- Click here for explanation of classification scheme.

To examine the relationship between food safety self-reported food handling behaviors and cognition of young adults to observed food-handling behaviors.

• Age 18 to 26 years
• Did not hold a sanitation certification
• Lived in a single-family type dwelling with a kitchen readily accessible
• Had good or excellent health
• Was not at increased risk of foodborne disease (FBD)
• Lived within 25 miles of campus.

Excluded if they did not meet all of the inclusion criteria.

Recruitment

• Young adults attending a major American university were recruited via official university student e-mail listservs and advertisements placed in the campus newspaper
• Recruitment materials indicated that this was a food study without mention of food safety
• Interested participants completed a brief online screening questionnaire used to identify those meeting all eligibility requirements. 

Design

• Cross-sectional study
  
• Data was collected using three instruments:
  • Trained observers used a food preparation observation instrument to assess how closely participants followed safe food-handling procedures while preparing a meal
  • A criteria-referenced home kitchen observation checklist was used by trained home kitchen auditors to assess compliance of:
    • Home storage and rotation practices
    • Sanitation and chemical storage
    • General kitchen with recommended practices
  • A multi-part questionnaire was used to investigate self-reported food-handling behaviors, psychosocial factors and food safety knowledge. 

Statistical Analysis

• Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations, were calculated to describe the demographic characteristics of the study population and their self-reported food-handling behaviors, psychosocial characteristics, knowledge, food preparation observations and home kitchen observations
• To examine determinants of food-handling procedures while preparing and storing foods (including rotation practices), backward regression models were constructed
• Stable models were generated for the sample size using only the independent variables that were found to have, via correlations (Pearson's or Spearman's depending on distribution normalcy), T-tests or analysis of variance, a P-value of 0.1 or less in relationship with dependent variables
• For the regression calculations, exclusion criterion was set at P>0.1 to avoid eliminating marginally significant variables early in the regression that may have become significant later in the analysis due to a particular relationship to the remaining variables.

Dependent Variables

Scores of the five food preparation observation scales and seven home kitchen observation scales:

• Best practices scale scores
• Risky food consumption score
• Beliefs scale scores
• Self-efficacy score
• Predominant locus of control
• Stage of change
• Knowledge
• Scale scores.

Independent Variables

Young adults.

Control Variables

• Gender
• Race
• Age
• Year in college
• If they had held a job as a food server or preparer
• Prior food safety instruction.

• Initial N: 432 met criteria for participation
• Attrition (final N): 153 young adults
• Age: Mean age of 20.74±1.3 years
• Ethnicity: 67% were white
• Other relevant demographics:
  • 56% were female
  • 97% never married
  • 85% juniors or seniors
• Location: United States.

Key Findings

• Mean best practices scale scores were poor, with study participants reporting they engage in less then half of the recommended safe food-handling practices evaluated by this instrument. Only 39% of young adults tended to eat few risky foods, have positive food safety beliefs and high self-efficacy mean scores. Overall, participants correctly answered two thirds of the food safety knowledge items. They were most knowledgeable about foods that increase risk for FBD and least knowledgeable about common food sources of FBD pathogens.
• Food preparation observation mean scores were sub-optimal with the highest mean compliance score recorded for the Separate scale (67%) and the lowest for the Cook scale (29%) of total. Two thirds of the participants kept raw animal protein separated from ready-to-eat food, whereas 97% did not use a thermometer to determine if the animal protein was cooked to a safe temperature. On the positive side, three home kitchen observation mean scale scores exceeded 81% compliance. In contrast, the temperatures mean scale score was especially low with participants complying with only 9% of the recommended safe practices. Few significant differences in mean scores for best practices, risky food consumption, beliefs, self-efficacy, knowledge or observations were noted among demographic groups.
• Regression models included any one of the home kitchen observation scales as the dependent variable generated R² values too low to warrant further discussion. In contrast, the regression models for the food preparation observation scales revealed stronger, albeit still fairly low R² values, ranging from 0.17 to 0.2. The knowledge scale of groups at greatest risk of foodborne disease and cross-contamination prevention self-report behavior scale tended to be significant predictors of actual food preparation behaviors.  Having had prior food safety instruction predicted actual behaviors related to Clean and Chill.

 

Food Preparation Observation	R2	Standardized Coefficients ß	P-value
Clean	19.7%	0.142 to 0.279	0 to 0.054
Separate	19.1%	0.167 to 0.385	0 to 0.027
Cook	17%	0.419	0
Chill	20.1%	0.123 to 0.379	0 to 0.092
Cross-contamination	19.1%	0.167 to 0.385	0 to 0.027

 

 

• This study supports the findings of other studies that also reported that college students have limited food safety knowledge and have sub-optimal compliance with safe food-handling practices, such as failure to follow hand-washing recommendations and use food thermometers. The observed sub-optimal food-handling behaviors and low food safety knowledge is not unique to young adults. Video surveillance indicates unsafe food-handling behaviors are common among adults in their own homes.
• The young adults in this study reported complying with less than half of the best practices for safe handling. Although the participants in this study had a predominantly internal focus of control for safe food handling and had high levels of food safety self-efficacy, their observed food-handling practices did not indicate that these health-promoting cognitions were translated into actually performing safe food handling practices. This finding contrasts with previous research indicating that an internal locus of control and high self-efficacy is associated with the performance of a wide array of health protective behaviors ranging from nutrition and weight control to exercise and safe sex. It appears that young adults may not have the adequate knowledge base or motivation to apply the knowledge they do have to handle food safely.
• Overall the findings from this exploratory analysis strengthen the assessment that young adults lack optimal food safety knowledge; behavior and skill and regression model results highlighted two important considerations for food safety education in this population:
  • First, educational efforts focused on increasing knowledge of both overall food-borne illness awareness and correct cross-contamination prevention procedures could translate into better compliance with actual safe food-handling practices.
  • Second, using these two measures as part of a baseline assessment could provide valuable information for evaluating where individuals fall on the continuum of food safety behaviors. This screening method could help educators focus their efforts more effectively by tailoring intensity and message topics to meet the needs of their specific audience.

Government:

US Department of Agriculture, National Food Safety Initiative

The authors note the following limitation: The low P-values for the significant predictor variables in the regression models present as a limitation of this analysis; however, these results should be looked upon as exploratory because there are limited previous evaluations of reported food safety behaviors compared with observed behaviors and knowledge of young adults.