Influence of hygiene practices through microbiological monitoring of craft beer production processes in Midlands Meander Breweries, Pietermaritzburg

Abstract

Introduction Good beer is made with a lot of thought dedicated to processes of hygiene. The prevention of microbiological contamination of beer needs consideration by understanding the microorganisms that exist within a craft brewery establishment and the control of microbial contamination on surfaces. Aims and Objectives The study strove to ascertain hygiene practices in two breweries, Brewery A and Brewery B, and to compare these practices using three assessments. These comprehensive assessments involved using observational screening, the evaluation of employee practices, and swab analyses collected from key surfaces in the selected craft breweries in the Pietermaritzburg Midlands Meander area. The study proposes effective controls and urges the need for relevant targeted training programs for the establishment of hygiene protocols in these and possibly similar beer breweries. Material and Methods Two craft beer breweries, referred to as Brewery A and Brewery B, were selected, as study sites. Samples were collected from these sites and evaluated. Employees (n=15) from both sites were also surveyed to determine their knowledge and understanding of hygienic practices in the craft beer brewery setting. Mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) were employed which involved using a five-step sequential flow of purposive sampling during the brewing process and a survey. Upon site visitation a standard checklist was used which formed part of the qualitative methods. Measuring instruments included onsite inspection using an audit checklist sourced from the Food Regulations 638 of June 22, 2018 (Department of Health, 2018) to assess compliance with regulations within the two sites. In addition, as part of quantitative methods self-administered survey questionnaires were administered to the employees to determine their personal hygiene practices as food handlers in the two establishments. Finally, sampling of surfaces was conducted using the protocol for laboratory analysis which involved using the sausage agar method and Lin’s Wild Yeast method. During the first and last week of each determined month, data were collected from the selected craft breweries which formed part of the quantitative methods. This occurred during COVID-19 restrictions during allocated time periods with specific intervals as determined by the craft brewery owners so as not to disturb production processes. The data were recorded on an excel spreadsheet. Data were analysed using the SPSS version 28 (IBM Corporation®, New York, USA) for Windows Version 17.0 software program. Trend analyses, descriptive statistics, and paired tests including the chi-square test were conducted to compare operations and practices in the breweries using the one-way Anova P-test. Results Brewery A adhered to better hygiene practices compared to Brewery B, especially in behaviours such as wearing personal protective clothing and removal of jewellery. The proportional test results indicated statistically significant differences for "Removal of jewellery when brewing" (p = 0.003) and "Hand washing during brewing stages" (p = 0.028), where Brewery A showed more positive results. These findings suggest that Brewery B could benefit from additional focus on these specific practices to align with the safety standards observed by Brewery A. Results of observational analysis of comparison between the two craft breweries also revealed that Brewery A employed well-implemented systems (HACCP) while Brewery B had infrastructural defects such as cracked floors, damaged ablution facilities, old paint, and dirty sinks, which suggested that the infrastructure in Brewery B required much more attention and improvement than in Brewery A. It was evident that craft beer Brewery B had a lesser advanced hygiene system and poorer overall structural development than Brewery A; hence, the recommendation that it should fully align with food establishment regulations. Microbial data indicated that there was high consistency of CFU/cm2 levels of microbial growth from swabs taken in Brewery B after sampling of different surfaces across all critical points. However, a further display of variable trends with an increase and decrease in microbial contamination between certain time points was noted. Brewery A showed relatively stable CFU/cm2 levels that were statically significant (p<0.05) over time with slight fluctuations, indicating good sanitisation practices. The chi-square test demonstrated a significant association between the premises and their respective hygiene statuses (χ2=26.32\chi^2 = 26.32χ2=26.32, p=0.01), indicating that Brewery A and Brewery B differed significantly in their proportions of satisfactory, good, and unsatisfactory hygiene statuses. Conclusions This study highlights the significance of good application of hygiene practices and protocol implementation of hygiene systems within craft beer breweries. A lack of adherence to these practices and standards creates room for microbial growth that ultimately poses a threat to product safety. The analyses revealed substantial differences in microbial contamination levels between Brewery A and Brewery B across time points, with Brewery B demonstrating higher microbial loads in both the swab and beer samples. These findings highlighted the importance of adherence to sanitation protocols in breweries, particularly in areas with a tendency for higher contamination, such as work surfaces. It is important to ensure that continuous monitoring is prioritized by craft beer brewery operational managers in collaboration with the local municipality as a key role-player in ensuring compliance with safety standards in breweries for the benefit of consumers. Recommendations for the two sites include frequent training programmes for employees and suitable training venues on site. Furthermore, regular in-house scheduled inspections must be conducted to ensure regulatory compliance, particularly in meeting hygiene standards.