Thank you, and apologies if I am repeating a question.



Amber McCreary

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 51 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 07 April 2011 - 01:54 PM

I am in the United States and we do in fact use a medicial questionnaire here within my company. We post a notice and make it clear that we will keep their information private. Unfortunately in order to ensure our product is kept safe it is the only way. I believe the statement on both our employee and visitor GMP policy is as follows:

1. Any person who, is infected with a communicable disease, has boils, open sores or infectious wounds, needs to report this to management prior to reporting to work.They will not be allowed to come in contact with product or product contact surfaces.

**We do also have a seperate medical screening questionnaire that is far more detailed but use at our discretion based on where a visitor or contractor may be working. Most people are completely understanding and do not question it one bit. I think we worry too mch about people's feeling and being sued, but imagine the lawsuits that will arise when more then 500+ people became deathly ill due to one of our employees... it's uncomfortable but neccessary.**



It is not so much the position you carry in life, as it is how you carry yourself within your position.

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 4,242 posts
  • 1297 thanks
613
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:World
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 07 April 2011 - 02:14 PM

I think we worry too mch about people's feeling and being sued, but imagine the lawsuits that will arise when more then 500+ people became deathly ill due to one of our employees... .


Sounds like it. I know what I'd be worrying about :(


Chris @ Safefood 360°

    Associate - AIFSQN

  • Corporate Sponsor
  • 104 posts
  • 51 thanks
5
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 07 April 2011 - 02:19 PM

Thank you for your input. Very helpful to know what others are doing. I was with another company previously and we tried to risk assess it away and the (BRC) auditing company was on the fence about it accepting it at that time. My personal opinion is that it is a valuable tool, and one that does not require a large capital expense so compliance is better than trying to find a loophole around it.
-T



Amber McCreary

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 51 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 07 April 2011 - 03:01 PM

My personal opinion is that it is a valuable tool, and one that does not require a large capital expense so compliance is better than trying to find a loophole around it.
-T



Precisely...and as Quality Professionals we must keep in mind there are diplimatic ways of approahing ANY situation. Older companys with unions (two of my plants) will resist more then the others but get production on board and the resistance should fizzle away in no time.

And working at a 100+ year old company loopholes are common but not always an option when it comes to certification. I remind my teams frequently. :smile:

If you would like my form as a an example, just let me know.

It is not so much the position you carry in life, as it is how you carry yourself within your position.

mikysya

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 15 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Ukraine
    Ukraine
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Chicago, IL

Posted 15 April 2011 - 04:24 PM

We just got certified in BRC. I put in GMP statement that sick employee should report to his manager. Also, not to touch products. Also, we are including statement in preemployment sheet, that we are going to ask medical questions and it is mandatory. In this case, we inform our candidate earlier about the geostationary (not violating privacy), and it candidate's decision to continue with us and become our employee or not.



SaltSafety

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 44 posts
  • 4 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Upstate NY, USA

Posted 11 September 2012 - 04:52 PM

Precisely...and as Quality Professionals we must keep in mind there are diplimatic ways of approahing ANY situation. Older companys with unions (two of my plants) will resist more then the others but get production on board and the resistance should fizzle away in no time.

And working at a 100+ year old company loopholes are common but not always an option when it comes to certification. I remind my teams frequently. :smile:

If you would like my form as a an example, just let me know.



I would like to see your form. The BRC, Issue 6, Interpretation Guideline states that the company should define the infection of concern, e.g. list of communicable diseases, which could be ridiculously long. Thanks!


mgourley

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,415 posts
  • 1002 thanks
277
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Plant City, FL
  • Interests:Cooking, golf, firearms, food safety and sanitation.

Posted 11 September 2012 - 05:38 PM

I would like to see your form. The BRC, Issue 6, Interpretation Guideline states that the company should define the infection of concern, e.g. list of communicable diseases, which could be ridiculously long. Thanks!


I second that.

Marshall


shea quay

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 180 posts
  • 92 thanks
23
Excellent

  • Ireland
    Ireland
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 September 2012 - 09:34 AM

I second that.

Marshall


I'd like the BRC to bathe me in milk every morning, but that ain't going to happen anytime soon. In the meantime, this might help...

Recommended Control Measures for Food Handlers

Causative Agent / Illness

Incubation Period

Main Clinical Features

Food Handler Case: Exclusion

Microbiological Clearance

If Food Handler is a Household Contact of a Case



Aeromonas sp

Vomiting, diarrhoea

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Amoebic Dysentery

Variable, commonly 2-4 weeks

Fever, chills, bloody/or mucoid diarrhoea

48 hours after first normal stool

No (but late follow-up to detect chronic carriage advisable)

Screen to detect cyst excreters


Camplyobacter


1-10 days (usually 2-5 days)

Abdominal pain, profuse diarrhoea, headache, fever (vomiting uncommon)

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Cholera

Hrs – 5 days (usually 2-3 days)

Sudden onset profuse, painless watery stools, nausea and vomiting

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Clostridium perfringens

8-22 hrs (usually 12-18 hrs)

Diarrhoea and abdominal pain

48 hours after first normal stool

No

No action necessary


Cryptosporidium sp

2-5 days

Watery or mucoid diarrhoea

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Escherichia coli (other than VTEC)

12-72 hrs

Diarrhoea

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Escherichia coli (VTEC)

1-10 days (usually 3 days)

Abdominal pain, diarrhoea, haemorrhagic coltis (bloody diarrhoea), HUS

Until microbiological clearance obtained

Yes (2 negative stool samples not less than 48 hours apart)

Exclude until microbiological clearance obtained


Giardia lamblia

5-25 days

Diarrhoea, abdominal cramps

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Screening may identify those who need treatment



Hepatitis A

2-6 weeks

Fever, nausea, loss of appetite, abdominal pain, jaundice

7 days from onset of jaundice and or symptoms

No

Consider for prophylaxis (HNIG or HAV vaccine)


Salmonella sp

6-72 hours (usually 12-36 hrs

Headache, abdominal pain, fever, diarrhoea, nausea +/- vomiting


48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Salmonella typhi / paratyphi

1-3 weeks

Fever, rigors, rash, variable gastro-intestinal symptoms

Until microbiological clearance gained

Yes (6 consecutive negative stool samples taken at 2 weekly intervals, starting 2 weeks after completion of antibiotic treatment)

Exclude until 3 consecutive negative stool samples taken at weekly intervals starting 3 weeks after last contact with untreated case (consider also for contact with household carrier)



Shigella

1-7 days (usually 1-3 days)

Diarrhoea, fever, abdominal pain, S.sonnei generally mild

48 hours after first normal stool

S.dysenteriae only (2 negative stool samples not less than 48 hours)

Reinforce hygiene advice


Staph Aureus

1-7 hours (usually 2-4 hrs

Vomiting, abdominal cramps, ofter with diarrhoea

Nasal carriers – no unless implicated as outbreak source

Skin – exclude if infected skin lesion on exposed part that cannot adequately covered until healed.

No

-


Streptococcal Disease

1-3 days

Variety of diseases:

e.g. sore throat – with fever, exudative tonsillitis/pharyngitis and lymphadenopathy

e.g. skin – impetigo / pyoderma


Exclude those with strep sore throat until treated


Skin – as for S.aureus above

No

-


Vibrios (non-cholera)

2-48 hrs (usually 12-18 hrs)

Diarrhoea, fever

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Viral gastroenteritis (rotavirus)

24-72 hrs

Diarrhoea, vomiting

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Virel gastroenteritis (NLV/SRSV)

12-48 hrs

Nausea, vomiting (often projectile), abdominal cramps, diarrhoea, fever, chills

48 -72 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice


Versinia sp

3-7 days

Watery diarrhoea, abdominal pain

48 hours after first normal stool

No

Reinforce hygiene advice



Chris @ Safefood 360°

    Associate - AIFSQN

  • Corporate Sponsor
  • 104 posts
  • 51 thanks
5
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 26 October 2012 - 02:58 AM

Hello all. I am very interested to hear how U.S. companies are getting along with this specific topic. This has interested me for sometime now, which is why I posted the thread when I used my alter-ego (Thermophile).

(btw - we eventually risk assessed it and stated that our visitor/contractor and personnel GMP policies referred to 21CFR110 requirements for employees to notifiy their supervisor in the event of illness, sore, open wound, boil, lesion, etc. and that was our control method, citing that HIPPA laws deterred the company from asking employees, contractors, or visitors to divulge their personal medical information - especially in a pre-employment scenario. We did not receive a non-conformance and in fact scored a grade A.)


Now that we are 10 months into BRC audits using V-6, what are your experiences regarding this clause?

Thanks,
Chris



Thanked by 1 Member:

Loren

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 79 posts
  • 15 thanks
3
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 15 November 2014 - 12:56 AM

Hi Chris,

 

Thank you for stating this information, it is really helpful.

 

I do have a question. Because you referred on your risk-assessment the 21CFR110, they didn't asked more questions? Does that mean no record of employees notification regarding their illnesses-everything is done verbal?

 

Hope your actual experience can help me regarding this requirement.

 

Regards,

Lorena





Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users