I have made a massive mistake thinking that the ATP data was something to do with the micro :-).
The hygiena values i just copied from the hygiena Recomendations. And not sure what you mean about the baseline and the comparison with the micro and eyes? Is it the TVC ?
I would appreciate if you could be more specific, and explain it to me step by step as i am new to the QA and hygiene.
By baseline I meant the ATP procedure whereby you establish if the manufacturer’s ATP decision levels are appropriate to your system. I think most manufacturer’s include this aspect within their documentation. One method to evaluate the usefulness is on a visual (eyes ) basis of the surface. And, yes, you’re correct that TVC is involved.
ATP vs micro. for assessing “cleanliness” is a large / popular topic, ie how to define a clean surface.?
From a purely FS POV, Cleanliness, IMO, logically implies micro.data unless other methods such as ATP can be correlated accordingly, ie validation.
On the other hand, if simply targetting “Cleanliness” as perhaps defined by low levels of (organic matter + “micro”,[usually, i think, OM >> micro.]), methods based on ATP are certainly a lot faster.
In practice there is a variety of opinions / usage / expectations. It may also depend on factors like product/process/standard/time/cost/lab.availability.
I suggest you initially look at these posts / included attachments –
(cleanliness defined via micro.data)
Comparison atp and micro. swabbing ca 2003.pdf 137.72KB
Rgds / Charles.C