五种餐具消毒方法消毒效果及日常监测调查  

Investigation on the effect of five disinfection methods for tableware and routine detection

作　　者：王文一 赵佳 沈震宇 

机构地区：[1]上海市虹口区卫生局卫生监督所,上海200437

出　　处：《上海预防医学》2001年第9期422-424,共3页Shanghai Journal of Preventive Medicine

摘　　要：[目的 ]　评价不同餐具消毒方法对大肠菌群的消毒效果并与日常监测的结果比较。 [方法 ]　对 30家饭店、饮食店、宾馆餐具的清洗过程、消毒方法、消毒时间、保洁方法进行调查 ,采集消毒前后餐具样品检测大肠菌群 ,并与跟踪调查、日常监测结果比较。 [结果 ]　对大肠杆菌的消毒效果 ,煮沸、电子消毒柜、药物法分别为 1 0 0 %、1 0 0 %、91 .84% ,三者差异不显著 ;蒸汽法为 82 .36 % ,洗碗机为 6 5.0 0 % ,与药物法比较差异显著。跟踪调查与初次调查比较 ,除洗碗机外 ,其余方法差别无显著意义。跟踪调查与定点监测比较 ,差异无显著性。与日常监测比较 ,差别有极显著意义。 [结论 ]　五种餐具消毒方法均有效 ,尤以煮沸和药物为佳。日常监测消毒效果较差。To evaluate the effect of several disinfection methods and compare with that of routine detection. The cleaning course, time for disinfection, and method for keeping of tableware in 30 restaurants, hotels and dietary shops were investigated. Samples before and after disinfection were collected. Follow up samples as well as routine detection samples were also taken. Every sample was detected for coliform group. The effective rate of disinfection by boiling, using disinfect-tank and disinfectant was 100%,100%,and 91.84% respectively, difference was non-significant. The disinfection rate by steamming was 82.36%, by washing bowl machinery was 65.00%, and the differences with the formers were significant. Compared the first and the follow up investigation, all methods showed difference non significant except the washing bowl machinery. Compared the fixed-point and follow up investigation, difference was non-significant. Compared with the routine detection, the difference were extremely significant. [Conclusion] Among the five methods for disinfection of tableware, boiling and disinfectant were the best, others were also effective. The effects of routine detection for tableware disinfection was not good.

关 键 词：餐具 消毒 大肠菌群 饮食业卫生 

分 类 号：R155.6[医药卫生—营养与食品卫生学]