Reuter G
Institut für Fleischhygiene, Freien Universität Berlin.
Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg B Umwelthyg Krankenhaushyg Arbeitshyg Prav Med. 1989 Apr;187(4-6):564-77.
An effective disinfection depends on the tested efficiency of commercial products. The recommendations given by producers must be justified by facts. As no official registration procedure exists in Germany, the results obtained by voluntary testing institutions of scientific or branch-specialized associations have to be considered. A remarkable progress could be achieved in that field in the last years. Established were precisely prescribed test methods for disinfectants for (1) hospitals, kitchen areas included, by the DGHM (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hygiene und Mikrobiologie); (2) processing areas for food of animal origin, kitchen areas also included, by the DVG (Deutsche Veterinärmedizinische Gesellschaft); (3) the beverage, especially the brewing industry by the MEBAK (Mitteleuropäische Brautechnische Analysen-Kommission); and (4) milk producing establishments by the DLG (Deutsche Landwirtschaftsgesellschaft). Each test method requires a different volume of procedures. This paper demonstrates by comparing the test factors which results may be achieved. Also taken into consideration were the methods prescribed by AFNOR (French Standardizing Organization) and by a Commission of the European Council. A disinfectant to be applied in the food industry should meet the following requirements: it should be (a) effective under application periods shorter than usually recommended for hospital areas or animal husbandry; (b) tested on less and heavier protein-loaded areas; (c) tested also under low-temperature conditions; (d) classified by groups of food products, in order to minimize the amount of substance applied to avoid unnecessary residues. The most comprehensive results may be obtained by the methods of the DGHM, DVG and MEBAK. The most specific data are provided in the DVG-list, the DGHM-list offers a somewhat reduced amount of specifics and the DLG-list is limited only to that informations which serve as basis for a quality seal. More coordination between the different testing and evaluation procedures would be appropriate in order to allow a comparison of the same products judged for different areas of application. An official test proceeding seems not necessary in Germany as enough reliable data are available from the above indicated institutions.
有效的消毒取决于商用产品的测试效率。生产商给出的建议必须有事实依据。由于德国不存在官方注册程序，因此必须考虑科学或行业专业协会的自愿检测机构所获得的结果。过去几年在该领域取得了显著进展。已确立了针对消毒剂的精确规定测试方法：（1）由德国卫生与微生物学会（DGHM）制定的针对医院（包括厨房区域）的消毒剂测试方法；（2）由德国兽医医学协会（DVG）制定的针对动物源性食品加工区域（也包括厨房区域）的消毒剂测试方法；（3）由中欧酿造技术分析委员会（MEBAK）制定的针对饮料行业，尤其是酿造业的消毒剂测试方法；（4）由德国农业协会（DLG）制定的针对牛奶生产企业的消毒剂测试方法。每种测试方法都需要不同数量的程序。本文通过比较测试因素来展示可能取得的结果。还考虑了法国标准化组织（AFNOR）和欧洲理事会一个委员会规定的方法。应用于食品工业的消毒剂应满足以下要求：它应（a）在比通常推荐用于医院区域或畜牧业的应用时间更短的情况下有效；（b）在蛋白质负载量较低和较高的区域进行测试；（c）在低温条件下也进行测试；（d）按食品产品类别分类，以尽量减少所使用物质的量，避免不必要的残留。通过德国卫生与微生物学会（DGHM）、德国兽医医学协会（DVG）和中欧酿造技术分析委员会（MEBAK）的方法可获得最全面的结果。德国兽医医学协会（DVG）列表提供了最具体的数据，德国卫生与微生物学会（DGHM）列表提供的具体信息有所减少，而德国农业协会（DLG）列表仅限于作为质量认证基础的信息。为了能够比较针对不同应用领域评判的相同产品，不同的测试和评估程序之间进行更多协调将是合适的。在德国，由于上述机构可提供足够可靠的数据，官方测试程序似乎没有必要。
