LAUSR

Abstract Noncompliances that decrease food safety are commonly detected in food safety inspections at restaurants, and challenges in correcting the noncompliances have been reported. Disclosure of inspection results has been used as a tool to decrease the rate of noncompliances by increasing motivation to attain and maintain compliance with regulations. However, the efficacy of disclosed inspection results is not well understood. In addition, preannouncement of the inspection and inspection interval may have an impact on the efficacy of inspections. In this longitudinal retrospective study based on disclosed restaurant inspections in Finland from the years 2017–2018, we examined the stability of compliance, correction of noncompliances at the item level, association of preannouncement with item-specific grades and association of inspection interval with compliance. The results show that compliance (inspection result Excellent) was maintained between two consecutive inspections in 60.5% of the restaurants. The inspection result To be corrected (C) improved in 72.3% and Poor (D) in 33.3% of the restaurants to an Excellent (A) or Good (B) result. Still, some noncompliances in items crucial to food safety were not corrected. This demonstrates that disclosure alone is not sufficient; other measures are also needed in food control. The inspection interval did not reveal any significant association with the stability of compliance. The proportions of C and D grades were at minimum twofold in unannounced compared to preannounced inspections in most inspected items. Unannounced inspections are therefore necessary to receive an accurate impression of the inspected items on the premises.