Foodborne illnesses are defined as diseases, usually either infectious or toxic in nature, caused by agents that enter the body through the ingestion of food. Every person is at risk of foodborne illness. (Food Safety and Foodborne Illness, WHO, March 2007) Foodborne Illness is the sickness people after eating the contaminated food that with pathogenic microorganisms, chemical or physical agents. The victims normally experience one or more symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration, abdominal pain, headache, and fever. It experience different type and severity of symptoms by the type of pathogen in food, amount of contaminated food ate, and the individual’s health status. Foodborne illness may be classified as infection, intoxication, or toxin-mediated infection. Foodborne infections are caused by eating biological hazards along with food. Some common symptoms of infection are nausea, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and fever. Intoxications are caused by consuming food that contains a toxic chemical. Some toxins are produced by microbes. Food intoxications may also caused by consume poisonous plants, fish or food contain chemicals such as pesticides or cleaning agents.
Toxin-mediated infection is caused by eating foods are contaminated by harmful microorganisms that produce toxins inside the human body. The different between toxin-mediated infection and intoxication is toxin of toxin-mediated is produced inside the human body. (McSwane, 2002b) Foodborne illness (also foodborne disease and colloquially referred to as food poisoning) is any illness resulting from the consumption of contaminated food, bacteria, viruses, or parasites that contaminate food, as well as chemical or natural toxins such as poisonous mushrooms. Foodborne illness usually arises from improper handling, preparation, or food storage. Good hygiene practices before, during, and after food preparation can reduce the chances of contracting an illness (Wikipedia, Foodborne Illness)
The purpose of this study is to identify the gaps and extent of the knowledge regarding Foodborne Illness and Diseases of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students of Panpacific University North Philippines in the school year of 2012-2013. Significance of the Study
This study is deemed beneficial to the following:
Students. This will be a great help to the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Students to fill out the gaps and enhance their level of awareness extent to the knowledge in Foodborne Illness and Diseases that will help them to meet the demand and expectation of the customers regarding to the safeness of the food they will intake, especially to maximize the trust and expectation of the consumer to their product safety and quality. HRM Instructors. This will serve as a basis to improve the quality of teaching and to develop strategies and give a better understanding in the diversity of learning of their students. As such, it is hoped that they could develop more effective methodologies in teaching their subject matter for the students to be aware and be more competitive in ensuring the safeness of the foods and reducing the risk cause by the foodborne illness and diseases. The University. The study will serve as an overview information about the extent of knowledge of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Students. Researchers. To apply the knowledge and information gathered. Future Researchers. They may be able to use the result of the study in farther research similar to what the study is. Scope and Delimitation of the Study
The study covers Food Safety & Sanitation that will lead every individual for more information on how to handle problem regarding Foodborne Illness and diseases. This study shows and the importance of knowing the cause and effect of unwanted microorganisms in the food we intake.
This is primarily focused on the study of the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students with regards to their performance in terms of safety and food sanitation
The study will be conducted dilimited only to the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students; Section A, B and C. at Panpacific University North Philippines, San Vicente, Urdaneta City, Pangasinan, school year 2012-2013.
Theoretical Framework of the Study
This theory shows on how to handle and reduce the risk caused by Foodborne Illness and Diseases. (Preventing food-borne illness in food service establishments, Mitchell RE, Fraser AM, Bearon LB.,2007 Feb,17) Through, unsafe food handling practices in food service establishments are a major contributor to the transmission of food-borne illness. However, current worker education and training interventions demonstrate only modest success in changing food service worker behaviour. They argue for more ecologically-oriented interventions that address both individual and contextual factors that influence safe food handling behaviours. They describe potential predisposing influences (e.g. knowledge, beliefs concerning risk of food-borne illness, perceived control, self-efficacy), enabling influences (e.g. intensity and quality of training, work pressure and pace, safety procedures and protocols, appropriate equipment) and reinforcing influences (e.g. management enforcement of policies, incentives for safe food handling, job stress and organizational justice) on worker behaviour.
Efforts to change food service workers’ behaviours are more likely to be effective if they pay greater attention to the ecological context, address multiple influences on worker behaviour, and view workers as partners in preventing food-borne illness in food service establishments. Traditionally, nutrition educators have used a fairly global approach to teach food safety by teaching a broad range of safe food handling behaviours in the expectation that this will lead to the avoidance of foodborne illness. This approach can be confusing and lead to evaluation data that are difficult to interpret. This article suggests that food safety education and evaluation in the future be organized around five behavioral constructs: 1. practice personal hygiene, 2. cook foods adequately, 3. avoid cross-contamination, 4. keep foods at safe temperatures, and 5. avoid food from unsafe sources. These five constructs are derived from data on actual outbreaks and estimated incidences of foodborne illness. Research is needed to establish reliable and valid evaluation measures for these five behavioral constructs. Evaluation instruments can be tailored to fit specific education programs.
If evaluation instruments focus on these five behavior areas, the result will be meaningful evaluation data that can be more easily summarized across food safety education programs for consumers. To lower the incidence of human food-borne disease, experts and stakeholders have urged the development of a science- and risk-based management system in which food-borne hazards are analyzed and prioritized. A literature review shows that most approaches to risk prioritization developed to date are based on measures of health outcomes and do not systematically account for other factors that may be important to decision making. The Multi-Factorial Risk Prioritization Framework developed here considers four factors that may be important to risk managers: public health, consumer risk perceptions and acceptance, market-level impacts, and social sensitivity.
The framework is based on the systematic organization and analysis of data on these multiple factors. The basic building block of the information structure is a three-dimensional cube based on pathogen-food-factor relationships. Each cell of the cube has an information card associated with it and data from the cube can be aggregated along different dimensions. The framework is operationalized in three stages, with each stage adding another dimension to decision-making capacity. The first stage is the information cards themselves that provide systematic information that is not pre-processed or aggregated across factors. The second stage maps the information on the various information cards into cobweb diagrams that create a graphical profile of, for example, a food-pathogen combination with respect to each of the four risk prioritization factors. The third stage is formal multi-criteria decision analysis in which decision makers place explicit values on different criteria in order to develop risk priorities.
The Multi-Factorial Risk Prioritization Framework provides a flexible instrument that compares and contrasts risks along four dimensions. Use of the framework is an iterative process. It can be used to establish priorities across pathogens for a particular food, across foods for a particular pathogen and/or across specific food-pathogen combinations. This report provides a comprehensive conceptual paper that forms the basis for a wider process of consultation and for case studies applying the framework. Objective: To measure the association among Health Belief Model (HBM) variables and safe food-handling behaviors among older adults. Design: A mail survey using Dillman’s Total Design Method.
Setting: In October 1999, a survey was sent to volunteers from a preexisting cohort of noninstitutionalized older adults living throughout Nevada. Data collection continued through January 2000. Participants: With a 56% response rate, the sample (n = 266) was composed mainly of women (73%) and individuals from urban counties (74%). The mean age was 68.09 years (SD = 8.27). Except for gender, sample characteristics were similar to those of the preexisting cohort. Variables Measured: Perceived threat of foodborne illness (ie, perceived severity and perceived susceptibility), cues to action (ie, media cues and educational cues), and safe food-handling behaviors (ie, sanitation and cross-contamination). Analysis: Rank order correlation coefficients were computed to measure the association among variables. Significance was set at P < .05. Results: Cues to action were positively related to perceived threat of foodborne illness and safe food-handling behaviors. Perceived severity of foodborne illness was positively related to one dimension of safe food-handling behaviors (ie, sanitation). Conclusions and Implications
The HBM (Health Belief Model) is a useful framework for examining food-handling behaviors among older adults
Conceptual Framework of the Study
Foodborne Illness maybe risky and dangerous, but it is preventive through food safety and sanitation. For further information the researchers have form a simple guideline on how we will practice food safety and sanitation The following are Prevention of Foodborne Disease and its importance The Five Keys to Safer Food
•Wash your hands before handling food and often during food preparations
•Wash your hands after going to the toilet
•Wash and sanitize all surfaces and equipment used for food preparation
•Protect kitchen areas and food from insects, pests and other animals Separate raw and cooked
•Separate raw meat, poultry and seafood from other foods
•Use separate equipment and utensils such as knives and cutting boards for handling raw foods
•Store food in containers to avoid contact between raw and prepared foods Cook thoroughly
•Cook food thoroughly, especially meat, poultry, eggs and Seafood
•Bring foods like soups and stews to boiling to make sure that they have reached 70°C. For meat and poultry, make sure that juices are clear, not pink. Ideally, use a thermometer
•Reheat cooked food thoroughly
Keep food at safe temperatures
•Do not leave cooked food at room temperature for more than 2 hours •Refrigerate promptly all cooked and perishable food (preferably below 5°C • Keep cooked food piping hot (more than 60°C) prior to serving •Do not store food too long even in the refrigerator
•Do not thaw frozen food at room temperature
Use safe water and raw materials
•Use safe water or treat it to make it safe
•Select fresh and wholesome foods
•Choose foods processed for safety, such as pasteurized milk
•Wash fruits and vegetables, especially if eaten raw
•Do not use food beyond its expiry date
Importance of Food Safety & Sanitation
Lack of proper food safety & sanitation can cause:
oLoss of customers & sales
oLoss of prestige & reputation
oLawsuits – resulting in court fees
oIncreased insurance premiums
oLowered employee morale / absenteeism
oNeed for retraining
The best way to ensure safe food is to prevent food from becoming contaminated. People can help reduce – but not eliminate – the risk of foodborne illness by following CFI’s Six Safe Food Practices. CFI’s first 5 safe food practices are based on the World Health Organization’s Five Keys to Safer Food. (Preventing Foodborne Diseases,CFI’s Six Safe Food Practices document,2012) Figure 1 is presents the Paradigm of the Study. The Profile of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students in terms of: Gender, b. Age. C. Numbers of family member. The process determines the profile of the respondents and the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students on Foodborne Illness and Diseases as perceived by the instructor and the students among themselves: a. Food Preparation and b. Food safety and sanitation.
Process contained determining the significant difference on the perception of the respondent on the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students on foodborne illness and diseases along the chosen area and the significant relationship between the profiles in Foodborne Illness and Diseases. The suggested measures to fill out the gaps and enhance the knowledge of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students on Foodborne Illness and Diseases are the output.
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Determining the following:
1.Level of Awareness of the Third Year Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students on Foodborne Illness and Diseases as perceived by the respondents themselves along: a.Food Preparation
b.Food Safety and Sanitation
2.Significant difference on the perceptions of the respondents on the level of awareness of the Third Year Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students on foodborne illness and diseases along the chosen area.
3.Significant relationship between the profile and the knowledge of the Third Year Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students on Foodborne Illness and diseases
Suggested measures to prevent and reduce the risk cause by Foodborne Illness and Diseases of Third Year Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students
Profile of the Third Year Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students in terms of:
c.Number of Family Member?
Level of Awareness of the Third Year Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students along:
e.Food Safety and Sanitation
Paradigm of the Study
Statement of the Problem
This study is designed to investigate the Level of Awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Students on Foodborne Illness and Diseases.
Specifically, it will seek answers to the following questions: 1.What is the profile of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management in terms of: a.Gender
c.Number of Family Member?
2.What is the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Students on Foodborne Illness and Diseases as perceived by the instructor and students themselves along; a.Food Safety and Sanitation
3.Is there a significant difference between the perceptions of the respondents on the level of awareness in foodborne illness and diseases of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Students along the identified areas? 4.Is there a significant relationship between the profile and the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Students on Foodborne Illness and Diseases? 5.What measures maybe suggested enhancing the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Student? Hypotheses
This study will test the hypotheses in its alternative form at level of significance. 1.There is a significant difference between the perception of the faculty and the respondents regarding to the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Students. 2.There is a significant relationship between the profile of the of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management Student on a Degree of Knowledge regarding Foodborne Illness and Diseases.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined for essentially understanding. Food Hazards
Biological Hazards – Danger to food safety caused by disease-causing micro-organisms Chemical Hazards – Danger to food safety caused by cleaners, pesticides and other chemicals Physical Hazards – Danger to food safety caused by glass, metal & other physical particles Bacteria – Can multiply rapidly to disease-causing levels at favorable temperature 70 to 125. Can produce toxins in food that can poison humans when the food is eaten, it caused most food borne illnesses. Viruses – Do not grow in food, but can be transported by food items. Transported by many food items, including ice & water. Fungi
Molds – Cause illnesses, infections, and allergies
Yeast – spoils food
This chapter describes and explains the research design of the study, the population of the study, data gathering tool, data gathering procedure and statistical treatment relevant to this study. Research Design
This research study used descriptive method of research. Descriptive method is designed for the researcher to gather information about present existing conditions. The principal aims in employing this method are to describe the nature of a situation as it exists at the time of the study and to explore the causes of particular phenomena according to Travers (1978). A descriptive study determines and reports the way things are. Just as historical research has no control over what was, descriptive research has no control over what is, and it can only measure what already exists.
The data will include the profile to the third year Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Managements students. Suggestions were also included to the Extent to the Knowledge of the Third Year BS in Hotel and Restaurant Management students in Foodborne Illness and Diseases. Locale and Population of the Study
The population samples of the study are the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management students of Panpacific University North Philippines with respondents coming from the Hotel and Restaurant management who were acquired through simple random sampling techniques including faculty members. Data Gathering Tools
The researcher will use questionnaire-check list in gathering the necessary information and data needed in the study. There were two set of questionnaire that was given to the students. Part 1 contained the Profile of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students in terms of: Gender, Age and Numbers of family members. Part 2 focused on the range of knowledge of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students and instructors along: Food Preparation, Food Safety and Sanitation.
Data Gathering Procedure
The questionnaire is administered personally by the researchers through, aided with the help of respective instructors of Panpacific University North Philippines. Treatment of Data
To determine the profile of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management in Panpacific University North Philippines, frequency count and percentage was used. The formula is shown as follows:
Percentage (%) = F/N * 100
F = Frequency
N =Number of Respondents
To determine the level of awareness of the Third Year Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students, average weighted means was used. The formula is as followed:
W1 = Weight of responses of scale 1
W2 = Weight of responses of scale 2
W3 = Weight of responses of scale 3
W4 = Weight of responses of scale 4
W5 = Weight of responses of scale 5
N1 = Number of responses of category 1
N2 = Number of responses of category 2
N3 = Number of responses of category 3
N4 = Number of responses of category 4
N5 = Number of responses of category 5
The quantitative equivalent of interpretation used the 5-point scale in measuring.
The following are the equivalent of the point of the scale used on the next page:
4.20-5.00VS – Very Satisfactory
3.40-4.19 S – Satisfactory
2.60-3.39 G – Good
1.80-2.59 F – Fair
1.00-1.79 P – Poor
To determine the significant difference between the perceptions of the faculty and Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students regarding their level of awareness in Foodborne Illness and Diseases, t-test was used.
To determine the significant relationship between the profile of the Bachelor of Science in Hospitality and Restaurant Management students and their level of awareness in Foodborne Illness and Diseases, chi-square was used.