The impact of 5S on Microbiological Air Quality of an agrobiological products quality laboratory

Authors

  • Lucía Huánuco Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. Lima, Perú
  • Pedro Pablo Rosales López Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola. Lima, Perú

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15381/idata.v21i2.15599

Keywords:

5S, microbiological air quality, CFU, laboratory

Abstract

Microbiological air quality (MAQ) was monitored in the agrobiological products quality laboratory before and after the application of the "5S" methodology. The results were obtained through the agar-plate sedimentation method, carried out via biweekly sampling from April to June and from September to November of 2017, keeping temperature and relative humidity parameters constant (23 + 2 ° C and 62 + 3%). The initial level of 5S achieved only 43% of compliance, considered as "Below average", obtaining in this instance MAQ sampling distributed among fungi of 25 CFU/plate (50%), followed by bacteria at 16 CFU/plate (33%) and yeast at 8 CFU/plate (17%). In contrast, after carrying out 5S implementation, a result of 91% or "Excellent" level was obtained, which had fungal counts of 14 CFU/plate and 1 CFU/plate for the case of bacteria and yeasts. That is to say, the total microbial load decreased 68% between both conditions. By means of Student’s T test for means of related samples, significant differences in Microbiological Air Quality before and after 5S implementation at the laboratory studied were confirmed.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Lucía Huánuco, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. Lima, Perú
    Bióloga. Estudiante Maestría Ingeniería Industrial. Consultora independiente.
  • Pedro Pablo Rosales López, Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola. Lima, Perú
    Ing. Industrial. Magister Docente Investigador USIL.

Downloads

Published

2018-12-20

Issue

Section

Diseño y Tecnología

How to Cite

The impact of 5S on Microbiological Air Quality of an agrobiological products quality laboratory. (2018). Industrial Data, 21(2), 17-24. https://doi.org/10.15381/idata.v21i2.15599