Bakin Bashiru C, Stolte-Carroll Kathryn, Sigman Jessica, Ritchie Stephanie M, Tillman Glenn E, Bilanovic Iva, Kowalcyk Barbara B
Department of Food Science and Technology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington DC 20052, USA.
J Food Prot. 2025 Mar 24;88(4):100474. doi: 10.1016/j.jfp.2025.100474. Epub 2025 Feb 27.
Preharvest interventions can play an important role in reducing Salmonella prevalence and levels entering poultry slaughter and processing establishments. Currently, there is no systematic literature review of preharvest interventions that control Salmonella in poultry in the United States (U.S.). The objective herein was to synthesize literature published on the effectiveness of preharvest interventions in U.S. poultry production. Utilizing the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews guidelines, a literature search was conducted. Experimental studies published from 1995 to 2022 assessing preharvest interventions to control Salmonella in U.S. poultry farms were included in the review if they reported prevalence or levels of Salmonella. Data were extracted from each article by two reviewers. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize key study parameters, (e.g., study design, study location, poultry type, Salmonella serotypes, type of intervention) and effectiveness of intervention. A total of 12,403 publications were identified, and 234 publications were included in the final review. The most evaluated interventions were feed/water additives (51.50%), competitive exclusion culture (10.30%), vaccination/immunization (7.88%), chemical treatments/compounds (5.45%), and probiotic culture (4.85%). Most studies focused on broiler chicken (78.20%) compared to turkey and investigated Salmonella Typhimurium (37.60%), S. Enteritidis (29.10%), and S. Heidelberg (8.48%). Overall, the effectiveness of evaluated interventions varied, though one should consider differences may be due to study design, sample sizes, and duration of interventions. This review improves our understanding of the breadth of preharvest interventions and their effectiveness against Salmonella in poultry and can be used to inform food safety policies and practices around poultry to protect public health.
收获前干预措施在降低进入家禽屠宰和加工场所的沙门氏菌流行率及含量方面可发挥重要作用。目前,尚无关于美国控制家禽沙门氏菌的收获前干预措施的系统性文献综述。本文的目的是综合已发表的关于美国家禽生产中收获前干预措施有效性的文献。按照Cochrane干预综述的方法学期望指南进行了文献检索。如果报告了沙门氏菌的流行率或含量,则将1995年至2022年发表的评估美国家禽养殖场控制沙门氏菌收获前干预措施的实验研究纳入综述。由两名评审员从每篇文章中提取数据。使用描述性统计来总结关键研究参数(如研究设计、研究地点、家禽类型、沙门氏菌血清型、干预类型)和干预效果。共识别出12403篇出版物,最终综述纳入了234篇出版物。评估最多的干预措施是饲料/水添加剂(51.50%)、竞争排斥培养物(10.30%)、疫苗接种/免疫(7.88%)、化学处理/化合物(5.45%)和益生菌培养物(4.85%)。与火鸡相比,大多数研究集中在肉鸡(78.20%)上,并调查了鼠伤寒沙门氏菌(37.60%)、肠炎沙门氏菌(29.10%)和海德堡沙门氏菌(8.48%)。总体而言,评估的干预措施的有效性各不相同,不过应考虑到差异可能归因于研究设计、样本量和干预持续时间。本综述增进了我们对收获前干预措施的广度及其在家禽中对抗沙门氏菌有效性的理解,并可用于为围绕家禽的食品安全政策和实践提供信息,以保护公众健康。