ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Vet. Sci.
Sec. One Health
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1523996
Investigation of food safety perceptions, practices, and workplace policies among employees of pet and animal feed stores that sell and do not sell raw meat-based diets
Provisionally accepted- 1Department of Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
- 2Department of Public Health, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
- 3Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
- 4Tennessee Integrated Food Safety Center for Excellence, Tennessee, United States
- 5Center for Agriculture and Food Security and Preparedness, Department of Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background:Pet and animal feed store employees face numerous occupational health hazards, including exposure to pathogens from handling contaminated animal food products. This study aimed to (1) investigate knowledge, sanitation practices, and workplace policies related to handling animal food and treats among employees of pet food and animal feed retailers in the United States and (2) determine whether differences exist between employees of stores that sell raw pet food products and those that do not.Methods:A survey evaluating sanitation practices, training, and knowledge of disease risk related to animal husbandry and food handling was distributed to US pet and animal feed store employees by the University of Tennessee Center for Agriculture and Food Security and Preparedness, part of the Tennessee Integrated Food Safety Center of Excellence. Stores that posted their email addresses online were contacted for participation. Surveys were disseminated via email, mail, and hand-delivery. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to assess differences between employees of stores that sold raw pet food and those that did not.Results:206 surveys were completed by employees of pet and animal feed stores in 15 states in the Southeast, Midwest, Southwest, and Western US. Just 25.3% of respondents had received training on disease risk related to handling animal food. Compared to employees of stores that did not sell raw food, those who worked at raw food retailers had significantly higher perceived risk of illness (p=0.0360). They tended to report more frequent surface disinfection (p=0.0054), but not handwashing (p=0.0542) than those who did not sell raw food. There were no significant differences in general workplace handwashing policies (p=0.7800) or those specifically related to handling animal food (p=0.0517). A substantial percentage of employees of both raw food retailers (41.5%) and those that did not sell raw food (67.8%) rarely or never provided customers with food safety information.Conclusions:Study findings indicate a need for ongoing training and outreach regarding food safety practices and zoonotic and foodborne disease risk among animal feed store employees. Stores should implement clear workplace hygiene policies and expand employee training and customer education to improve food safety standards and minimize disease risks.
Keywords: Zoonotic disease, Food Safety, raw pet food, Public Health, Pet store, Animal Feed, One Health
Received: 05 Dec 2024; Accepted: 22 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Lord, Cozzarelli, Lyon, Pugh and Thompson. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Jennifer Lord, Department of Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.