Food Protection Trends - July/August 2022 - 308

TABLE 2. Association between hygienic practices and compliance with the code of hygienic
practices among selected processors in Accra (N = 11)
Score Allocation
Category
License/certification to operate
Primary production and traceability
Hygiene of slaughter animal
Hygiene of feed for slaughter animal
Hygiene of primary production
environment
Presentation of animal for slaughter
Establishment design, facilities,
and equipment
Design and construction of
slaughter area
Water supply and hygiene
Process control
*Significant at α < 0.05.
TABLE 3. Compliance of the hygiene of slaughter requirement (N = 11)
Basis for Score Allocation
Subcategories
Records on health status
Quality or hygiene assessment before slaughter
Monitoring by GVSD onsite
Control of contamination/cross-contamination
1 (9.1)
3 (27.3)
1 (9.1)
infections, a proper assessment by an expert onsite is ideal
and encouraged.
Most (72.7%) informal live bird traders and processors
scored below 50% in terms of hygiene of slaughter (Table
2), with noncompliance spanning from major to critical
noncompliance across health status monitoring, hygiene
assessment before slaughter, and record keeping (Table
3). However, 18.2% of the respondents separated only the
birds with obvious signs of illness from the flock but were
not fully compliant, because the records kept were outdated
and scanty. Although efforts such as having some spare
cages for isolation, isolating visibly ill birds, and cleaning
out litter relatively often were being made, there is the risk
of cross-contamination, because most operators did not
frequently inspect their birds to isolate the sick ones before
308 Food Protection Trends July/August
2 (18.2)
3 (27.3)
1 (9.1)
4 (36.4)
n (%)
Compliant Minor Deviation Major Deviation Noncompliant
1 (9.1)
3 (27.3)
6 (54.6)
3 (27.3)
5 (45.5)
5 (45.5)
1 (9.1)
4 (36.4)
1 (9.1)
they ended up spreading diseases or cross-infecting the rest
of the flock. Based on responses from previous studies (12),
most (91.7%) did not know that caging visibly sick birds
with healthy birds can cause cross-infections. Only 9.1% of
the auditees had satisfactory compliance with the hygiene of
slaughter requirements. The chi-square analysis (P = 0.016
and phi = 0.744) also showed good association between the
hygiene of slaughter and general compliance with the code
of hygienic practices. This emphasizes that the hygiene of
slaughter is critical to the overall hygiene of the dressed meat.
Hygiene of feed
According to the live bird traders and processors, feed for
their birds is obtained from retail shops in the market and at
farm gates, because some poultry processors have feed mills.
1 (9.1)
1 (9.1)
2 (18.2)
1 (9.1)
1 (9.1)
Excellent
1 (9.1)
n (%)
P-Value Phi-Cramer
Satisfactory Conditional Unsatisfactory
1 (9.1)
2 (18.2)
1 (9.1)
1 (9.1)
9 (81.8)
5 (45.5)
4 (36.4)
2 (18.2)
5 (45.5)
1 (9.1)
5 (45.5)
2 (18.2)
5 (45.5)
10 (90.9)
3 (27.3)
8 (72.7)
5 (45.5)
1 (9.1)
6 (54.5)
6 (54.5)
6 (54.5)
5 (45.5)
10 (90.9)
0.730
0.026*
0.016*
0.110
0.008*
0.073
0.015*
0.028*
0.021*
0.004*
0.239
0.807
0.744
0.586
0.793
0.690
0.751
0.728
0.724
1.000
Food Protection Trends - July/August 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - July/August 2022
