Search

Abstract Aims--To assess the effect on health visitor action of providing community health visitors with information on all injury attendances in children under 5 attending an accident and emergency (A&E) [...]

Background: Patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds are underserved in randomised controlled trials, yet they experience a much greater burden of disease compared with patients from socioeconomically advantaged areas. It is crucial to make trials more inclusive to ensure that treatments and interventions are safe and effective in real-world contexts. Improving how information about trials is verbally communicated is an unexplored strategy to make trials more inclusive. This study examined how trials are communicated verbally, comparing consultations involving patients from the most and least socioeconomically disadvantaged areas., Methods: Secondary qualitative analysis of 55 trial consultation transcripts from 41 patients, sampled from 3 qualitative studies embedded in their respective UK multi-site, cancer-related randomised controlled trials. Patients living in the most and least socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, defined using English Indices of Multiple Deprivation decile scores, were purposively sampled. Analysis was largely thematic and drew on the constant comparison method., Results: Recruiters communicated clinical uncertainty in a similar way for patients living in different socioeconomic areas. Consultations with disadvantaged patients were, on average, half the duration of those with advantaged patients, and tended to involve recruiters providing less in-depth explanations of trial concepts, used phrasing that softened trial arm risks, and described trial processes (e.g. randomisation) using informal or metaphorical phrasing. Disadvantaged and advantaged patients differed in the concerns they expressed; disadvantaged patients voiced fewer concerns and asked fewer questions but were also less likely to be invited to do so by recruiters., Conclusion: Interactions about trials unfolded in different ways between patients living in different socioeconomic areas, likely due to both patient- and recruiter-related factors. We present considerations for recruiters when discussing trials with patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, aimed at enhancing trial communication. Future research should examine disadvantaged patients' and recruiters' experiences of verbal trial communication to inform guidance that addresses the needs and preferences of underserved groups., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: We report on a study of a facilitated interactive group learning approach, through Collaborative Implementation Groups (CIGs), established to enhance capacity for equity-sensitive evaluation of healthcare services to inform local decision-making: (1) What was the experience of participants of the CIGs? (2) How was knowledge mobilisation achieved? (3) What are the key elements that enhance the process of coproducing equity-sensitive evaluations?, Methods: A thematic analysis of qualitative data obtained from focus group (FG) discussions and semistructured interviews exploring the experiences of participants. All FGs included representation of participants from different projects across the programme. Interviews were conducted with a member from each of the teams participating in the first cohort after their final workshop., Results: We identified four themes to illustrate how the approach to delivering intensive and facilitated training supported equity-sensitive evaluations of local healthcare services: (1) Creating the setting for coproduction and knowledge mobilisation; (2) establishing a common purpose, meaning and language for reducing health inequalities; (3) making connections and brokering relationships and (4) challenging and transforming the role of evaluation., Conclusion: We report on the implementation of a practical example of engaged scholarship, where teams of healthcare staff were supported with resources, interactive training and methodological advice to evaluate their own services, enabling organisations to assemble timely practical and relevant evidence that could feed directly into local decision-making. By encouraging mixed teams of practitioners, commissioners, patients, the public and researchers to work together to coproduce their evaluations, the programme also aimed to systematise health equity into service change. The findings of our study illustrate that the approach to delivering training gave participants the tools and confidence to address their organisation's stated aims of reducing health inequalities, coproduce evaluations of their local services and mobilise knowledge from a range of stakeholders., Patient or Public Contribution: The research question was developed collaboratively with researchers, partner organisations and public advisers (PAs). PAs were involved in meetings to agree on the focus of this research and to plan the analysis. N. T. is a PA and coauthor, contributing to the interpretation of findings and drafting of the paper., (© 2023 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Exposure to air pollution has a detrimental effect on health and disproportionately affects people living in socio-economically disadvantaged areas. Engaging with communities to identify concerns and solutions could support organisations responsible for air quality control, improve environmental decision-making, and widen understanding of air quality issues associated with health. This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of approaches used to engage communities in addressing air quality and identify the outcomes that have been achieved., Methods: Searches for studies that described community engagement in air quality activities were conducted across five databases (Academic Search Complete, CABI, GreenFILE, MEDLINE, Web of Science). Data on study characteristics, community engagement approach, and relevant outcomes were extracted. The review process was informed by a multi-stakeholder group with an interest in and experience of community engagement in air quality. Thirty-nine papers from thirty studies were included in the final synthesis., Conclusion: A range of approaches have been used to engage communities in addressing air quality, most notably air quality monitoring. Positive outcomes included increased awareness, capacity building, and changes to organisational policy and practice. Longer-term projects and further exploration of the impact of community engagement on improving air quality and health are needed as reporting on these outcomes was limited., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Air quality is monitored at a local level in the UK as part of the Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) system. If air quality objectives within an area are not achieved an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) is declared and action plan developed. The efficacy of this system in reducing air pollution has increasingly come into question, however very little is known about its impact on health or health inequalities. We therefore investigated the effect of declaring an AQMA on emergency hospitalisations for respiratory conditions in the North West Coast region of England, and examined whether the effect differed between more compared to less deprived neighbourhoods., Methods: This longitudinal controlled ecological study analysed neighbourhoods located within or touching the boundaries of AQMAs declared in the North West Coast region between 2006 and 2016. Each of these intervention neighbourhoods were matched with five control neighbourhoods which had never been located within/touching an AQMA boundary. Difference-in-differences methods were used to compare the change in hospitalisation rates in the intervention neighbourhoods to the change in hospitalisation rates in the matched control neighbourhoods, before and after the declaration of an AQMA., Results: In total, 108 intervention neighbourhoods and 540 control neighbourhoods were analysed over the period 2005-2017, giving a total sample size of 8424 neighbourhood-years. Emergency hospitalisations for respiratory conditions decreased in the intervention neighbourhoods by 158 per 100,000 per year [95% CI 90 to 227] after an AQMA was declared relative to the control neighbourhoods. There was a larger decrease in hospitalisation rates following the declaration of an AQMA in more compared to less income deprived neighbourhoods., Conclusions: Our results suggest the LAQM system has contributed to a reduction in emergency hospitalisations for respiratory conditions, and may represent an effective strategy to reduce inequalities in health. These findings highlight the importance of measuring the success of air quality policies not just in terms of air pollution but also in terms of population health., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Public and Patient Involvement, Engagement and Participation research encompasses working with patients/service users (people with a medical condition receiving health service treatment), public members, caregivers and communities (who use services or care for patients). The Partner Priority Programme (PPP) was developed by the National Health Service [NHS] and National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care [NIHR CLAHRC] NWC to share information and experience on evaluating new services being offered to patients that were seeking to reduce health inequalities, improve people's health and wellbeing and reduce emergency hospital admissions. This paper seeks to explore an approach developed for involving the public as equal partners within the evaluation and decision-making processes of health and social care services research. The aim of this study was to identify how public advisors were included, the impact of their involvement, and how change occurred within the organisations following their involvement., Methods: A qualitative approach using focus group discussions was adopted to explore the experiences of two cohorts of participants involved in PPP project teams. Focus groups were held with public advisors (n = 9), interns (n = 9; staff or public who received a funded internship for a PPP project), NHS and Local Authority initiative leads (n = 10), and academic facilitators (n = 14). These were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach., Results: Thirty-two public advisors were recruited to support 25 PPP projects across the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and CLAHRC North West Coast [NWC] partner organisations. Three inter-related themes were conceptualised: 1)"Where it all started - involving public advisors" identified the varying journeys to recruitment and experiences of becoming a public advisor; 2)"Steps toward active involvement and engagement" related to public advisors becoming core team members; and 3) "Collaborative working to enhance public and patient involvement" relayed how projects identified the benefits of working jointly with the public advisors, particularly for those who had not experienced this style of working before., Conclusions: The findings indicate that the PPP model is effective for embedding Public and Patient Involvement [PPI] within health services research, and recommends that PPI is integrated at the earliest opportunity within research projects and service evaluations through the use of support-led and facilitative programmes.

Background: Action to address the structural determinants of health inequalities is prioritized in high-level initiatives such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and many national health strategies. Yet, the focus of much local policy and practice is on behaviour change. Research shows that whilst lifestyle approaches can improve population health, at best they fail to reduce health inequalities because they fail to address upstream structural determinants of behaviour and health outcomes. In health research, most efforts have been directed at three streams of work: understanding causal pathways; evaluating the equity impact of national policy; and developing and evaluating lifestyle/behavioural approaches to health improvement. As a result, there is a dearth of research on effective interventions to reduce health inequalities that can be developed and implemented at a local level., Objective: To describe an initiative that aimed to mainstream a focus on health equity in a large-scale research collaboration in the United Kingdom and to assess the impact on organizational culture, research processes and individual research practice., Methods: The study used multiple qualitative methods including semi-structured interviews, focus groups and workshops (n = 131 respondents including Public Advisers, university, National Health Service (NHS), and local and document review., Results: utilizing Extended Normalization Process Theory (ENPT) and gender mainstreaming theory, the evaluation illuminated (i) the processes developed by Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care North West Coast to integrate ways of thinking and acting to tackle the upstream social determinants of health inequities (i.e. to mainstream a health equity focus) and (ii) the factors that promoted or frustrated these efforts., Conclusions: Findings highlight the role of contextual factors and processes aimed at developing and implementing a robust strategy for mainstreaming health equity as building blocks for transformative change in applied health research.

Introduction: There is an extensive literature on public involvement (PI) in research, but this has focused primarily on experiences for researchers and public contributors and factors enabling or restricting successful involvement in specific projects. There has been less consideration of a 'whole system' approach to embedding PI across an organization from governance structures through to research projects., Objective: To investigate how a combination of two theoretical frameworks, one focused on mainstreaming and the other conceptualizing quality, can illuminate the embedding of positive and influential PI throughout a research organization., Methods: The study used data from the evaluation of a large UK research collaboration. Primary data were collected from 131 respondents (including Public Advisers, university, NHS and local government staff) via individual and group interviews/workshops. Secondary sources included monitoring data and internal documents., Findings: CLAHRC-NWC made real progress in mainstreaming PI. An organizational vision and infrastructure to embed PI at all levels were created, and the number and range of opportunities increased; PI roles became more clearly defined and increasingly public contributors felt able to influence decisions. However, the aspiration to mainstream PI throughout the collaboration was not fully achieved: a lack of staff 'buy-in' meant that in some areas, it was not experienced as positively or was absent., Conclusion: The two theoretical frameworks brought a novel perspective, facilitating the investigation of the quality of PI in structures and processes across the whole organization. We propose that combining these frameworks can assist the evaluation of PI research., (© 2020 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The Applied Biosystems™ RapidFinder™ STEC Detection Workflow (Thermo Fisher Scientific) is a complete protocol for the rapid qualitative detection of Escherichia coli (E. coli) O157:H7 and the "Big 6" non-O157 Shiga-like toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) serotypes (defined as serogroups: O26, O45, O103, O111, O121, and O145). The RapidFinder STEC Detection Workflow makes use of either the automated preparation of PCR-ready DNA using the Applied Biosystems PrepSEQ™ Nucleic Acid Extraction Kit in conjunction with the Applied Biosystems MagMAX™ Express 96-well magnetic particle processor or the Applied Biosystems PrepSEQ Rapid Spin kit for manual preparation of PCR-ready DNA. Two separate assays comprise the RapidFinder STEC Detection Workflow, the Applied Biosystems RapidFinder STEC Screening Assay and the Applied Biosystems RapidFinder STEC Confirmation Assay. The RapidFinder STEC Screening Assay includes primers and probes to detect the presence of stx1 (Shiga toxin 1), stx2 (Shiga toxin 2), eae (intimin), and E. coli O157 gene targets. The RapidFinder STEC Confirmation Assay includes primers and probes for the "Big 6" non-O157 STEC and E. coli O157:H7. The use of these two assays in tandem allows a user to detect accurately the presence of the "Big 6" STECs and E. coli O157:H7. The performance of the RapidFinder STEC Detection Workflow was evaluated in a method comparison study, in inclusivity and exclusivity studies, and in a robustness evaluation. The assays were compared to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) Microbiology Laboratory Guidebook (MLG) 5.09: Detection, Isolation and Identification of Escherichia coli O157:H7 from Meat Products and Carcass and Environmental Sponges for raw ground beef (73% lean) and USDA/FSIS-MLG 5B.05: Detection, Isolation and Identification of Escherichia coli non-O157:H7 from Meat Products and Carcass and Environmental Sponges for raw beef trim. No statistically significant differences were observed between the reference method and the individual or combined kits forming the candidate assay using either of the DNA preparation kits (manual or automated extraction). For the inclusivity and exclusivity evaluation, the RapidFinder STEC Detection Workflow, comprising both RapidFinder STEC screening and confirmation kits, correctly identified all 50 target organism isolates and correctly excluded all 30 nontarget strains for both of the assays evaluated. The results of these studies demonstrate the sensitivity and selectivity of the RapidFinder STEC Detection Workflow for the detection of E. coli O157:H7 and the "Big 6" STEC serotypes in both raw ground beef and beef trim. The robustness testing demonstrated that minor variations in the method parameters did not impact the accuracy of the assay and highlighted the importance of following the correct incubation temperatures.

The Thermo Scientific SureTect™ Salmonella species real-time PCR assay is a rapid alternative method designed for the detection of salmonellae in a wide range of foods, animal feeds, and production-environment samples. The assay has previously been validated according to the AOAC Research Institute Performance Tested Methods(SM) program using Thermo Scientific PikoReal™ PCR cycler and Thermo Scientific SureTect Software Performance Tested Method 051303). This report details the method-modification study performed to validate an updated assay format, utilizing a reduced target probe concentration and an extension of the PCR cycler platform to enable the use of the kit with a Applied Biosystems 7500 Fast PCR cycler and Applied Biosystems RapidFinder™ Express 2.0 software. During this validation study, a matrix study was conducted on a subset of the method's claimed matrixes, comparing the performance of the modified SureTect Salmonella species kit (a reduced target probe concentration with a 7500 Fast platform) to the reference method detailed in ISO 6579:2002. No significant difference by probability of detection statistical analysis was found between SureTect or International Organization for Standardization methods for any of the matrixes analyzed during the study. Inclusivity and exclusivity studies using the modified method demonstrated accurate results for the 117 Salmonella and 36 non-Salmonella strains tested. Multiple production lots of the newly formatted kit were evaluated and found to be consistent with the current assay. Robustness studies confirmed that the change to the kit had no impact on the assay's performance when alterations were made to method parameters having the greatest potential impact on assay performance.

In 2013, the Thermo Scientific™ SureTect™ Listeria monocytogenes Real-Time PCR Assay was certified by the AOAC Research Institute (RI) Performance Tested Methods(SM) program as a rapid method for the detection of L. monocytogenes from a wide range of food matrixes and surface samples. This report details the method modification studies undertaken to extend the analysis of this PCR assay to the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast PCR Instrument and Applied Biosystems RapidFinder™ Express 2.0 software allowing the use of the SureTect assay on a 96 well format PCR cycler in addition to the current workflow, which uses the 24 well Thermo Scientific PikoReal™ PCR Instrument and Thermo Scientific SureTect software. Because this study was deemed by AOAC-RI to be a level 2 method modification study, a representative range of food matrixes covering raw ground turkey, 2% fat pasteurized milk, and bagged lettuce as well as stainless steel surface samples were analyzed with the Applied Biosystems 7500 Fast PCR Instrument and RapidFinder Express 2.0 software. All testing was conducted in comparison to the reference method detailed in International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 6579:2002. No significant difference by probability of detection statistical analysis was found between the SureTect Listeria monocytogenes PCR Assay or the ISO reference method methods for any of the matrixes analyzed during the study.

The Thermo Scientific™ SureTect™ Listeria species assay is a new real-time PCR assay for the detection of all species of Listeria in food and environmental samples. The assay was originally certified as Performance Tested Methods(SM) (PTM) 071304 in 2013. This report details the method modification study undertaken to extend the performance claims of the assay for matrixes of raw ground turkey, raw ground pork, bagged lettuce, raw pork sausages, pasteurized 2% fat milk, raw cod, pasteurized brie cheese, and ice cream. The method modification study was conducted using the AOAC Research Institute (RI) PTM program to validate the SureTect PCR assay in comparison to the reference method detailed in ISO 11290-1:1996 including amendment 1:2004. All matrixes were tested by Thermo Fisher Scientific (Basingstoke, United Kingdom). In addition, three matrixes (raw cod, bagged lettuce, and pasteurized brie cheese) were analyzed independently as part of the AOAC RI-controlled independent laboratory study by the University of Guelph, Canada. Using probability of detection statistical analysis, there was no significant difference in the performance between the SureTect assay and the International Organization for Standardization reference method for any of the matrixes analyzed in this study.

The Thermo Scientific™ SureTect™ Listeria species Real-Time PCR Assay was certified during 2013 by the AOAC Research Institute (RI) Performance Tested Methods(SM) program as a rapid method for the detection of Listeria species from a wide range of food matrixes and surface samples. A method modification study was conducted in 2015 to extend the matrix claims of the product to a wider range of food matrixes. This report details the method modification study undertaken to extend the use of this PCR kit to the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast PCR Instrument and Applied Biosystems RapidFinder™ Express 2.0 software allowing use of the assay on a 96-well format PCR cycler in addition to the current workflow, using the 24-well Thermo Scientific PikoReal™ PCR Instrument and Thermo Scientific SureTect software. The method modification study presented in this report was assessed by the AOAC-RI as being a level 2 method modification study, necessitating a method developer study on a representative range of food matrixes covering raw ground turkey, 2% fat pasteurized milk, and bagged lettuce as well as stainless steel surface samples. All testing was conducted in comparison to the reference method detailed in International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 6579:2002. No significant difference by probability of detection statistical analysis was found between the SureTect Listeria species PCR Assay or the ISO reference method methods for any of the three food matrixes and the surface samples analyzed during the study.

A method modification validation study was conducted to validate the Applied Biosystems MicroSEQ™ Salmonella spp. Detection Kit for the detection of Salmonella spp. in 375 g samples of dried pet food. The MicroSEQ assay protocol, using the Applied Biosystems PrepSEQ™ Rapid Spin DNA Sample Preparation Kit, was compared to the reference method detailed in the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM; Chapter 5, Salmonella) for detection of Salmonella spp. For each method, 20 replicates were analyzed at a low contamination level of 0.2-2 CFU/test portion, five replicates were analyzed at a high level of contamination of 2-5 CFU/test portion, and five control replicates were also analyzed at 0 CFU/test portion (uninoculated). Statistical analysis was conducted using the Probability of Detection statistical test to determine the ability of the MicroSEQ Salmonella spp. Detection Kit to detect Salmonella from 375 g samples of dried pet food in comparison to the FDA-BAM reference method. The results demonstrated that the MicroSEQ Salmonella spp. Detection Kit was able to accurately detect Salmonella spp. present in dry pet food after an enrichment time of 20 h.

The Thermo Scientific™ SureTect™ Escherichia coli O157:H7 Assay is a new real-time PCR assay which has been validated through the AOAC Research Institute (RI) Performance Tested Methods(SM) program for raw beef and produce matrixes. This validation study specifically validated the assay with 375 g 1:4 and 1:5 ratios of raw ground beef and raw beef trim in comparison to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety Inspection Service, Microbiology Laboratory Guidebook (USDS-FSIS/MLG) reference method and 25 g bagged spinach and fresh apple juice at a ratio of 1:10, in comparison to the reference method detailed in the International Organization for Standardization 16654:2001 reference method. For raw beef matrixes, the validation of both 1:4 and 1:5 allows user flexibility with the enrichment protocol, although which of these two ratios chosen by the laboratory should be based on specific test requirements. All matrixes were analyzed by Thermo Fisher Scientific, Microbiology Division, Vantaa, Finland, and Q Laboratories Inc, Cincinnati, Ohio, in the method developer study. Two of the matrixes (raw ground beef at both 1:4 and 1:5 ratios) and bagged spinach were additionally analyzed in the AOAC-RI controlled independent laboratory study, which was conducted by Marshfield Food Safety, Marshfield, Wisconsin. Using probability of detection statistical analysis, no significant difference was demonstrated by the SureTect kit in comparison to the USDA FSIS reference method for raw beef matrixes, or with the ISO reference method for matrixes of bagged spinach and apple juice. Inclusivity and exclusivity testing was conducted with 58 E. coli O157:H7 and 54 non-E. coli O157:H7 isolates, respectively, which demonstrated that the SureTect assay was able to detect all isolates of E. coli O157:H7 analyzed. In addition, all but one of the nontarget isolates were correctly interpreted as negative by the SureTect Software. The single isolate giving a positive result was an E. coli O157:NM isolate. Nonmotile isolates of E. coli O157 have been demonstrated to still contain the H7 gene; therefore, this result is not unexpected. Robustness testing was conducted to evaluate the performance of the SureTect assay with specific deviations to the assay protocol, which were outside the recommended parameters and which are open to variation. This study demonstrated that the SureTect assay gave reliable performance. A final study to verify the shelf life of the product, under accelerated conditions was also conducted.

The Thermo Scientific™ SureTect™ Listeria monocytogenes assay is a real-time PCR assay for the detection of Listeria monocytogenes in food and environmental samples, which was certified during 2013 by the AOAC Research Institute (RI) as Performance Tested Method(SM) (PTM) 061302 for a representative range of key food matrixes and production surfaces. This report details the method modification study, which was conducted during 2014, using the AOAC-RI PTM program to extend the validated matrix claims of the assay in comparison to the reference method detailed in International Organization for Standardization 11290-1:1996, including Amendment 1:2004, to gain certification for raw ground turkey, raw ground pork, pasteurized 2% milk, raw pork sausages, raw cod, pasteurized brie cheese, cooked sliced ham, and bagged lettuce. All matrixes were tested by Thermo Fisher Scientific, Microbiology Division, Basingstoke, UK. In addition, brie cheese, bagged lettuce, and raw cod were analyzed independently by the University of Guelph, Canada, during the AOAC-RI controlled independent laboratory study. Using probability of detection (POD) statistical analysis, a significant difference was demonstrated between the candidate and reference methods for the high spiking level with raw ground pork and brie cheese. For all other matrixes and the low spiked levels for raw ground pork and brie cheese, no significant difference by POD was seen between the two methods during the study.

The Thermo Scientific SureTect Salmonella species Assay is a new real-time PCR assay for the detection of Salmonellae in food and environmental samples. This validation study was conducted using the AOAC Research Institute (RI) Performance Tested Methods program to validate the SureTect Salmonella species Assay in comparison to the reference method detailed in International Organization for Standardization 6579:2002 in a variety of food matrixes, namely, raw ground beef, raw chicken breast, raw ground pork, fresh bagged lettuce, pork frankfurters, nonfat dried milk powder, cooked peeled shrimp, pasteurized liquid whole egg, ready-to-eat meal containing beef, and stainless steel surface samples. With the exception of liquid whole egg and fresh bagged lettuce, which were tested in-house, all matrixes were tested by Marshfield Food Safety, Marshfield, WI, on behalf of Thermo Fisher Scientific. In addition, three matrixes (pork frankfurters, lettuce, and stainless steel surface samples) were analyzed independently as part of the AOAC-RI-controlled laboratory study by the University of Guelph, Canada. No significant difference by probability of detection or McNemars Chi-squared statistical analysis was found between the candidate or reference methods for any of the food matrixes or environmental surface samples tested during the validation study. Inclusivity and exclusivity testing was conducted with 117 and 36 isolates, respectively, which demonstrated that the SureTect Salmonella species Assay was able to detect all the major groups of Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica (e.g., Typhimurium) and the less common subspecies of S. enterica (e.g., arizoniae) and the rarely encountered S. bongori. None of the exclusivity isolates analyzed were detected by the SureTect Salmonella species Assay. Ruggedness testing was conducted to evaluate the performance of the assay with specific method deviations outside of the recommended parameters open to variation (enrichment time and temperature, and lysis temperature), which demonstrated that the assay gave reliable performance. Accelerated stability testing was additionally conducted, validating the assay shelf life.

The Thermo Scientific SureTect Listeria species Assay is a new real-time PCR assay for the detection of all species of Listeria in food and environmental samples. This validation study was conducted using the AOAC Research Institute (RI) Performance Tested Methods program to validate the SureTect Listeria species Assay in comparison to the reference method detailed in International Organization for Standardization 11290-1:1996 including amendment 1:2004 in a variety of foods plus plastic and stainless steel. The food matrixes validated were smoked salmon, processed cheese, fresh bagged spinach, cantaloupe, cooked prawns, cooked sliced turkey meat, cooked sliced ham, salami, pork frankfurters, and raw ground beef. All matrixes were tested by Thermo Fisher Scientific, Microbiology Division, Basingstoke, UK. In addition, three matrixes (pork frankfurters, fresh bagged spinach, and stainless steel surface samples) were analyzed independently as part of the AOAC-RI-controlled independent laboratory study by the University ofGuelph, Canada. Using probability of detection statistical analysis, a significant difference in favour of the SureTect assay was demonstrated between the SureTect and reference method for high level spiked samples of pork frankfurters, smoked salmon, cooked prawns, stainless steel, and low-spiked samples of salami. For all other matrixes, no significant difference was seen between the two methods during the study. Inclusivity testing was conducted with 68 different isolates of Listeria species, all of which were detected by the SureTect Listeria species Assay. None of the 33 exclusivity isolates were detected by the SureTect Listeria species Assay. Ruggedness testing was conducted to evaluate the performance of the assay with specific method deviations outside of the recommended parameters open to variation, which demonstrated that the assay gave reliable performance. Accelerated stability testing was additionally conducted, validating the assay shelf life.

The Thermo Scientific SureTect Listeria monocytogenes Assay is a new real-time PCR assay for the detection of Listeria monocytogenes in food and environmental samples. This assay was validated using the AOAC Research Institute (AOAC-RI) Performance Tested Methods program in comparison to the reference method detailed in International Organization for Standardization 11290-1:1996, including Amendment 1:2004 with the following foods and food contact surfaces: smoked salmon, processed cheese, fresh bagged spinach, fresh cantaloupe, cooked prawns (chilled product), cooked sliced turkey meat (chilled product), ice cream, pork frankfurters, salami, ground raw beef meat (12% fat), plastic, and stainless steel. All matrixes were tested by Thermo Fisher Scientific, Microbiology Division, Basingstoke, UK. In addition, three matrixes (pork frankfurters, bagged lettuce, and stainless steel) were analyzed independently as part of the AOAC-RI controlled laboratory study by the University of Guelph, Canada. Using probability of detection (POD) statistical analysis, a significant difference was demonstrated between the candidate and reference methods for salami, cooked sliced turkey and ice cream in favor of the SureTect assay. For all other matrixes, no significant difference by POD was seen between the two methods during the study. Inclusivity and exclusivity testing was also conducted with 53 and 30 isolates, respectively, which demonstrated that the SureTect assay was able to detect all serotypes of L. monocytogenes. None of the exclusivity isolates analyzed were detected by the SureTect assay. Ruggedness testing was conducted to evaluate the performance of the assay with specific method deviations outside the recommended parameters open to variation, i.e., enrichment time and temperature and lysis temperature, which demonstrated that the assay gave reliable performance. Accelerated stability testing was also conducted, validating the assay shelf life.

I am a student nurse starting my branch programme at Christ Church College, Canterbury.