We have added an extra cleaning and sanitizing of the entire production line zones 1-3 if an employee is found to be at risk of the virus and confirms a test positive.
Normally, we verify cleaning by zone-2 swabbing for dry ATP.
It was mentioned to use the E-coli for verification during the crisis. Can you clarify with respect to cleaning verification during the crisis- would Genus Listeria be acceptable in place of testing for E-coli for a cleaning verification to capture against a virus?
- We use Microsnap swabs and already have Listeria swabs in house with incubators. E-coli would be a different swab we'd need to purchase.
Also- immediately after the extra cleaning, prior to the sanitizing- is it still acceptable for verification using zone-2?
I deduce you wish to increase "cleanliness" in the event of encountering a Covid-19 (CV19) positive event, This action is presumably based on the assumption/premise (A) that increased "cleanliness" will minimise the likelihood of residual virus on contact surfaces.
Here are a few ATP caveats from Hygiena -
- ATP systems do not detect viruses directly. However, COVID-19 infected material that contains biological residues will be detected by an ATP system.
- Hygiena does not produce a virus test
- Performing ATP CleaningVerification does not guarantee removal of viruses on surfaces
- ATP Cleaning Verification should be used in conjunction with CDC recommendations and guideline
afaik, there is as yet no commercial kit for detecting the CV19 virus on contact surfaces.
Viruses do not contain ATP so are not directly estimatable by this measurement.
I have not seen any reported evidence of quantitative relationships between any indicator/pathogenic bacterial species and the CV19 virus.
If one chooses to accepts premise (A), it becomes necessary to implement/validate a quantitative method to estimate the increase in cleanliness from any additional introduced cleaning procedure.
(a) One option would be to compare ATP data as you mention (eg file cl1)
(b) A second (micro) option might be to compare APC data.(compiled "standards" exist here).
(c) Use fluorescent marking (eg -
(d) Use mycometer (eg file cl2)
The difficulty with (a,d) may be accuracy of measurements/procedural repeatability.
cl1-evaluation cleaning- bioburden of frequently touched surfaces with ATP.pdf 704.24KB
cl2 - COVID19, ATP, Mycometer for assessing cleanliness.pdf 305.83KB
@cjewell- not swabbing in zone 1 is a debatable but sort of "accepted" fudge to avoid draconian actions due the processing material itself.