Ground beef handling and cooking practices in restaurants in eight States.

Eating in table-service restaurants has been implicated as a risk factor for Escherichia coli O157:H7 infection. To explore this association and learn about the prevalence of risky ground beef preparation practices in restaurants, the Environmental Health Specialists Network (EHS-Net) assessed ground beef handling policies and practices in restaurants in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Tennessee. Eligible restaurants prepared and served hamburgers. EHS-Net specialists interviewed a restaurant employee with authority over the kitchen (defined as the manager) using a standard questionnaire about food safety policies, hamburger preparation policies, and use of irradiated ground beef. Interviews were followed by observations of ground beef preparation. Data from 385 restaurants were analyzed: 67% of the restaurants were independently owned and 33% were chain restaurants; 75% of the restaurants were sit down, 19% were quick service or fast food, and 6% were cafeteria or buffet restaurants. Eighty-one percent of restaurants reported determining doneness of hamburgers by one or more subjective measures, and 49% reported that they never measure the final cook temperatures of hamburgers. At least two risky ground beef handling practices were observed in 53% of restaurants. Only 1% of restaurants reported purchasing irradiated ground beef, and 29% were unfamiliar with irradiated ground beef. Differences in risky ground beef handling policies and practices were noted for type of restaurant ownership (independently owned versus chain) and type of food service style (sit down versus quick service or fast food). This study revealed the pervasiveness of risky ground beef handling policies and practices in restaurants and the need for educational campaigns targeting food workers and managers. These results highlight the importance of continued efforts to reduce the prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef.

Prevalence of high-risk egg-preparation practices in restaurants that prepare breakfast egg entrées: an EHS-Net study.

Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis (SE) is a common cause of foodborne illness in the United States. Foods prepared with raw shell eggs have often been associated with SE outbreaks. The federal government published the Egg Safety Action Plan in December 1999 that called for reduction of egg-preparation practices that may contribute to the survival and proliferation of SE. In seven states, an interview and brief site evaluation of 153 restaurants that prepare eggs during all hours of operation was conducted by the Environmental Health Specialists Network to determine the prevalence of such practices. Fifty-four percent (83 of 153) of restaurants pooled raw shell eggs not intended for immediate service. These pooled eggs were held a median of 4 h for scrambled eggs, 5.5 h for omelets, and 6 h for pancakes and French toast. Nearly 26% (39 of 152) of restaurants reported storing eggs at room temperature, and 5% (7 of 152) stored eggs on ice or in cold-water baths before cooking. Generally, eggs were cooked to 72 to 83 degrees C, which is above the recommended final cook temperature of 63 to 68 degrees C. Employees reported sanitizing utensils used to prepare eggs less than once every 4 h in 42% (57 of 136) of restaurants. Several areas were identified in which further emphasis might reduce egg-associated SE infections in accordance with Healthy People 2010 goals.

Low risk of measles transmission after exposure on an international airline flight.

In May 2000, a passenger with measles traveled aboard a 7-hour flight from Japan to Hawaii. A follow-up survey was sent to 307 (91%) of the 336 exposed passengers to identify susceptible passengers and subsequent occurrences of measles. The median age of the 276 respondents (90%) was 34 years; 268 (97%) were residents of Japan. Self-reports determined that 173 (63%) were immune through prior measles or vaccination; 6 (2%) denied a history of prior measles or immunization, and 97 (35%) were unaware of their status. Only 1 nonimmune respondent received immunoprophylaxis. None of the respondents developed a febrile rash illness 7-21 days after exposure. The risk of in-flight measles transmission among passenger populations with similar susceptibility profiles appears to be low. An aggressive response by health departments may not be warranted after airborne exposure to measles. Each health department should make such determinations on the basis of specific circumstances and availability of resources.

Evaluation of eight rapid screening tests for acute leptospirosis in Hawaii.

Leptospirosis is a major public health problem throughout the world. Clinical recognition of leptospirosis is challenging, and the definitive serologic diagnostic assay, the microscopic agglutination test, is time-consuming and difficult to conduct. Various serologic screening tests have been developed, but their performance among ill persons in the United States has not been established. Eight screening tests were compared using 379 serum samples obtained in 1998 and 1999 from a series of 236 patients (33 with confirmed infection). The median number of days between illness onset and specimen collection was 9. The overall sensitivity, by specimen, for each test was as follows: indirect hemagglutination assay (MRL Diagnostics, Cypress, Calif.), 29%; INDX Leptospira Dip-S-Tick (PanBio InDx, Inc., Baltimore, Md.), 52%; Biognost IgM IFA test (Bios GmbH Labordiagnostik, Gräfelfing, Germany), 40%; Biolisa IgM ELISA (Bios GmbH, Labordiagnostik), 48%; Leptospira IgM ELISA (PanBio Pty Ltd., Brisbane, Australia), 36%; SERION ELISA classic Leptospira (Institut Virion*Serion GmbH, Würzburg, Germany), 48%; LEPTO Dipstick(Organon-Teknika, Ltd., Amsterdam, The Netherlands), 34%; Biosave latex agglutination test (LATEX; Bios GmbH Labordiagnostik), 86%. Test specificity ranged from 85 to 100% among all tests except LATEX, for which the specificity was significantly lower, at 10%. Test sensitivity was particularly low (<25%) for all tests (except LATEX) on specimens collected during the first week of illness. This is the most comprehensive field trial of leptospirosis screening tests reported to date. The data indicate that immunoglobulin M detection tests have limited utility for diagnosing leptospirosis during the initial evaluation of patients seen in Hawaii, a time when important therapeutic decisions are made. Improved leptospirosis screening tests are needed.