da Cunha Diogo Thimoteo, de Rosso Veridiana Vera, Stedefeldt Elke
GeQual-Study Group of Food Quality, School of Applied Sciences, University of Campinas, Pedro Zacarias Street, 1300, Limeira, São Paulo, Brazil.
GeQual-Study Group of Food Quality, Biosciences Department, Federal University of São Paulo, Ana Costa Avenue, 95, Vila Mathias, 11010-001, Santos, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Food Prot. 2016 Mar;79(3):501-6. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-15-292.
The objective of this study was to verify the characteristics of food safety inspections, considering risk categories and binary scores. A cross-sectional study was performed with 439 restaurants in 43 Brazilian cities. A food safety checklist with 177 items was applied to the food service establishments. These items were classified into four groups (R1 to R4) according to the main factors that can cause outbreaks involving food: R1, time and temperature aspects; R2, direct contamination; R3, water conditions and raw material; and R4, indirect contamination (i.e., structures and buildings). A score adjusted for 100 was calculated for the overall violation score and the violation score for each risk category. The average violation score (standard deviation) was 18.9% (16.0), with an amplitude of 0.0 to 76.7%. Restaurants with a low overall violation score (approximately 20%) presented a high number of violations from the R1 and R2 groups, representing the most risky violations. Practical solutions to minimize this evaluation bias were discussed. Food safety evaluation should use weighted scores and be risk-based. However, some precautions must be taken by researchers, health inspectors, and health surveillance departments to develop an adequate and reliable instrument.
本研究的目的是根据风险类别和二元评分来验证食品安全检查的特征。对巴西43个城市的439家餐馆进行了一项横断面研究。一份包含177项内容的食品安全检查表应用于餐饮服务机构。这些项目根据可能导致食源性疾病暴发的主要因素分为四组（R1至R4）：R1，时间和温度方面；R2，直接污染；R3，水的状况和原材料；以及R4，间接污染（即结构和建筑物）。计算了总体违规评分以及每个风险类别的违规评分，并将其调整为满分100分。平均违规评分（标准差）为18.9%（16.0），幅度为0.0%至76.7%。总体违规评分较低（约20%）的餐馆在R1和R2组中存在大量违规行为，这些是风险最高的违规行为。讨论了尽量减少这种评估偏差的实际解决方案。食品安全评估应使用加权评分并以风险为基础。然而，研究人员、卫生检查员和卫生监督部门必须采取一些预防措施，以开发出一种充分且可靠的工具。
