Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41233898›Full record

ArticleActa veterinaria Scandinavica2025

Challenges in cleaning and disinfection, and environmental monitoring in Swedish slaughterhouses.

Madeleine Moazzami, Hedvig Gröndal, Ingrid Hansson, Sofia Boqvist

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta veterinaria Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Madeleine MoazzamiMicrobiology Unit, Swedish Food Agency, Uppsala, 751 26, Sweden.
Hedvig GröndalDepartment of Animal Biosciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7023, Uppsala, 750 07, Sweden.
Ingrid HanssonDepartment of Animal Biosciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7023, Uppsala, 750 07, Sweden.
Sofia BoqvistDepartment of Animal Biosciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7023, Uppsala, 750 07, Sweden. sofia.boqvist@slu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8072-7132

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCleaning and disinfection (C&D) in slaughterhouses and meat processing facilities is essential to avoid cross-contamination of the meat and thereby prevent food-borne illness and decreased shelf-life of the food product. To determine C&D efficacy, environmental monitoring should be performed. The food business operator must decide which activities to apply in their facility, which can be a challenging task. Ten slaughterhouses, six red meat and four poultry, with associated meat processing facilities participated in this interview study. The animals slaughtered in these slaughterhouses represented approximately 32% and 90% of the annual slaughter in Sweden, respectively. Quality assurance managers of the slaughterhouses were asked 27 questions using digital interviews about their C&D procedures and environmental monitoring. Additionally, the managers could freely elaborate on the difficulties and challenges related to C&D.

resultsDaily C&D was performed in all slaughterhouses and nine hired external cleaning companies. The same type of chemicals were used in all ten slaughterhouses, which primarily included alkaline detergents with or without chlorine for cleaning and chlorine-based agents for disinfection. The most common methods used for monitoring C&D efficacy were the sampling of surfaces by dipslides and ATP-bioluminescence, while one slaughterhouse used swabbing. Only half of the slaughterhouses based thresholds to determine if a surface was sufficiently clean on their own risk-analysis. The remaining slaughterhouses did not provide the information, or the respondent did not know. Quality assurance managers expressed difficulties in determining C&D efficacy, identified several surfaces as difficult to clean and noted reliance on externally provided hygiene thresholds. Four thematic challenges emerged in the thematic analysis: microbial composition on surfaces; efficacy of C&D procedures; competence and management; and production and competitiveness.

conclusionsSlaughterhouses face notable challenges in C&D, and environmental monitoring, including procedural deficiencies, knowledge gaps, and limited science-based guidelines. Hygiene outcomes are strongly influenced by personnel competence and management support. Limited collaboration between slaughterhouses further impedes the sharing of effective practices. Strengthened partnerships with the scientific community, improved training, risk-based monitoring, and hygienic facility design are essential to enhance C&D standards and reduce microbial contamination risks at slaughterhouses and meat processing facilities.

Indexed as

AbattoirsDisinfectionEnvironmental MonitoringAnimalsSwedenCleaning efficacyFood safetyPost-operational cleaningQuality controlSlaughterhouse hygieneThematic analysis

Identifiers

PMID41233898
PMCPMC12616898

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.