Internal audits as a tool to assess the compliance with biosecurity rules in a veterinary faculty

Marie-France Humblet; Claude Saegerman

doi:10.3389/fvets.2023.960051

Internal audits as a tool to assess the compliance with biosecurity rules in a veterinary faculty

Front Vet Sci. 2023 Mar 2:10:960051. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.960051. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Marie-France Humblet¹, Claude Saegerman²

Affiliations

¹ Unit Biosafety, Biosecurity and Environmental Licenses, Department for Occupational Protection and Hygiene, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
² Veterinary Science Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Research Unit (UREAR-ULiège), Fundamental and Applied Research for Animals and Health Center (FARAH), Department of Infectious and Parasitic Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

Abstract

Introduction: The present paper proposes a tool to follow up the compliance of staff and students with biosecurity rules, as enforced in a veterinary faculty, i.e., animal clinics, teaching laboratories, dissection rooms, and educational pig herd and farm.

Methods: Starting from a generic list of items gathered into several categories (personal dress and equipment, animal-related items, infrastructures, waste management, management of material/equipment and behavior), a checklist was created for each sector/activity mentioned above, based on the rules and procedures compiled in the Faculty biosecurity standard operating procedures. Checklists were created as Excel™ files. For each sector, several sheets were elaborated, i.e., one per specific activity: for example, the following sheets were created for the equine clinic: class 1-2 hospitalization (class 1 = non-infectious conditions; class 2 = infectious disease with a low or non-existent risk of transmission), class 3 hospitalization (class 3 = infectious disease with a moderate risk of transmission; these patients are suspected of having an infectious disease and being contagious for other patients and/or for humans) and consultation.

Results: Class 4 area, which corresponds to the isolation unit and aims at housing patients suffering from infectious diseases with a significant risk of transmission (including notifiable conditions), was not audited at that period, as it was undergoing renovation works. The audit relied on observations performed by a unique observer to ensure standardization. Observed items were presented as yes/no and multiple-choice questions. A scale from 0 to 3 or 4 (depending on the item) allowed scoring each item, i.e., 0 corresponding to 100% compliance with the procedure and the highest score to the worst situation. A median and average global score was also estimated by category and by activity.

Discussion: The methodology described in the present paper allows estimating the compliance with biosecurity standard operating procedures in a specific sector and/or for a given activity. The identification of criteria needing improvement is a key point: it helps prioritizing actions to be implemented and awareness raising among people concerned. Regular internal auditing is an essential part of a biosecurity plan, the frequency being conditioned by the risk linked to a specific activity or area (i.e., more frequent audits in risky situations).

Keywords: awareness; biosecurity; compliance; hygiene; prevention; quality control; standard operating procedure (SOP); zoonoses.