A guide to defining and implementing protocols for the welfare assessment of laboratory animals: eleventh report of the BVAAWF/FRAME/RSPCA/UFAW Joint Working Group on Refinement

The refinement of husbandry and procedures to reduce animal suffering and improve welfare is an essential component of humane science. Successful refinement depends upon the ability to assess animal welfare effectively, and detect any signs of pain or distress as rapidly as possible, so that any suffering can be alleviated. This document provides practical guidance on setting up and operating effective protocols for the welfare assessment of animals used in research and testing. It sets out general principles for more objective observation of animals, recognizing and assessing indicators of pain or distress and tailoring these to individual projects. Systems for recording indicators, including score sheets, are reviewed and guidance is set out on determining practical monitoring regimes that are more likely to detect any signs of suffering. This guidance is intended for all staff required to assess or monitor animal welfare, including animal technologists and care staff, veterinarians and scientists. It will also be of use to members of ethics or animal care and use committees. A longer version of this document, with further background information and extra topics including training and information sharing, is available on the Laboratory Animals website.     

Ethics and invertebrates: a cephalopod perspective

This paper first explores 3 philosophical bases for attitudes to invertebrates, Contractarian/Kantian, Utilitarian, and Rights-based, and what they lead us to conclude about how we use and care for these animals. We next discuss the problems of evaluating pain and suffering in invertebrates, pointing out that physiological responses to stress are widely similar across the animal kingdom and that most animals show behavioral responses to potentially painful stimuli. Since cephalopods are often used as a test group for consideration of pain, distress and proper conditions for captivity and handling, we evaluate their behavioral and cognitive capacities. Given these capacities, we then discuss practical issues: minimization of their pain and suffering during harvesting for food; ensuring that captive cephalopods are properly cared for, stimulated and allowed to live as full a life as possible; and, lastly, working for their conservation.     

Topical ocular anesthetics in ocular irritancy testing: a review.

The routine use of topical anesthetics to alleviate discomfort associated with in vivo ocular irritancy testing has been advocated. This review provides information about the adverse effects of topical ocular anesthetics and answers the questions: are topical anesthetics practical and effective in ocular irritancy protocols, is long-term use contraindicated, will topical anesthetics alter the response of a test substance, and are there significant side-effects which might cause pain and suffering in test animals? There was no evidence to support the use of a specific topical anesthetic. Further, information about using systemic analgesics or combinations with local anesthetics that would effectively alleviate discomfort associated with ocular irritancy testing without affecting test results was not found. Comprehensive studies are needed to identify the most effective combination of drugs that would ameliorate discomfort associated with ocular irritation testing.     

Animal welfare and the refinement of neuroscience research methods--a case study of Huntington's disease models

The use of animals in biomedical and other research presents an ethical dilemma: we do not want to lose scientific benefits, nor do we want to cause laboratory animals to suffer. Scientists often refer to the potential human benefits of animal models to justify their use. However, even if this is accepted, it still needs to be argued that the same benefits could not have been achieved with a mitigated impact on animal welfare. Reducing the adverse effects of scientific protocols ('refinement') is therefore crucial in animal-based research. It is especially important that researchers share knowledge on how to avoid causing unnecessary suffering. We have previously demonstrated that even in studies in which animal use leads to spontaneous death, scientists often fail to report measures to minimize animal distress (Olsson et al. 2007). In this paper, we present the full results of a case study examining reports, published in peer-reviewed journals between 2003 and 2004, of experiments employing animal models to study the neurodegenerative disorder Huntington's disease. In 51 references, experiments in which animals were expected to develop motor deficits so severe that they would have difficulty eating and drinking normally were conducted, yet only three references were made to housing adaptation to facilitate food and water intake. Experiments including end-stages of the disease were reported in 14 papers, yet of these only six referred to the euthanasia of moribund animals. If the reference in scientific publications reflects the actual application of refinement, researchers do not follow the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, refinement) principle. While in some cases, it is clear that less-than-optimal techniques were used, we recognize that scientists may apply refinement without referring to it; however, if they do not include such information in publications, it suggests they find it less relevant. Journal publishing policy could play an important role: first, in ensuring that referees seriously consider whether submitted studies were indeed carried out with the smallest achievable negative impact on the animals and, secondly, in encouraging scientists to share refinements through the inclusion of a 3Rs section in papers publishing the results of animal-based research.     

Comments on the sixth report of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

The Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) was established in July 1996, to consider the care, welfare and use of animals involved in procedures for defence research purposes at Defence and Evaluation Research Agency (DERA) establishments in the UK. Two of the objectives of AWAC are to examine the broad trends in animal use at DERA establishments, and to implement and audit the application of the Three Rs principle. AWAC's sixth report addressed the period from 31 October 2000 to 28 February 2002. The statistics of animal use within the report are briefly examined, and some of the actions undertaken by defence research establishments to facilitate the application of the Three Rs are highlighted. It is recommended that, if possible (subject to security constraints), figures detailing the severity of the procedures undertaken should be included in future issues of the report, in order to provide a more-detailed account. It is concluded that Defence Science and Technology Laboratory establishments have made a contribution to the Three Rs, and that other establishments may be able to incorporate some of their actions into their own research programmes. There was an overall 36% increase in the number of procedures carried out by defence research establishments between 1995 and 2000, from 8,900 to 12,065. This probably reflects alterations in the research programme, which is, in turn, decided primarily by the Ministry of Defence's customers and the progress made with previous research programmes. It is therefore recommended that the UK Government allocates significantly more financial resources for the development and validation of alternatives, in order to maximise the potential for achieving the Three Rs in defence research, and to complement the existing initiatives within the defence research industry.     

The interpretation and application of the three Rs by animal ethics committee members

The Three Rs form the basis of review of animal-use protocols by Animal Ethics Committees (AECs), but little research has examined how AECs actually interpret and implement the Three Rs. This topic was explored through in-depth, open-ended interviews with 28 members of AECs at four Canadian universities. In describing protocol review, AEC members rarely mentioned the Three Rs, but most reported applying some aspects of the basic concepts. Comments identified several factors that could impede full application of the Three Rs: incomplete understanding of the Three Rs (especially Refinement), trust that researchers implement Replacement and Reduction themselves, belief by some members that granting agency review covers the Three Rs, focus on sample size rather than experimental design to achieve Reduction, focus on harm caused by procedures to the exclusion of housing and husbandry, and lack of consensus on key issues, notably on the nature and moral significance of animal pain and suffering, and on whether AECs should minimise overall harm to animals. The study suggests ways to achieve more consistent application of the Three Rs, by providing AECs with up-to-date information on the Three Rs and with access to statistical expertise, by consensus-building on divisive issues, and by training on the scope and implementation of the Three Rs.     

The influence of visual display terminal use on the physical and mental conditions of administrative staff in Japan

Visual display terminals (VDT) are standard equipment for many office workers. Their use, however, may increase the risk of developing adverse conditions related to vision, the musculoskeletal system, and mental health. We carried out a survey among 3070 workers aged 18 to 67 years (mean, 39.9 years) at a prefectural administrative office, in which 76% of subjects were visual display terminal (VDT) users. We examined the relationship between duration of daily VDT use and eyestrain, neck or upper extremity pain, back pain, and mental health, and estimated the effect of breaks and rest during VDT work on these symptoms. The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12: total scores ranged from 0 to 12) was used to identify potential poor mental health status, and subjects with 4 or more were considered to have symptoms of psychological distress. Seventeen percent of subjects reported eyestrain, 19.1% reported upper extremity pain, 11.6% reported back pain, and 17% of subjects had GHQ-12 scores of 4 or higher. Logistic regression analysis showed that duration of daily VDT use and lack of breaks and rest during VDT work were significantly associated with eyestrain, neck or upper extremity pain, back pain, and psychological distress. In order to protect users from the adverse effects associated with VDT work, reducing daily VDT exposure, taking breaks, and rest during VDT work are important.     

Carbon dioxide for euthanasia: concerns regarding pain and distress, with special reference to mice and rats

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most commonly used agent for euthanasia of laboratory rodents, used on an estimated tens of millions of laboratory rodents per year worldwide, yet there is a growing body of evidence indicating that exposure to CO2 causes more than momentary pain and distress in these and other animals. We reviewed the available literature on the use of CO2 for euthanasia (as well as anaesthesia) and also informally canvassed laboratory animal personnel for their opinions regarding this topic. Our review addresses key issues such as CO2 flow rate and final concentration, presence of oxygen, and prefilled chambers (the animal is added to the chamber once a predetermined concentration and flow rate have been reached) versus gradual induction (the animal is put into an empty chamber and the gas agent(s) is gradually introduced at a fixed rate). Internationally, animal research standards specify that any procedure that would cause pain or distress in humans should be assumed to do so in non-human animals as well (Public Health Service 1986, US Department of Agriculture 1997, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 2000). European Union guidelines, however, specify a certain threshold of pain or distress, such as 'skilled insertion of a hypodermic needle', as the starting point at which regulation of the use of animals in experimental or other scientific procedures begins (Biotechnology Regulatory Atlas n.d.). There is clear evidence in the human literature that CO2 exposure is painful and distressful, while the non-human literature is equivocal. However, the fact that a number of studies do conclude that CO2 causes pain and distress in animals indicates a need for careful reconsideration of its use. Finally, this review offers recommendations for alternatives to the use of CO2 as a euthanasia agent.     

Self-consciousness and animal suffering

Animals with relatively highly developed brains are likely to experience some degree of self-awareness and the ability to think. As well as being interesting in its own right, self-consciousness matters from an ethical point of view, since it can give rise to forms of suffering above and beyond the immediate physical sensations of pain or distress. This article surveys the evidence for animal self-consciousness and its implications for animal welfare.     

Nest Building as an Indicator of Health and Welfare in Laboratory Mice

The minimization and alleviation of suffering has moral and scientific implications. In order to mitigate this negative experience one must be able to identify when an animal is actually in distress. Pain, illness, or distress cannot be managed if unrecognized. Evaluation of pain or illness typically involves the measurement of physiologic and behavioral indicators which are either invasive or not suitable for large scale assessment. The observation of nesting behavior shows promise as the basis of a species appropriate cage-side assessment tool for recognizing distress in mice. Here we demonstrate the utility of nest building behavior in laboratory mice as an ethologically relevant indicator of welfare. The methods presented can be successfully used to identify thermal stressors, aggressive cages, sickness, and pain. Observation of nest building behavior in mouse colonies provides a refinement to health and well-being assessment on a day to day basis.     

Training of laboratory-housed non-human primates in the UK

Abstract

Laboratory-housed non-human primates may experience a range of potential stressors, including physical and chemical restraint, venepuncture, injection, catching and cage-change. Training them to co-operate, using positive reinforcement techniques, is one means of significantly reducing the adverse impact of such procedures upon them and, therefore, is a refinement. Furthermore, the additional time that staff spend with the primates, and the need for individual recognition and close observation of animal behavior, mean that the trainer develops a relationship with each individual animal which can be beneficial for animal welfare (e.g., by reducing the occurrence of abnormal behavior and fear of humans). We surveyed use of training in thirteen UK establishments using and breeding primates, utilizing a mixed-mode questionnaire. The survey demonstrated that there is widespread awareness of training as a refinement and appreciation of its diverse benefits, but training is not used as widely or as fully as it might be. This is largely due to real constraints (principally staff and time and a lack of confidence in ability to train), and perceived constraints (such as a supposed lack of information on how to train and assessment of the benefits, and an overestimation of the time investment needed). There is also considerable variation between establishments in the purposes of training and techniques used, with a reliance on negative reinforcement in three. We conclude that there is considerable scope for refinement of common scientific, veterinary and husbandry procedures, and refer to some resources designed to help establishments take action (e.g., Prescott and Buchanan-Smith 2003).     

Institutional and IACUC responsibilities for animal care and use education and training programs

Training and instruction of personnel are important components of animal care and use programs because they help to ensure the health and welfare of the animals and the integrity of the research or testing results. Training also helps to promote the consideration of alternatives, recognition of animal pain and distress, appropriate use of pain-relieving agents, aseptic technique, pre- and post-procedural care, and personnel health and safety. While individuals who provide the care for or conduct research or testing in laboratory animals should take personal responsibility for ensuring that they have the skills to perform their duties, the institution is ultimately responsible for ensuring their competency. The institution is also responsible for providing the training or instruction that is required by federal legislation, regulations, and policies. The institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) is responsible for ensuring, as part of their review of research activities, that the personnel are capable of performing the procedures described. The IACUC must also assess the institution's training program as part of their semiannual animal care and use program review and make recommendations regarding training to the institutional official. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the US regulatory mandates for training and personnel qualification.     

ECVAM: desperately needed or superfluous? An animal welfare perspective

Eurogroup for Animal Welfare is the umbrella organisation of the major animal welfare organisations in Europe. Whereas its long-term goal is the complete replacement of animal experiments by methods that do not involve pain, suffering or distress in animals, it is also committed to any reasonable effort to reduce and refine animal experiments, as long as these continue to be carried out. Eurogroup therefore supports the activities of ECVAM, and it acknowledges the contributions to animal protection in various areas of animal use for scientific purposes made by ECVAM to date. Eurogroup is not satisfied with the number of alternative methods accepted in the past, but it sees the main responsibility for the slow progress as being outside ECVAM. The insufficient involvement of ECVAM by the EU Commission in various issues that would require its competence is also a matter of concern to Eurogroup.     

Adjuvants and antibody production: dispelling the myths associated with Freund's complete and other adjuvants

Adjuvants have been used for more than 70 yr to enhance the immune response of the host animal to an antigen. Among the mechanisms that adjuvants use to enhance the immune response are the "depot" effect, antigen presentation, antigen targeting, immune activation/modulation, and cytotoxic lymphocyte induction. The immunostimulatory properties of adjuvants result in inflammation, tissue destruction, and the potential for resulting pain and distress in the host animal. The inflammatory lesions produced by adjuvants such as Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA) have led some to conclude that pain and distress are present, even in cases where the scientific evidence fails to support this conclusion. Recommendations and regulations in the literature, based on available scientific evidence, provide guidance on total adjuvant volumes, volumes per site, routes of injection, booster injections, and adjuvants used for antibody production. Among the numerous adjuvants that are used for experimental antibody production reviewed in this article, many claim to be less inflammatory, tissue destructive, and painful than FCA while producing equal or superior antibody responses. Although no adjuvant surpasses FCA for experimental antibody production against a wide range of antigenic molecules, many produce excellent antibody responses with less inflammation and tissue destruction. Balancing the requisite degree of immuno-stimulation and the extent of inflammation, necrosis, and potential pain and distress requires consideration of the nature of the antigen, the host immune responsiveness, the adjuvant's mechanisms of action, and the desired end-product. In cases where the antigen is a weak immunogen or has a very limited availability, the type and role of adjuvant becomes a critical component in producing an acceptable immune response and humoral antibody response.     

Identifying and preventing pain during and after surgery in farm animals

Pain research in farm animals has focused on routine husbandry procedures such as dehorning; much less known about the pain associated with the other surgeries such as those required for displaced abomasum and caesarean delivery. We review the literature on pain in farm animals due to non-routine procedures including laporatomy, caesarean sections, ovariectomy and ovariohysterectomy, displaced abomasums, cannulations, vasectomy and claw removal. Where there are gaps in the farm animal literature, we describe relevant studies on wildlife, companion and lab animals. This review addresses both pain responses during surgery and the pain that animals experience in the hours and days that follow. Surgical procedures sometimes cause pain responses due to damage of somatic tissues (skin, muscle, joints, etc.) and the viscera, and there is some evidence that these pain responses differ. Overall conclusions from this review are that surgical pain in farm animals is under studied, and the resulting lack of knowledge, awareness, assessment tools and treatment protocols means that both intra-operative and post-operative pain are often under treated.     

Identifying and monitoring pain in farm animals: a review

One important objective for animal welfare is to maintain animals free from pain, injury or disease. Therefore, detecting and evaluating the intensity of animal pain is crucial. As animals cannot directly communicate their feelings, it is necessary to identify sensitive and specific indicators that can be easily used. The aim of the present paper is to review relevant indicators to assess pain in several farm species. The term pain is used for mammals, birds and fish, even though the abilities of the various species to experience the emotional component of pain may be different. Numerous behavioural changes are associated with pain and many of them could be used on farms to assess the degree of pain being experienced by an animal. Pain, as a stressor, is associated with variations in the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis as well as in the sympathetic and immune systems that can be used to identify the presence of pain rapidly after it started. However, most of these measures need sophisticated equipment for their assessment. Therefore, they are mainly adapted to experimental situations. Injuries and other lesional indicators give information on the sources of pain and are convenient to use in all types of situations. Histopathological analyses can identify sources of pain in experimental studies. When pronounced and/or long lasting, the pain-induced behavioural and physiological changes can decrease production performance. Some indicators are very specific and sensitive to pain, whereas others are more generally related to stressful situations. The latter can be used to indicate that animals are suffering from something, which may be pain. Overall, this literature review shows that several indicators exist to assess pain in mammals, a few in birds and very few in fish. Even if in some cases, a single indicator, usually a behavioural indicator, may be sufficient to detect pain, combining various types of indicators increases sensitivity and specificity of pain assessment. Research is needed to build and validate new indicators and to develop systems of pain assessment adapted to each type of situation and each species.     

The use of H2 antagonists in treating and preventing NSAID-induced mucosal damage

Pain affects the quality of life for millions of individuals and is a major reason for healthcare utilization. As populations age, medical personnel will need to manage more and more patients suffering from pain associated with degenerative and inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are an effective treatment for both acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain; however, their use is associated with potentially significant gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Guidelines suggest various strategies to prevent problems in those at risk for NSAID-associated GI complications. In this article, we review the data supporting one such strategy - the use of histamine type-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) - for the prevention of GI adverse events in NSAID users. Older studies suggest that high-dose H2RAs are effective in preventing upper GI ulcers and dyspepsia. This suggestion was recently confirmed during clinical trials with a new ibuprofen/famotidine combination that reduced the risk of ulcers by 50% compared with ibuprofen alone.     

The search for refinement alternatives: when you've just got to use animals

Refinements to animal-use protocols can help reduce animal pain and distress, thus producing cleaner data. Yet, most researchers neglect a refinement search, despite legal mandates, because the information is not readily available. What's more, IACUCs may have difficulty assessing researchers' refinement searches. The author offers some solutions.     

Companion-Animals’ Effectiveness in Managing Chronic Pain in Adult Community Members

ABSTRACT

Therapy animals have been found to alleviate pain in healthcare settings, but companion-animal owners report greater discomfort and use more analgesics than people who do not own one or more companion animals. To investigate this anomaly, 173 adults completed an online survey that included questions about themselves and any companion animal they owned, the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales, the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, and a modified version of the Chronic Pain Coping Inventory-42. Participants were also invited to contact the researchers to expand on their responses in a semi-structured interview, to which seven owners responded. There was no significant difference between reported pain levels in owners versus non-owners. However, companion-animal owners who reported actively using human–animal interactions to manage their pain rated this as moderately helpful and reported lower pain levels than other owners. There were also no significant differences between owners’ and non-owners’ anxiety or stress levels. Companion-animal owners reported more depressive symptoms than non-owners, but owners with animals perceived as more friendly reported fewer depressive symptoms. Dog owners comprised most of the sample and, for these participants, there was a negative association between perceived dog friendliness and levels of depression and anxiety. Those with more disobedient dogs also experienced greater stress. Interviewees reported that their companion animals helped them cope with pain in many ways, including provision of social and emotional support and by providing a sense of purpose in life. These findings indicate that some, but not all, companion animals may be beneficial for participants with chronic pain. Since the benefits appear to be associated with the species and personality of the animal, and with whether the person actively uses human–animal interactions as a pain-coping mechanism, care should be taken before recommending companion-animal ownership to persons suffering from chronic pain.