Forum Replies Created
Yes in the hygiene locks a possible link with covid consequences could be the “reflex” to use disinfectant gel.
I am interested by this comment. Would you mind sharing references on the rise of resistance to disinfectants?
I don’t have scientific evidence on the effect of proximity with swine barns for Salmonella (serovar Tiphymurium would be of concern?). There is one reported study where the proximity with swine farms plays a role in Influenza positivity https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23050464/
If the visit is only aimed at having a short look at inside the barn, check the farms records / water tank / lighting, (1) they may even not have to enter the barn, and a window on the door could do the trick (2) or “easy to put” (not requiring the use of hands) gardening clogs could reduce the time dedicated to changing boots. Just like when you like to reduce the time needed to put your slippers on!
A short visit is still a visit ith contamination risk. Do you have experience of farmers/visitors not respecting hygiene lock biosecurity rules beacause of a short visit?
A three-zone anteroom really eases the order of biosecurity practices in the hygiene lock to reduce contamination risk : (1) removing shoes and coat, (2) then wash hands, (3) then put farm/barn specific shoes and clothes. It also better separates the zones.
In fact, it may require as little as an extrabench or planck in the hygiene lock (and so little space as a meter-wide intermediate zone). Did you ever try to install this system or advise it to a farmer? Some super small hygiene locks may not be adapted but I believe that many are.27 January 2022 at 10:15 am in reply to: What are the best tricks to make use the hygiene lock properly ? #1447
For visitors, the fact that the farmer performed in front of them the proper practices sets the example that the visitors would have to copy/follow.
The other way roung, the fact that all visitors also show the “good example” (vets and advisors in aprticular) also serves as a reference or reminder for the farmer.27 January 2022 at 10:12 am in reply to: Which biosecurity breaks are most commonly met in hygiene locks ? #1445
Many biosecurity breaks exist in hygiene locks. In Canada, poultry abrn hygiene locks were equipped with cameras and thus the biosecurity breaks identified and counted: https://www.academia.edu/3762784/Description_of_44_biosecurity_errors_while_entering_and_exiting_poultry_barns_based_on_video_surveillance_in_Quebec_Canada
Do you have the same ranking of bisoecurity breaks in your country/production type?27 January 2022 at 10:08 am in reply to: Why biosecurity practices are not well respected in hygiene locks ? ? #1444
One first answer is the time taken to perform the practices, or at least the perception of the time taken. Any measure reducing the time of the practices or any measure reducing the perception of the time taken (habits, automated behaviours) could help. Has anyone got any particular examples?27 January 2022 at 10:05 am in reply to: What about foot bath ? What does it tell from us ? #1443
I agree that is may be seen as a “warning sign” for visitors. But as it is most likely ineffective (or a possible source of contamination) efforts should be targetted to changing boots ot using boot/shoe covers. the presence of poultry barn-specific boots (or boot covers) on the other side of the bench should also have this “warning sign” effect. I believe that the efforts for biosecurity (a person would have a limited “amount” of efforts dedicated to biosecurity) should be targetted on efficient practices.
Also, to increase the visitor sense of responsibility, a visitor log should be used in each barn.
The ease and comfort of handwashing may be a critical point : knee or foot command for the tap, hot water (which however requires higher investment costs), location of the sink inside the hygiene lock.
I believe that the answer to this question really depends on the skills of the farmers to his own building/fixing, as the handwork may increase the prices.
It also depends on already existing spaces or not on a barn.
It appears that the higher cost for hygiene lock construction is related to installing a sink (the sink itself + plumbing expenses when pipes have to be added).
Some companies propose fully equipped “mobile” hygiene locks (they mey be added in front of a door) for 2000-3000 euros. Finally, apart from the sink, the equipement may be very cheap (bench, hooks on the walls, bin, …).
I have even seen on some farms hygiene locks made from recycled garden’s huts.
Disinfectant gels have received a considerable attention during COVID-19 crisis, and they use could perhaps be made easier from now on in farms. In the case it is not affordable to have a sink in a hygiene lock (many small units in small scale farms for example) it is pretty convenient. Their efficacy is judged as acceptable, even in the presence of very little organic matter on the hands, as tested for poultry catching crews https://www.medvet.umontreal.ca/crsv/medias/uploads/2012/02/M.Racicot_Assessing_most_practical_effective_protocols_sanitise_hands_poultry_catching_crews_members.pdf. The fact that it takes less time than a proper handwash may also increase compliance by the hygiene lock users. In hygiene locks already equiped with a sink, disinfectant gels could be used after handwash to increase its efficacy.
Rules for farm hygiene lock versus poultry barn hygiene lock may differ between countries and production types. Poultry barns should have their own hygiene lock, otherwise contamination between barns/flocks is favored, as well as contamination between the “working zone” (feed delivery, tractors, etc.) to the poultry barn. A central farm hygiene lock can be a supplementary tool to reduce contamination, when biosecurity need is increased, but may be less efficient for the drivers of vehicles which enter the farm, as they go back to the vehicle cabin afterwards. For all other pedestrians who parked outside the farm zone (employees, vets, advisors, etc.) it should improve the biosecurity.
In conclusion I think that both are complementary, and barn hygiene lock a minimal requirement
The minimum equipement should allow the following actions : efficient handwash and a proper respect of hygiene lock zoning, when changing overalls and shoes (boots, shoe cover).
(1) Efficient handwash require a sink + disposable paper towels + soap at the very minimum, and hot water would be much confortable and increase handwashing compliance, as well as a foot command for the tap.
(2) the respect of zoning require a visible limit between the zones and I would suggest to have at least a plank or a bench to clearly symbolise this limit. A bench naturally makes it easier to change shoes without making contamination mistakes
(3) also the hygiene lock should provide things to hang your clothes to, on both sides of the limit, and naturally the appropriate clothes/boots/shoe covers