Implementation of indicators for biological hazards by meat inspection of poultry

Transcription

1 Implementation of indicators for biological hazards by meat inspection of poultry Ellerbroek, L. Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Diedersdorfer Weg 1, D Berlin, Germany. *Corresponding author: An integrated food safety assurance system includes a risk categorisation of poultry flocks based on the use of preharvest farm information supported by historical data in addition to the flockspecific markers. Farm-related data from the preharvest area could be provided through farm audits and inspection visits using indicators to assess both the risk and also protective/biosecurity factors for the flocks to control the main hazards (Salmonella, Campylobacter, ESBL-/AmpC-producing E. coli) in the context of meat inspection of poultry. A prerequisite for such an effective assurance system is the setting of EU-wide measurable targets at the carcass and primary production level. Targets at primary production have been defined previously in EU legislation according to Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003. Targets in primary production can be considered if effective intervention methods at the farm level exist. They are already in place for Salmonella in breeding flocks of Gallus gallus and turkeys, and production flocks of broilers, turkeys and laying hens. A model to set targets and to implement monitoring programmes could follow the FSO/ALOP strategy: An ALOP describes the level of protection deemed necessary for the whole population. In connection with this, an FSO provides the translation of an ALOP into a practical tool at the end of the food processing in setting i.e. a maximum level of bacteria to be tolerated in the respective food. A PO defines a certain concentration of pathogens to be allowed at a selected food processing step while a PC is the effect of a certain processing step on the relevant bacteria. Before starting the FSO/ALOP strategy a data collection by an EU-wide baseline survey at flock and/or carcass level is needed to propose a target at carcass level and design a target at the preharvest/flock level. Within this strategy several indicators are already proposed for the main hazards identified at different levels. This system could than be used to categorise the poultry flocks into specific risk categories. Indicators could be communicated via the food chain information (FCI), and become a tool for risk-based management at the slaughterhouse. Indicators at the abattoir/carcase level could form the basis for risk categorisation of the abattoirs. Both informations from the preharvest/farm and from the postharvest/abattoir level could be used to channel e.g. high-risk poultry flocks to abattoirs or specific slaughter lines with high slaughter process hygiene. As the main responsibility for food hygiene is assigned to the food business operator (FBO) such a system should be allocated to FBO, whereby compliance is to be verified by the competent authority. Keywords: Poultry meat, biological hazards, meat inspection, Salmonella, Campylobacter. Introduction Meat for human consumption should be derived from the slaughter of healthy animals. To ensure this, the objective of meat inspection programme are (1) that only apparently healthy, physiologically normal animals are slaughtered for human consumption and that abnormal animals are separated and dealt with accordingly. Meat inspection programme is (2) to ensure that meat from animals is free from disease as well as wholesome and of no risk to human health. Since more than fifty years these objectives are given for ante-mortem and post-mortem inspection procedures at poultry slaughter and World s Poultry Science Journal, Volume 69, Supplement 1

2 by hygienic processing with minimum contamination. Whenever appropriate the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles should be used although HACCP is due to missing critical points not suitable for harvesting of meat at this stage. In addition to the general preventive approach, such as implementation of good hygiene practice and application of procedures based on HACCP principles, microbiological criteria form a second important tool to ensure food safety. Microbiological criteria can be used in validation and verification of HACCP procedures and other hygiene control measures as laid down in Good Hygiene Procedure (GHP) measures of the food business operator (FBO). Since 2005 microbio logical criteria have defined EU-wide the acceptability of the processes for certain products. Food safety micro biological criteria setting a limit above which a foodstuff should be considered unacceptably contaminated with the micro-organisms for which the criteria are set in the EU. These microbiological (end-point) criteria reflect and also give guidance on the earlier production stages during manufacturing, handling and distribution processes of foodstuffs. The criteria even have their implications for the pre-harvest area. Setting the microbiological criteria it was anticipated that their use should form an integral part of the implementation of HACCP-based procedures and other hygiene control measures. Food business operators should decide themselves the necessary sampling and testing frequencies as part of their procedures based on HACCP principles and other hygiene control procedures. To control GHP and HACCP principles by microbiological criteria have a long tradition. Bacterial indicators like total coliforms, faecal coliforms (thermo-tolerant coliforms), E. coli, and total viable plate count (tvc) are widely applied for the assessment of the degree of contamination not only of the environment but also of food from external sources. For examples, E. coli and faecal coliform bacteria are currently one of the best indicators for the assessment of faecal contamination. The occurrence of faecal indicators points to the potential presence of pathogenic organisms (faecal associated pathogenic bacteria, viruses and parasites). Selection and application of criteria for meat Although microbiological criteria may indicate hygiene deficiencies, their relation to pathogens are discussed since a long time. In 1979 a FAO/WHO Working Group (FAO/WHO, 1979) concluded that the number of indicator organisms in meat neither did not always reflect adherence to a code of hygienic practice nor indicates presence or absence of pathogens. Hence criteria based on indicator organisms were not justified for raw meat. Ideally the control of microorganisms in meat is at the point of production, processing, or preparation for consumption. However, for much processing steps of meat no or only little knowledge is existing for the control of conditions used during processing and handling. To set up microbiological criteria for a product, they should meet at least the two following conditions: 1. There must be high epidemiological evidence that the product, or product group, has been implicated in food-borne disease and/or may have an inadequate shelf-life if Good Hygienic Practice (GHP) has not been followed. 2. There must be good evidence, or good reason to believe, that the application of a criterion will reduce the health risk in food and/ or effectively. Both conditions are given for example in the case of Salmonella and Campylobacter in poultry meat. Harmonised epidemiological indicators (HEI) HEIs are introduced to overcome the known deficiencies of micro criteria given by regulation (EC) No 2073/2005. HEIs differ from classical indicators. HEIs are proposed for food-borne biological hazards to public health that are related to poultry and meat thereof and that can be addressed in a broader sense and also within meat inspections hazards. A hazard is defined by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) as a biological, chemical or physical agent or property of food with World s Poultry Science Journal, Volume 69, Supplement 2

3 the potential to cause an adverse health effect. The first step in the hazard identification carried out in this assessment focussed on identifying biological hazards occurring in poultry and/or poultry meat that can be transmitted to humans. Hazards were identified based on evidence found in peer-reviewed literature and textbooks, through reported data (e.g. EU summary reports on zoonoses), previous assessments and various national opinions, and expert knowledge. A foodborne risk is a product of the likelihood of the occurrence of the hazard and the magnitude and severity of the consequences of the illness it causes on human health. EFSA proposed as a definition for a HEI the prevalence or concentration of the hazard at a certain stage of the food chain or an indirect indicator of the hazards (such as audits of farms or evaluation of process hygiene) that correlates to human health risk caused by the hazard. HEIs are therefore strongly correlated to risks and risk assessment. The original purpose of the HEIs were to enable the European Commission (EC) and the Member States (MS) of the EU to consider whether adaptations to meat inspection methods may be implemented at the MS level, and to enable the individual MS to carry out a risk analysis (or components thereof) to support decisions on any such adaptations to meat inspection methods. Following a qualitative risk assessment, EFSA (2013) classified hazards relevant in poultry meat hygiene as follows: 1. Campylobacter spp. and Salmonella spp. were considered of high public health relevance for poultry meat inspection. 2. Extended spectrum -lactamase (ESBL)/AmpC gene-carrying bacteria were considered to be of medium to high (E. coli) and low to medium (Salmonella) public health relevance. 3. In the case of C. difficile, data for ranking were insufficient, but, based on the limited information available; the Panel assessed the risk at the present time to be low. 4. The remaining identified hazards were considered to be of low public health relevance, based on available data. For the low-risk hazards, no hazard-specific control measures are currently implemented at the farm and/or slaughterhouse level. These hazards were therefore not considered further by EFSA. Comparing the hazards with the current achievements at meat inspection for poultry, it seems to be obvious that none of the public health hazards listed can be detected by traditional meat inspection. It deemed necessary that other approaches are necessary to identify and control these microbiological hazards. In poultry meat inspection procedures like food chain information systems (FCI) are already in practice which may lead to new interventions based on the above mentioned risks. In an integrated food safety assurance system, one possible strategy may be to set up clear and measurable targets to indicate what FBOs should achieve in respect to a particular hazard. These should be set either as EU targets (if an EU-wide approach is feasible) or to be reached at the national/regional level for prevalence and/or concentration of the hazards in poultry carcasses and, when appropriate, in poultry flocks before slaughter. Benchmark data for the assessment of the hazards related to regions or related to the whole EU are already known and on the pre-harvest level as harmonised monitoring and targets already in place: This is the case for Salmonella in breeding flocks of Gallus gallus, and turkeys, flocks of laying hens producing table eggs, broiler flocks and fattening turkey flocks. Although the introduction of these harmonised monitoring schemes lasted a long time and were laborious, these programmes could be extended to other main hazards if effective intervention methods at the farm level are available and these measures can be applied or if the data obtained are useful for subsequent risk management. Risk categorisation of poultry flocks The way that current ante and post-mortem inspection contributes to preventing/ reducing microbial risk to public health is by detecting heavy contamination of carcasses by faecal material and/or spilled intestinal content. Only the Salmonella status of the birds is available at slaughterhouse by the FCI. Traditional meat inspection procedures can detect microbial foodborne pathogens World s Poultry Science Journal, Volume 69, Supplement 3

4 indirectly only if pathological alterations at carcases can be addressed specifically to this pathogen and early information from other source is available. A future food safety assurance system should integrate food chain information (FCI) combined with risk-based interventions at the slaughterhouse. This new system includes a set of targets at carcass level and, when appropriate, flock level indicating what should be achieved for a given hazard. Since many years FCI is in practice and consists of (1) farm descriptors, (2) historical data and (3) flockspecific information. Such data/information can be assessed and completed by harmonised monitoring results and provide a categorisation of poultry flocks before slaughter which can be summarised for each hazard in a HEI. HEIs for example in the case of Campylobacter spp. or Salmonella spp. as given hazards could be used than to assess the risk and protective factors for the flocks related to the hazards. Due to the long experience in ante-mortem inspection on farm in most cases a risk history for the holding to be recorded in the FCI is feasible for logistic selection/ slaughter. On the other side the implementation of HEIs will be difficult for poultry companies in practice to follow their traditional slaughter scheme in relation to organise placement of products on the marked if testing results from the actual flock sent for slaughter are to be considered. All these aspects can be assessed already nowadays on the basis of historical data over a time period. Many farms and slaughterhouses focus control efforts where the risk is highest already today and use the outcome of their controls for adjusting not only the sampling frequency of the main hazards but also for logistic slaughter. Risk categorisation of slaughterhouses A second important element of an integrated food safety assurance system besides the risk categorisation of poultry flocks is the risk categorisation of slaughterhouses. This system would complement the risk categorisation of flocks based on FCI by classification of slaughterhouses according to their capability to reduce carcass faecal contamination. When reaching the slaughterhouse a risk categorisation of poultry flocks according to the above mentioned issues should be on the table and according to the hygienic capability of a slaughterhouse to prevent or reduce faecal contamination of carcasses HEIs can be based on two elements: 1. The processing technologies applied. This includes installed equipment and the HACCP programmes in place and 2. The process hygiene as measured by the level of indicator organisms on the carcasses (i.e. process hygiene criteria [PC]). A differentiation of slaughterhouses could provide a way of sending flocks presenting specific risk levels to adapted slaughter lines or abattoirs. For example, high-risk flocks might be directed to a specific category of abattoirs having suitable equipment and having demonstrated the ability to reduce the contamination of carcasses and to achieve an acceptable risk-reduction/contamination level in the final product. As a consequence for slaughterhouses with an increased level of contamination, improvement of slaughter hygiene should be sought, for instance through technological developments. The performance of the slaughterhouses should be monitored, and a risk history of the abattoirs should be registered. Historical data could also form the basis for adjusting sampling frequency and sample sizes. As none of these hazards are detected by traditional meat inspection procedures, EFSA recommended the establishing of an integrated food safety assurance system: This system could be achievable through improved FCI and risk-based interventions. Implementation of changes to the current system If the current post-mortem inspection is replaced by setting and monitoring targets for the main hazards on the poultry carcass, and by verification of FBOs hygiene management, using Process Hygiene Criteria (PC), meat inspection will chance its face dramatically to a general food safety assurance system. As the current meat inspection is recognised as a valuable tool for surveillance and monitoring of specific animal health and welfare conditions, other approaches should be applied to World s Poultry Science Journal, Volume 69, Supplement 4

5 compensate for the associated loss of information on the occurrence of animal disease and welfare conditions. Extended use of FCI has the potential to compensate for some, but not all, of the information on animal health and welfare that would be lost if visual post-mortem inspection is removed.. World s Poultry Science Journal, Volume 69, Supplement 5

6 Figure 1. Main elements of a food safety assurance system for the principal public health hazards related to poultry meat. HEI, harmonised epidemiological indicators for Salmonella (s), Campylobacter (c) or ESBL-/AmpC-carrying E. coli (e). (EFSA, 2012). FSO/ALOP strategy A model to set targets and to implement monitoring programmes could follow the FSO/ALOP strategy: Microbial Criteria (MC) providing the framework to enhance food safety. Based on a formal risk analysis approach these criteria are connected to an Appropriate Level of Protection (ALOP) as well as to a Food Safety Objective (FSO), a Performance Objective (PO), a Performance Criteria (PC) and to a Process Criteria (PC). An ALOP describes the level of protection deemed necessary for the whole population. In connection with this, an FSO provides the translation of an ALOP into a practical tool at the end of the food processing in setting i.e. a maximum level of bacteria to be tolerated in the respective food. A PO defines a certain concentration of pathogens to be allowed at a selected food processing step while a PC is the effect of a certain processing step on the relevant bacteria. Metrics like ALOP, FSO, PO and PC provide the framework for the application of Microbiological Criteria and also for HEIs. Within the risk analysis procedure, as laid down by the Codex Alimentarius during the past ten years, metrics link food safety activities to public health via risk assessment. World s Poultry Science Journal, Volume 69, Supplement 6

7 References CAC (1997): Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods; CAC/GL CAC (2004): General Guidelines on Sampling (CAC/GL ) CAC (2007): Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Management (CAC/GL )) CAC (2008): Guidelines for the Validation of Food Safety Control Measures (CAC/GL ) CAC 2003): Guidelines for Food Import Control System (CAC/GL ) CCFH (2012): Document REP 12/FH. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Codex Alimentarius Commission. Report of the forty-third session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene. Miami. USA, 5-9 December 2011 FAO/WHO (2006): The use of microbiological risk assessment outputs to develop practical risk management strategies:metrics to improve food safety. WHO/FAO, ftp://ftp.fao.org/ag/agn/food/kiel.pdf GKOGKA E, REIJ M, HAVELAAR A, ZWIETERING M, GORRIS L. (2011): Risk-based estimate of effect of foodborne diseases on public health, Greece. Emerg.Infect.Dis. 17(9), GORRIS, L. (2008): Operational food safety management based on risk. WTO (1995): EFSA 2012: Scientific Opinion on the public health hazards to be covered by inspection of meat (poultry); EFSA Journal 2012;10(6):274; FAO/WHO (1979): Microbiological Criteria for Foods. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Working Group on Microbiological Criteria for Foods, Geneva, February (Document WG/Microbiol/79/1) WHO, Geneva ICMSF (1978): Microorganisms in Food 2: Sampling for microbiological analysis: Principles and specific applications. CAC (1999): Principles and guidelines for the conduct of microbiological risk assessment. EFSA (2012): Scientific Opinion on the public health hazards to be covered by inspection of meat (poultry); EFSA Journal 2012;10(6):274; EU (2005): Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Official Journal of the European Union. L 338/ World s Poultry Science Journal, Volume 69, Supplement 7