7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Biofilms as a microbial hazard in the food industry: A scoping review

      , , , ,
      Journal of Applied Microbiology
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Biofilms pose a serious public health hazard with a significant economic impact on the food industry. The present scoping review is designed to analyse the literature published during 2001–2020 on biofilm formation of microbes, their detection methods, and association with antimicrobial resistance (if any). The peer-reviewed articles retrieved from 04 electronic databases were assessed using PRISMA-ScR guidelines. From the 978 preliminary search results, a total of 88 publications were included in the study. On analysis, the commonly isolated pathogens were Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella spp., Escherichia coli, Bacillus spp., Vibrio spp., Campylobacter jejuni and Clostridium perfringens. The biofilm-forming ability of microbes was found to be influenced by various factors such as attachment surfaces, temperature, presence of other species, nutrient availability etc. A total of 18 studies characterized the biofilm-forming genes, particularly for S. aureus, Salmonella spp., and E. coli. In most studies, polystyrene plate and/or stainless-steel coupons were used for biofilm formation, and the detection was carried out by crystal violet assays and/or by plate counting method. The strain-specific significant differences in biofilm formation were observed in many studies, and few studies carried out analysis of multi-species biofilms. The association between biofilm formation and antimicrobial resistance was not clearly defined. Further, viable but non-culturable form of the foodborne pathogens is posing an unseen (by conventional cultivation techniques) but potent threat to the food safety. The present review recommends the need for carrying out systematic surveys and risk analysis of biofilms in food chain to highlight the evidence-based public health concerns, especially in regions where microbiological food hazards are quite prevalent.

          Related collections

          Most cited references237

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

              Background Scoping studies are an increasingly popular approach to reviewing health research evidence. In 2005, Arksey and O'Malley published the first methodological framework for conducting scoping studies. While this framework provides an excellent foundation for scoping study methodology, further clarifying and enhancing this framework will help support the consistency with which authors undertake and report scoping studies and may encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process. Discussion We build upon our experiences conducting three scoping studies using the Arksey and O'Malley methodology to propose recommendations that clarify and enhance each stage of the framework. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question (stage one); balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process (stage two); using an iterative team approach to selecting studies (stage three) and extracting data (stage four); incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis, reporting results, and considering the implications of study findings to policy, practice, or research (stage five); and incorporating consultation with stakeholders as a required knowledge translation component of scoping study methodology (stage six). Lastly, we propose additional considerations for scoping study methodology in order to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research. Summary Specific recommendations to clarify and enhance this methodology are outlined for each stage of the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness and rigor of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Journal of Applied Microbiology
                Wiley
                1365-2672
                1364-5072
                October 01 2022
                October 01 2022
                October 01 2022
                October 01 2022
                October 01 2022
                October 01 2022
                : 133
                : 4
                : 2210-2234
                Article
                10.1111/jam.15766
                35945912
                04efcb18-eb0c-42ca-a665-41ce37def959
                © 2022

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article