P1-78 Good Manufacturing Practices: Knowledge of Food Handlers, Perception of Consumers and Its Adoption in Foodservice Restaurants

Monday, July 23, 2012
Exhibit Hall (Rhode Island Convention Center)
Leticia Paiva, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
Adriano Cruz, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
Jose de Assis Fonseca Faria, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
Anderson Sant'Ana, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil
Introduction: In Brazil, more than 40% of the > 4,500 foodborne disease outbreaks (FDO) notified among 1999-2008 occurred in restaurants/foodservices. The effective implementation of good hygienic practices (GHP) may ensure that consumer’s expectations on food safety are satisfied and contribute for reduction of FDO associated with foodservices.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the awareness of food handlers regarding the implementation of GHP in foodservices and to compare it with the perception of consumers on hygienic conditions and with the GHP implementation.

Methods: The study was performed in two foodservices located in cities of the state of Sao Paulo, Brazil. The knowledge of food handlers (n=15) on GHP was the first step studied through the application of a check-list comprising 35 questions. Then, the perception of consumers (n=72) on hygienic practices of the foodservices was evaluated after the application of a check-list with 12 questions. The final step consisted of the assessment of GHP implementation through the use of a check-list developed by the Brazilian National Surveillance Sanitary Agency. The results were tabulated and percentages of conformity were calculated.

Results: Ninety seven percent of food handlers in both foodservices responded they were aware of the basic principles of GHP. At least > 40% and > 50% of consumers in foodservices A and B, respectively, considered these establishments as “high level” regarding each section of GHP questionnaire. Non-conformities in GHP implementation in foodservice A were observed in the sections of raw materials (16%) and exposure of foods for consumption (14%). On the other hand, foodservice B presented an average of 44%, 16% and 5% of non-conformities in equipment/facilities, raw materials and food preparation sections, respectively.

Significance: The study provides insights on how GHP is viewed by food handlers and consumers of two foodservices, followed by the validation of perceived view through assessment of GHP implementation.