Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por eng |
Título da fonte: | Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
Texto Completo: | https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1221 |
Resumo: | Introduction: The Best Practices Manual (BPM) and the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are documents that are intended to portray the operations performed by establishments. Objective: In this context, the present work had as objective to emphasize the adequacy of these documents in food services. Method: Thus, the BPMs and SOPs of 15 food services were evaluated on the spot, divided into three categories, using a checklist elaborated based on the sanitary legislation in force. This list consisted of eight items on the BPM and eight on the SOPs and included aspects such as language, presence of mandatory items, storage location and update status of the documents. Results: The average adequacy of BPM andSOPs was 60.62% and 80.50%, respectively. However, differences were observed among the three categories of establishments, with a lower level of adequacy in the food and nutrition units. In addition, some documents did not portray the reality of the places and did not present signatures, fact that indicates lack of commitment of its implementation. The language used was not simple and understandable and many documents were outdated. Conclusions: This analysis allows to conclude that although food services present BPM and SOPs, many points in their elaboration and implementation need to be improved. |
id |
FIOCRUZ-9_fd61af1a783958a7e2bbd1dc93166487 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1221 |
network_acronym_str |
FIOCRUZ-9 |
network_name_str |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of ParanáAdequação do manual de boas práticas e dos procedimentos operacionais padronizados em serviços de alimentação de Ponta Grossa, ParanáLegislação SanitáriaHigiene dos AlimentosManipulação de AlimentosDocumentosHealth LegislationFood HygieneFood HandlingDocumentsIntroduction: The Best Practices Manual (BPM) and the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are documents that are intended to portray the operations performed by establishments. Objective: In this context, the present work had as objective to emphasize the adequacy of these documents in food services. Method: Thus, the BPMs and SOPs of 15 food services were evaluated on the spot, divided into three categories, using a checklist elaborated based on the sanitary legislation in force. This list consisted of eight items on the BPM and eight on the SOPs and included aspects such as language, presence of mandatory items, storage location and update status of the documents. Results: The average adequacy of BPM andSOPs was 60.62% and 80.50%, respectively. However, differences were observed among the three categories of establishments, with a lower level of adequacy in the food and nutrition units. In addition, some documents did not portray the reality of the places and did not present signatures, fact that indicates lack of commitment of its implementation. The language used was not simple and understandable and many documents were outdated. Conclusions: This analysis allows to conclude that although food services present BPM and SOPs, many points in their elaboration and implementation need to be improved. Introdução: O Manual de Boas Práticas (MBP) e os Procedimentos Operacionais Padronizados (POP) são documentos que têm como finalidade retratar as operações executadas pelos estabelecimentos. Objetivo: Nesse contexto, o presente trabalho teve como objetivo analisar a adequação destes documentos em serviços de alimentação. Método: Assim, foram avaliados in loco os MBP e POP de 15 serviços de alimentação, divididos em três categorias, sendo utilizada uma lista de verificação elaborada com base nas legislações sanitárias vigentes. Esta lista era composta por oito itens sobre o MPB e oito sobre os POP e contemplava aspectos como linguagem, presença dos itens obrigatórios, local de armazenamento e estado de atualização dos documentos. Resultados: A média de adequação dos manuais e dos POP foi de 60,62% e 80,50%, respectivamente. Contudo, foram verificadas diferenças entre as três categorias de estabelecimentos, com menor nível de adequação nas unidades de alimentação e nutrição. Além disso, alguns documentos não retratavam a realidade dos locais e não apresentavam assinaturas, fato que aponta falta de compromisso em sua implementação. A linguagem utilizada não era simples e compreensível e muitos documentos estavam desatualizados. Conclusões: Com base nessa análise, conclui-se que embora os serviços de alimentação apresentem MBP e POP, muitos pontos na elaboração e implementação precisam ser melhorados.Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde2019-05-31info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion"Peer-reviewed article""Artículo revisado por pares""Artigo avaliado pelos pares"application/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/122110.22239/2317-269x.01221Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 7 No. 2 (2019): May; 69-74Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 7 Núm. 2 (2019): Puede; 69-74Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 7 n. 2 (2019): Maio; 69-742317-269Xreponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debateinstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZporenghttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1221/1014https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1221/1073Copyright (c) 2019 Vigilância Sanitária em Debate: Sociedade, Ciência & Tecnologia (Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology) – Visa em Debatehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBelphman, CristianeBatistel Szczerepa, Sunáli2023-06-27T15:11:12Zoai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1221Revistahttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebatePUBhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/oaiincqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br2317-269X2317-269Xopendoar:2023-06-27T15:11:12Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná Adequação do manual de boas práticas e dos procedimentos operacionais padronizados em serviços de alimentação de Ponta Grossa, Paraná |
title |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná |
spellingShingle |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná Belphman, Cristiane Legislação Sanitária Higiene dos Alimentos Manipulação de Alimentos Documentos Health Legislation Food Hygiene Food Handling Documents |
title_short |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná |
title_full |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná |
title_fullStr |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná |
title_full_unstemmed |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná |
title_sort |
Adequacy of the best practices manual of and of the standard operating procedures in food services in Ponta Grossa, State of Paraná |
author |
Belphman, Cristiane |
author_facet |
Belphman, Cristiane Batistel Szczerepa, Sunáli |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Batistel Szczerepa, Sunáli |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Belphman, Cristiane Batistel Szczerepa, Sunáli |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Legislação Sanitária Higiene dos Alimentos Manipulação de Alimentos Documentos Health Legislation Food Hygiene Food Handling Documents |
topic |
Legislação Sanitária Higiene dos Alimentos Manipulação de Alimentos Documentos Health Legislation Food Hygiene Food Handling Documents |
description |
Introduction: The Best Practices Manual (BPM) and the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are documents that are intended to portray the operations performed by establishments. Objective: In this context, the present work had as objective to emphasize the adequacy of these documents in food services. Method: Thus, the BPMs and SOPs of 15 food services were evaluated on the spot, divided into three categories, using a checklist elaborated based on the sanitary legislation in force. This list consisted of eight items on the BPM and eight on the SOPs and included aspects such as language, presence of mandatory items, storage location and update status of the documents. Results: The average adequacy of BPM andSOPs was 60.62% and 80.50%, respectively. However, differences were observed among the three categories of establishments, with a lower level of adequacy in the food and nutrition units. In addition, some documents did not portray the reality of the places and did not present signatures, fact that indicates lack of commitment of its implementation. The language used was not simple and understandable and many documents were outdated. Conclusions: This analysis allows to conclude that although food services present BPM and SOPs, many points in their elaboration and implementation need to be improved. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-05-31 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion "Peer-reviewed article" "Artículo revisado por pares" "Artigo avaliado pelos pares" |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1221 10.22239/2317-269x.01221 |
url |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1221 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.22239/2317-269x.01221 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por eng |
language |
por eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1221/1014 https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1221/1073 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 7 No. 2 (2019): May; 69-74 Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 7 Núm. 2 (2019): Puede; 69-74 Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 7 n. 2 (2019): Maio; 69-74 2317-269X reponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debate instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) instacron:FIOCRUZ |
instname_str |
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) |
instacron_str |
FIOCRUZ |
institution |
FIOCRUZ |
reponame_str |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
collection |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
incqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br |
_version_ |
1797042045296050176 |