Tebbutt G M
Middlesbrough Public Health Laboratory, South Cleveland Hospital.
Epidemiol Infect. 1991 Apr;106(2):319-27. doi: 10.1017/s0950268800048470.
The performance of agar-contact plates and an alginate-swab method for sampling food surfaces before and after cleaning was compared. Contact plates were more convenient, and were at least as sensitive as the swabbing method. To assess cleaning efficiency repeated sampling was carried out in selected premises, and several cleaning methods were introduced for trial periods. Some surfaces, notably wood and polypropylene, were particularly difficult to clean. For these scrubbing with a nylon brush was the best method. Other surfaces were more easily cleaned, and generally the methods introduced as part of this study were better than the original method used in the premises. Paper proved to be unpopular, and cleaning solutions applied with it did no better than those cleaned with a multiuse cloth kept soaking in a detergent and hypochlorite solution.
比较了琼脂接触平板法和藻酸盐拭子法在清洁前后对食品表面进行采样的效果。接触平板更方便，并且至少与拭子法一样灵敏。为评估清洁效率，在选定场所进行了重复采样，并在试验期引入了几种清洁方法。一些表面，尤其是木材和聚丙烯，特别难以清洁。对于这些表面，用尼龙刷擦洗是最好的方法。其他表面更容易清洁，并且总体而言，作为本研究一部分引入的方法比场所原来使用的方法更好。事实证明纸不受欢迎，使用纸涂抹的清洁溶液并不比用浸泡在洗涤剂和次氯酸盐溶液中的多用布清洁的效果更好。
