Comparison of Swiffer Wipes and Conventional Drag Swab Methods for the Recovery of Salmonella in Swine Production Systems

The main goal of this study was to assess the efficacy of Swiffer wipes in comparison to conventional drag swabs for the recovery of Salmonella. A total of 800 samples (400 Swiffer wipes and 400 drag swabs) were aseptically collected from randomly selected swine barns before disinfection with specif...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of food protection 2009, Vol.72 (1), p.142-146
Main Authors: MOLLA ZEWDE, Bayleyegn, ROBBINS, Rebecca, ABLEY, Melanie J, HOUSE, Brandon, MORGAN MORROW, W. E, GEBREYES, Wondwossen A
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animal productions
Animals
Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology
Antimicrobial agents
Bacteria
Bacteriological Techniques - instrumentation
Bacteriological Techniques - methods
Bacteriological Techniques - veterinary
Biological and medical sciences
Colony Count, Microbial
Disinfection & disinfectants
Drug Resistance, Bacterial
Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial
Feces
Feces - microbiology
Floors and Floorcoverings
Food
Food industries
Food microbiology
Food safety
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Hogs
Housing, Animal
Hygiene
Laboratories
Methods
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Pathogens
Salmonella
Salmonella - drug effects
Salmonella - isolation & purification
Swine - microbiology
Terrestrial animal productions
Vertebrates
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The main goal of this study was to assess the efficacy of Swiffer wipes in comparison to conventional drag swabs for the recovery of Salmonella. A total of 800 samples (400 Swiffer wipes and 400 drag swabs) were aseptically collected from randomly selected swine barns before disinfection with specific biocides and within 2 h after disinfection. From each barn, 10 samples of each swab type and negative controls were collected. Salmonellae were isolated from 43 (10.8%) of 400 drag swabs and 34 (8.5%) of 400 Swiffer wipes. There was a significant reduction in Salmonella postdisinfection as identified with both sampling procedures irrespective of the type of biocide used (P < 0.05). With the drag swabs, salmonellae were detected in 15% of the samples before disinfection versus 6.5% after disinfection, whereas with the Swiffer wipes, 13 and 4% of the samples were positive pre- and postdisinfection, respectively. Of the total 720 fecal samples collected from pigs placed in the disinfected barns, 132 (18.3%) were Salmonella positive. About 65 and 98% of the Salmonella isolates from swine barns and fecal samples, respectively, were resistant to one or more of the antimicrobials tested. Multidrug resistance was found in 35.7% of the isolates from barn swabs and 56.4% of the isolates from fecal samples. Results of this study suggest that the conventional drag swab method results in better recovery of Salmonella than does the Swiffer wipe method and thus could be a useful sampling method in monitoring Salmonella. Pentaresistant Salmonella (mainly R-type ACSSuT) was more common in fecal samples than in environmental samples.
ISSN:0362-028X
1944-9097
DOI:10.4315/0362-028X-72.1.142