Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks

The <i>Salmonella</i> monitoring program, as outlined in the EU Commission regulation 200/2010, asks for repeated sampling in order to ascertain progress in achievement of the EU target. According to Article 2.2.2.2.c of this regulation, the competent authority may decide to do a resampl...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Eduardo Costa, Armin Elbers, Miriam Koene, Andre Steentjes, Henk Wisselink, Peter Wijnen, Jose Gonzales
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	MDPI AG 2021
Materias:	<i>Salmonella</i> monitoring poultry breeding flocks retesting false-positive positive predicted value Biology (General) QH301-705.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/f97980595aba418a943f19dd1d633f28
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:f97980595aba418a943f19dd1d633f28
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:f97980595aba418a943f19dd1d633f282021-11-25T18:24:19ZQualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks10.3390/microorganisms91122152076-2607https://doaj.org/article/f97980595aba418a943f19dd1d633f282021-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/9/11/2215https://doaj.org/toc/2076-2607The <i>Salmonella</i> monitoring program, as outlined in the EU Commission regulation 200/2010, asks for repeated sampling in order to ascertain progress in achievement of the EU target. According to Article 2.2.2.2.c of this regulation, the competent authority may decide to do a resample and retest when it has reasons to question the results of initial testing. In the Netherlands, the competent authorities have been resampling and retesting all initial positive samplings for several years because of doubts about false positive initial test results. An analysis of population data in the period 2015–2019 indicates that 48% of initial samplings at the farm were classified as false positive after resampling and retesting by the competent authorities. A qualitative analysis, assessing factors that could be associated with the occurrence of false positives, indicates that cross-contamination during the sampling process by the poultry farmer is probably the most likely source. Cross-contamination of samples during transport from the farm to the laboratory and/or cross-contamination at the laboratory are also considered possible sources. Given the slightly non-optimal system-specificity of the <i>Salmonella</i> monitoring program, there is good reason to make, or consider, standard resampling and retesting of initial positive results by the competent veterinary authorities possible within the EU.Eduardo CostaArmin ElbersMiriam KoeneAndre SteentjesHenk WisselinkPeter WijnenJose GonzalesMDPI AGarticle<i>Salmonella</i> monitoringpoultry breeding flocksretestingfalse-positivepositive predicted valueBiology (General)QH301-705.5ENMicroorganisms, Vol 9, Iss 2215, p 2215 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	<i>Salmonella</i> monitoring poultry breeding flocks retesting false-positive positive predicted value Biology (General) QH301-705.5
spellingShingle	<i>Salmonella</i> monitoring poultry breeding flocks retesting false-positive positive predicted value Biology (General) QH301-705.5 Eduardo Costa Armin Elbers Miriam Koene Andre Steentjes Henk Wisselink Peter Wijnen Jose Gonzales Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks
description	The <i>Salmonella</i> monitoring program, as outlined in the EU Commission regulation 200/2010, asks for repeated sampling in order to ascertain progress in achievement of the EU target. According to Article 2.2.2.2.c of this regulation, the competent authority may decide to do a resample and retest when it has reasons to question the results of initial testing. In the Netherlands, the competent authorities have been resampling and retesting all initial positive samplings for several years because of doubts about false positive initial test results. An analysis of population data in the period 2015–2019 indicates that 48% of initial samplings at the farm were classified as false positive after resampling and retesting by the competent authorities. A qualitative analysis, assessing factors that could be associated with the occurrence of false positives, indicates that cross-contamination during the sampling process by the poultry farmer is probably the most likely source. Cross-contamination of samples during transport from the farm to the laboratory and/or cross-contamination at the laboratory are also considered possible sources. Given the slightly non-optimal system-specificity of the <i>Salmonella</i> monitoring program, there is good reason to make, or consider, standard resampling and retesting of initial positive results by the competent veterinary authorities possible within the EU.
format	article
author	Eduardo Costa Armin Elbers Miriam Koene Andre Steentjes Henk Wisselink Peter Wijnen Jose Gonzales
author_facet	Eduardo Costa Armin Elbers Miriam Koene Andre Steentjes Henk Wisselink Peter Wijnen Jose Gonzales
author_sort	Eduardo Costa
title	Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks
title_short	Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks
title_full	Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks
title_fullStr	Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks
title_full_unstemmed	Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks
title_sort	qualitative evaluation of causes for routine <i>salmonella</i> monitoring false-positive test results in dutch poultry breeding flocks
publisher	MDPI AG
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/f97980595aba418a943f19dd1d633f28
work_keys_str_mv	AT eduardocosta qualitativeevaluationofcausesforroutineisalmonellaimonitoringfalsepositivetestresultsindutchpoultrybreedingflocks AT arminelbers qualitativeevaluationofcausesforroutineisalmonellaimonitoringfalsepositivetestresultsindutchpoultrybreedingflocks AT miriamkoene qualitativeevaluationofcausesforroutineisalmonellaimonitoringfalsepositivetestresultsindutchpoultrybreedingflocks AT andresteentjes qualitativeevaluationofcausesforroutineisalmonellaimonitoringfalsepositivetestresultsindutchpoultrybreedingflocks AT henkwisselink qualitativeevaluationofcausesforroutineisalmonellaimonitoringfalsepositivetestresultsindutchpoultrybreedingflocks AT peterwijnen qualitativeevaluationofcausesforroutineisalmonellaimonitoringfalsepositivetestresultsindutchpoultrybreedingflocks AT josegonzales qualitativeevaluationofcausesforroutineisalmonellaimonitoringfalsepositivetestresultsindutchpoultrybreedingflocks
_version_	1718411235749265408

Qualitative Evaluation of Causes for Routine <i>Salmonella</i> Monitoring False-Positive Test Results in Dutch Poultry Breeding Flocks

Ejemplares similares