Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34840449›Full record

ArticleVeterinary world2021

Assessing hygiene indicators in two dairies in Algeria in producing pasteurized milk.

Regguem Souad, Hamdi Taha Mossadak, Bouayad Leila

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary world, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Regguem SouadLaboratory of Food Hygiene and Quality Insurance System (HASAQ), Higher National Veterinary School, Rue Issad Abbes, Oued Smar, Algiers 16000, Algeria.
Hamdi Taha MossadakLaboratory of Food Hygiene and Quality Insurance System (HASAQ), Higher National Veterinary School, Rue Issad Abbes, Oued Smar, Algiers 16000, Algeria.
Bouayad LeilaLaboratory of Food Hygiene and Quality Insurance System (HASAQ), Higher National Veterinary School, Rue Issad Abbes, Oued Smar, Algiers 16000, Algeria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimThere is a worldwide controversy about the choice of microbial flora for use as process hygiene indicators. This study aimed to evaluate the pertinence of using either coliforms or Enterobacteriaceae (EB) as process hygiene indicators in the pasteurized milk production line. Two flora families and total flora were used as bacterial indicators in some stages of pasteurized milk production line to identify the origin of post-pasteurization contamination and compare the results obtained for each flora. In addition, the bacteriological profile of isolated coliforms and EB was developed. MATERIALS AND

methodsOne thousand and two hundred samples of pasteurized cow milk and surfaces (pipes and tank) at various processing stages were taken from two dairies in the northern region of Algeria. The total microbial flora (TF), total coliforms (TC), thermotolerant coliforms, and EB were enumerated, following the recommendations of ISO 4833:2006, ISO 4832:2006, and ISO 21528-2:2017 methods, respectively. The bacteriological profile was determined using the API 20E and 10S tests (bioMérieux, France). Furthermore, the cleaning efficiency and disinfection protocol of surfaces were evaluated using contact agar slides 1 (Liofilchem™, Italy).

resultsEnumeration of the different indicators shows that the highest contamination rate is recorded by the total flora in the two units, 3.28 and 3.78 log CFU/mL, respectively. EB (-0.60 log CFU/mL) at post-pasteurization stage in Unit 1 and coliforms (0.44 log CFU/mL) at the pasteurized packaged milk stage in Unit 2 are the least significant germ families. The lowest compliance rates of bacterial contamination were reported for total flora (82-85%) at the three sampled sites in Unit 2. In comparison, the highest was reported in Unit 1 (99.8%) and 2 (98%) by the EB indicator. Assessing the surface cleaning and disinfection protocol compliance shows that the tank records the highest non-compliance rates for EB and TF (4% and 3%) in Unit 2. EB are represented in both units by various species.

conclusionThe results obtained show no difference in the use of EB or TC as hygiene indicators. However, if the objective is to identify the species of bacterial populations, using EBs are the most appropriate.

Indexed as

coliformsenterobacteriaindicatorspasteurized milkprocess hygienetotal microbial flora

Identifiers

PMID34840449
PMCPMC8613772

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.