Roles of Vegetable Surface Properties and Sanitizer Type on Annual Disease Burden of Rotavirus Illness by Consumption of Rotavirus‐Contaminated Fresh Vegetables: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment
Enteric viruses are often detected in water used for crop irrigation. One concern is foodborne viral disease via the consumption of fresh produce irrigated with virus‐contaminated water. Although the food industry routinely uses chemical sanitizers to disinfect post‐harvest fresh produce, it remains...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Risk analysis 2020-04, Vol.40 (4), p.741-757 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 757 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 741 |
container_title | Risk analysis |
container_volume | 40 |
creator | Fuzawa, Miyu Smith, Rebecca Lee Ku, Kang‐Mo Shisler, Joanna L. Feng, Hao Juvik, John A. Nguyen, Thanh H. |
description | Enteric viruses are often detected in water used for crop irrigation. One concern is foodborne viral disease via the consumption of fresh produce irrigated with virus‐contaminated water. Although the food industry routinely uses chemical sanitizers to disinfect post‐harvest fresh produce, it remains unknown how sanitizer and fresh produce properties affect the risk of viral illness through fresh produce consumption. A quantitative microbial risk assessment model was conducted to estimate (i) the health risks associated with consumption of rotavirus (RV)‐contaminated fresh produce with different surface properties (endive and kale) and (ii) how risks changed when using peracetic acid (PAA) or a surfactant‐based sanitizer. The modeling results showed that the annual disease burden depended on the combination of sanitizer and vegetable type when vegetables were irrigated with RV‐contaminated water. Global sensitivity analyses revealed that the most influential factors in the disease burden were RV concentration in irrigation water and postharvest disinfection efficacy. A postharvest disinfection efficacy of higher than 99% (2‐log10) was needed to decrease the disease burden below the World Health Organization (WHO) threshold, even in scenarios with low RV concentrations in irrigation water (i.e., river water). All scenarios tested here with at least 99.9% (3‐log10) disinfection efficacy had a disease burden lower than the WHO threshold, except for the endive treated with PAA. The disinfection efficacy for the endive treated with PAA was only about 80%, leading to a disease burden 100 times higher than the WHO threshold. These findings should be considered and incorporated into future models for estimating foodborne viral illness risks. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/risa.13426 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2391789716</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2391789716</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3576-1f90f55f48cb94af620b625aff3012760fbce01198bddf73dcb16e273c3596bc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokNhwwMgS-yQUnzJZcIuHSiMVATMFLaRnRyDS2IHH6doWPEIPBhPwZPgYQqIDd54cT5__5F_Qu5zdsLTeRwsqhMuc1HeIAteyDora5HfJAsmKpHlUoojcgfxkjHOWFHdJkeSV7moSr4g3zd-AKTe0HfwHqLSA9DtHIzqgL4OfoIQbZor19OtcjbaLxDoxW4C6h1tnJvVQJ9aBIVAT-fQg9u7Nj6qKxtmpOthcIBI9Y6uvMN5nKL1_zI_vn5Lo6hG61SEnp4FwA9_18EntKFvZuWijSraK6AvbRe8til5Y_EjbRBTwggu3iW3jBoQ7l3fx-Tt2bOL1Yvs_NXz9ao5zzpZVGXGTc1MUZh82ek6V6YUTJeiUMZIxtO3MKM7YJzXS933ppJ9p3kJopLpeV3qTh6ThwfvFPynGTC2l34OLkW2Qta8WtYVLxP16EClbREDmHYKdlRh13LW7otr98W1v4pL8INr5axH6P-gv5tKAD8An-0Au_-o2s162xykPwFloKjb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2391789716</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Roles of Vegetable Surface Properties and Sanitizer Type on Annual Disease Burden of Rotavirus Illness by Consumption of Rotavirus‐Contaminated Fresh Vegetables: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Fuzawa, Miyu ; Smith, Rebecca Lee ; Ku, Kang‐Mo ; Shisler, Joanna L. ; Feng, Hao ; Juvik, John A. ; Nguyen, Thanh H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Fuzawa, Miyu ; Smith, Rebecca Lee ; Ku, Kang‐Mo ; Shisler, Joanna L. ; Feng, Hao ; Juvik, John A. ; Nguyen, Thanh H.</creatorcontrib><description>Enteric viruses are often detected in water used for crop irrigation. One concern is foodborne viral disease via the consumption of fresh produce irrigated with virus‐contaminated water. Although the food industry routinely uses chemical sanitizers to disinfect post‐harvest fresh produce, it remains unknown how sanitizer and fresh produce properties affect the risk of viral illness through fresh produce consumption. A quantitative microbial risk assessment model was conducted to estimate (i) the health risks associated with consumption of rotavirus (RV)‐contaminated fresh produce with different surface properties (endive and kale) and (ii) how risks changed when using peracetic acid (PAA) or a surfactant‐based sanitizer. The modeling results showed that the annual disease burden depended on the combination of sanitizer and vegetable type when vegetables were irrigated with RV‐contaminated water. Global sensitivity analyses revealed that the most influential factors in the disease burden were RV concentration in irrigation water and postharvest disinfection efficacy. A postharvest disinfection efficacy of higher than 99% (2‐log10) was needed to decrease the disease burden below the World Health Organization (WHO) threshold, even in scenarios with low RV concentrations in irrigation water (i.e., river water). All scenarios tested here with at least 99.9% (3‐log10) disinfection efficacy had a disease burden lower than the WHO threshold, except for the endive treated with PAA. The disinfection efficacy for the endive treated with PAA was only about 80%, leading to a disease burden 100 times higher than the WHO threshold. These findings should be considered and incorporated into future models for estimating foodborne viral illness risks.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0272-4332</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1539-6924</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/risa.13426</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31742761</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Contaminated water ; Contamination ; Disinfection ; Efficacy ; Food consumption ; Food industry ; Food processing industry ; Foodborne disease ; Harvest ; Health risk assessment ; Health risks ; Healthy food ; Illnesses ; Irrigation ; Irrigation water ; Microorganisms ; Peracetic acid ; Properties (attributes) ; QMRA ; Risk assessment ; Rivers ; Rotavirus ; Sanitizers ; Sensitivity analysis ; Surface properties ; Vegetables ; Viral diseases ; virus ; virus disinfection ; Viruses ; Water pollution</subject><ispartof>Risk analysis, 2020-04, Vol.40 (4), p.741-757</ispartof><rights>2019 Society for Risk Analysis</rights><rights>2019 Society for Risk Analysis.</rights><rights>2020 Society for Risk Analysis</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3576-1f90f55f48cb94af620b625aff3012760fbce01198bddf73dcb16e273c3596bc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3576-1f90f55f48cb94af620b625aff3012760fbce01198bddf73dcb16e273c3596bc3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5461-5233 ; 0000-0002-8343-794X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Frisa.13426$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Frisa.13426$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31742761$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fuzawa, Miyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Rebecca Lee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ku, Kang‐Mo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shisler, Joanna L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Juvik, John A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Thanh H.</creatorcontrib><title>Roles of Vegetable Surface Properties and Sanitizer Type on Annual Disease Burden of Rotavirus Illness by Consumption of Rotavirus‐Contaminated Fresh Vegetables: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment</title><title>Risk analysis</title><addtitle>Risk Anal</addtitle><description>Enteric viruses are often detected in water used for crop irrigation. One concern is foodborne viral disease via the consumption of fresh produce irrigated with virus‐contaminated water. Although the food industry routinely uses chemical sanitizers to disinfect post‐harvest fresh produce, it remains unknown how sanitizer and fresh produce properties affect the risk of viral illness through fresh produce consumption. A quantitative microbial risk assessment model was conducted to estimate (i) the health risks associated with consumption of rotavirus (RV)‐contaminated fresh produce with different surface properties (endive and kale) and (ii) how risks changed when using peracetic acid (PAA) or a surfactant‐based sanitizer. The modeling results showed that the annual disease burden depended on the combination of sanitizer and vegetable type when vegetables were irrigated with RV‐contaminated water. Global sensitivity analyses revealed that the most influential factors in the disease burden were RV concentration in irrigation water and postharvest disinfection efficacy. A postharvest disinfection efficacy of higher than 99% (2‐log10) was needed to decrease the disease burden below the World Health Organization (WHO) threshold, even in scenarios with low RV concentrations in irrigation water (i.e., river water). All scenarios tested here with at least 99.9% (3‐log10) disinfection efficacy had a disease burden lower than the WHO threshold, except for the endive treated with PAA. The disinfection efficacy for the endive treated with PAA was only about 80%, leading to a disease burden 100 times higher than the WHO threshold. These findings should be considered and incorporated into future models for estimating foodborne viral illness risks.</description><subject>Contaminated water</subject><subject>Contamination</subject><subject>Disinfection</subject><subject>Efficacy</subject><subject>Food consumption</subject><subject>Food industry</subject><subject>Food processing industry</subject><subject>Foodborne disease</subject><subject>Harvest</subject><subject>Health risk assessment</subject><subject>Health risks</subject><subject>Healthy food</subject><subject>Illnesses</subject><subject>Irrigation</subject><subject>Irrigation water</subject><subject>Microorganisms</subject><subject>Peracetic acid</subject><subject>Properties (attributes)</subject><subject>QMRA</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Rivers</subject><subject>Rotavirus</subject><subject>Sanitizers</subject><subject>Sensitivity analysis</subject><subject>Surface properties</subject><subject>Vegetables</subject><subject>Viral diseases</subject><subject>virus</subject><subject>virus disinfection</subject><subject>Viruses</subject><subject>Water pollution</subject><issn>0272-4332</issn><issn>1539-6924</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokNhwwMgS-yQUnzJZcIuHSiMVATMFLaRnRyDS2IHH6doWPEIPBhPwZPgYQqIDd54cT5__5F_Qu5zdsLTeRwsqhMuc1HeIAteyDora5HfJAsmKpHlUoojcgfxkjHOWFHdJkeSV7moSr4g3zd-AKTe0HfwHqLSA9DtHIzqgL4OfoIQbZor19OtcjbaLxDoxW4C6h1tnJvVQJ9aBIVAT-fQg9u7Nj6qKxtmpOthcIBI9Y6uvMN5nKL1_zI_vn5Lo6hG61SEnp4FwA9_18EntKFvZuWijSraK6AvbRe8til5Y_EjbRBTwggu3iW3jBoQ7l3fx-Tt2bOL1Yvs_NXz9ao5zzpZVGXGTc1MUZh82ek6V6YUTJeiUMZIxtO3MKM7YJzXS933ppJ9p3kJopLpeV3qTh6ThwfvFPynGTC2l34OLkW2Qta8WtYVLxP16EClbREDmHYKdlRh13LW7otr98W1v4pL8INr5axH6P-gv5tKAD8An-0Au_-o2s162xykPwFloKjb</recordid><startdate>202004</startdate><enddate>202004</enddate><creator>Fuzawa, Miyu</creator><creator>Smith, Rebecca Lee</creator><creator>Ku, Kang‐Mo</creator><creator>Shisler, Joanna L.</creator><creator>Feng, Hao</creator><creator>Juvik, John A.</creator><creator>Nguyen, Thanh H.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5461-5233</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8343-794X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202004</creationdate><title>Roles of Vegetable Surface Properties and Sanitizer Type on Annual Disease Burden of Rotavirus Illness by Consumption of Rotavirus‐Contaminated Fresh Vegetables: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment</title><author>Fuzawa, Miyu ; Smith, Rebecca Lee ; Ku, Kang‐Mo ; Shisler, Joanna L. ; Feng, Hao ; Juvik, John A. ; Nguyen, Thanh H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3576-1f90f55f48cb94af620b625aff3012760fbce01198bddf73dcb16e273c3596bc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Contaminated water</topic><topic>Contamination</topic><topic>Disinfection</topic><topic>Efficacy</topic><topic>Food consumption</topic><topic>Food industry</topic><topic>Food processing industry</topic><topic>Foodborne disease</topic><topic>Harvest</topic><topic>Health risk assessment</topic><topic>Health risks</topic><topic>Healthy food</topic><topic>Illnesses</topic><topic>Irrigation</topic><topic>Irrigation water</topic><topic>Microorganisms</topic><topic>Peracetic acid</topic><topic>Properties (attributes)</topic><topic>QMRA</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Rivers</topic><topic>Rotavirus</topic><topic>Sanitizers</topic><topic>Sensitivity analysis</topic><topic>Surface properties</topic><topic>Vegetables</topic><topic>Viral diseases</topic><topic>virus</topic><topic>virus disinfection</topic><topic>Viruses</topic><topic>Water pollution</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fuzawa, Miyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Rebecca Lee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ku, Kang‐Mo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shisler, Joanna L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Juvik, John A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Thanh H.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Risk analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fuzawa, Miyu</au><au>Smith, Rebecca Lee</au><au>Ku, Kang‐Mo</au><au>Shisler, Joanna L.</au><au>Feng, Hao</au><au>Juvik, John A.</au><au>Nguyen, Thanh H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Roles of Vegetable Surface Properties and Sanitizer Type on Annual Disease Burden of Rotavirus Illness by Consumption of Rotavirus‐Contaminated Fresh Vegetables: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment</atitle><jtitle>Risk analysis</jtitle><addtitle>Risk Anal</addtitle><date>2020-04</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>741</spage><epage>757</epage><pages>741-757</pages><issn>0272-4332</issn><eissn>1539-6924</eissn><abstract>Enteric viruses are often detected in water used for crop irrigation. One concern is foodborne viral disease via the consumption of fresh produce irrigated with virus‐contaminated water. Although the food industry routinely uses chemical sanitizers to disinfect post‐harvest fresh produce, it remains unknown how sanitizer and fresh produce properties affect the risk of viral illness through fresh produce consumption. A quantitative microbial risk assessment model was conducted to estimate (i) the health risks associated with consumption of rotavirus (RV)‐contaminated fresh produce with different surface properties (endive and kale) and (ii) how risks changed when using peracetic acid (PAA) or a surfactant‐based sanitizer. The modeling results showed that the annual disease burden depended on the combination of sanitizer and vegetable type when vegetables were irrigated with RV‐contaminated water. Global sensitivity analyses revealed that the most influential factors in the disease burden were RV concentration in irrigation water and postharvest disinfection efficacy. A postharvest disinfection efficacy of higher than 99% (2‐log10) was needed to decrease the disease burden below the World Health Organization (WHO) threshold, even in scenarios with low RV concentrations in irrigation water (i.e., river water). All scenarios tested here with at least 99.9% (3‐log10) disinfection efficacy had a disease burden lower than the WHO threshold, except for the endive treated with PAA. The disinfection efficacy for the endive treated with PAA was only about 80%, leading to a disease burden 100 times higher than the WHO threshold. These findings should be considered and incorporated into future models for estimating foodborne viral illness risks.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>31742761</pmid><doi>10.1111/risa.13426</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5461-5233</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8343-794X</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0272-4332 |
ispartof | Risk analysis, 2020-04, Vol.40 (4), p.741-757 |
issn | 0272-4332 1539-6924 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2391789716 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Contaminated water Contamination Disinfection Efficacy Food consumption Food industry Food processing industry Foodborne disease Harvest Health risk assessment Health risks Healthy food Illnesses Irrigation Irrigation water Microorganisms Peracetic acid Properties (attributes) QMRA Risk assessment Rivers Rotavirus Sanitizers Sensitivity analysis Surface properties Vegetables Viral diseases virus virus disinfection Viruses Water pollution |
title | Roles of Vegetable Surface Properties and Sanitizer Type on Annual Disease Burden of Rotavirus Illness by Consumption of Rotavirus‐Contaminated Fresh Vegetables: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T21%3A46%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Roles%20of%20Vegetable%20Surface%20Properties%20and%20Sanitizer%20Type%20on%20Annual%20Disease%20Burden%20of%20Rotavirus%20Illness%20by%20Consumption%20of%20Rotavirus%E2%80%90Contaminated%20Fresh%20Vegetables:%20A%20Quantitative%20Microbial%20Risk%20Assessment&rft.jtitle=Risk%20analysis&rft.au=Fuzawa,%20Miyu&rft.date=2020-04&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=741&rft.epage=757&rft.pages=741-757&rft.issn=0272-4332&rft.eissn=1539-6924&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/risa.13426&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2391789716%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2391789716&rft_id=info:pmid/31742761&rfr_iscdi=true |