Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28854757›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2017

Cleaning and disinfection programs against Campylobacter jejuni for broiler chickens: productive performance, microbiological assessment and characterization.

Maria Fernanda de Castro Burbarelli, Gustavo do Valle Polycarpo, Karoline Deliberali Lelis, Carlos Alexandre Granghelli, Agatha Cristina Carão de Pinho, Sabrina Ribeiro Almeida Queiroz, Andrezza Maria Fernandes, Ricardo Luiz Moro de Souza, Maria Estela Gaglianone Moro, Roberto de Andrade Bordin and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Poultry science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Global Challenge ofTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Characterization and Phylogenetic Analysis ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Maria Fernanda de Castro BurbarelliDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Production (VNP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FMVZ-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil. Electronic address: mfcb@usp.br.
Gustavo do Valle PolycarpoSão Paulo State University (Unesp), School of Technology and Agricultural Sciences, Campus of Dracena.
Karoline Deliberali LelisDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Production (VNP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FMVZ-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.
Carlos Alexandre GranghelliDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Production (VNP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FMVZ-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.
Agatha Cristina Carão de PinhoDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Production (VNP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FMVZ-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.
Sabrina Ribeiro Almeida QueirozDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FZEA-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.
Andrezza Maria FernandesDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FZEA-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.
Ricardo Luiz Moro de SouzaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FZEA-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.
Maria Estela Gaglianone MoroDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FZEA-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.
Roberto de Andrade BordinNutrition, Animal Production, Health - FATEC-SP.
Ricardo de AlbuquerqueDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Production (VNP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo (FMVZ-USP), Pirassununga, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detailed cleaning and disinfection programs aims to reduce infection pressure from microorganisms from one flock to the next. However, studies evaluating the benefits to poultry performance, the sanitary status of the facilities, and the sanitary quality of the meat are rarely found. Thus, this study was designed to evaluate 2 cleaning and disinfecting programs regarding their influence on productive performance, elimination of Campylobacter, and characterization of Campylobacter jejuni strains when applied to broiler chickens' facilities. Two subsequent flocks with 960 birds each were distributed into 32 pens containing 30 birds each. In the first, the whole flock was inoculated with a known strain of Campylobacter jejuni in order to contaminate the environment. In the second flock, performance and microbiological evaluations were done, characterizing an observational study between 2 cleaning and disinfection programs, regular and proposed. The regular program consisted of sweeping facilities, washing equipment and environment with water and neutral detergent. The proposed cleaning program consisted of dry and wet cleaning, application of 2 detergents (one acid and one basic) and 2 disinfectants (250 g/L glutaraldehyde and 185 g/L formaldehyde at 0.5% and 210 g/L para-chloro-meta-cresol at 4%). Total microorganism count in the environment and Campylobacter spp. identification were done for the microbiological assessment of the environment and carcasses. The positive samples were submitted to molecular identification of Campylobacter spp. and posterior genetic sequencing of the species identified as Campylobacter jejuni. The birds housed in the facilities and submitted to the proposed treatment had better performance when compared to the ones in the regular treatment, most likely because there was a smaller total microorganism count on the floor, walls, feeders and drinkers. The proposed program also resulted in a reduction of Campylobacter spp. on floors, drinkers and birds. Moreover, it was possible to identify 6 different Campylobacter jejuni strains in the facilities. The proposed treatment resulted in a positive influence on the birds' performance and reduction of environment contamination for broiler chickens.

Indexed as

ChickensAnimal HusbandryAnimalsCampylobacter InfectionsCampylobacter jejuniDisinfectionMalePoultry Diseasesbiosecuritycampylobacteriosisdisinfectanthealthpoultry

Identifiers

PMID28854757
PMCPMC5850738

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.