Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Protocol Review
  • Published:

Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Playing by the rules, but processes could be more PI friendly

Lab Animal volume 46, pages 419–420 (2017)Cite this article

This scenario brings up several questions: can/should an IACUC protocol be delayed until all ancillary institutional committee applications are reviewed and approved? Once they are approved, should the IACUC protocol go through another round of review by Designated Member Review or Full Committee, as the case may be? Can a PI get approval signatures from individual IACUC member, otherwise known as 'polling'?

According to the Public Health Service Policy1, organizations must base their animal care and use programs on the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals2. The Guide requires that an Occupational Health and Safety Program (OHSP) be part of the animal care and use program3 and it references the Occupational Health and Safety in the Care and Use of Research Animals4 as guidance on establishment and performance of an OHSP. Examples of oversight of OHSP Program include, but are not limited to, verification of enrollment, training of individuals on Animal Use Protocols5; compliance with ancillary institutional committees such as the Institutional Biosafety, Radiation Safety, Institutional Review Board and Chemical Safety6. The IACUC is also required to review the OHSP during its semi-annual program evaluation6, which considers “some of the most important personnel issues, [..]the occupational health and safety of animal care, use, and support personnel”7 and including the “use of hazardous materials and provision of a safe working environment”2. The IACUC must report deficiencies in the OHSP to OLAW/NIH7.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (2015).

  2. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals 8th edn. (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2011).

  3. Greer, William G., & Ron E. Banks . The IACUC Administrator's Guide to Animal Program Management: Setting Up and Directing an IACUC Office (CRC Press, Boca Rotan, FL, 2016).

  4. National Research Council, Commission on Life Sciences et al. Occupational Health and Safety in the Care and Use of Research Animals (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 1997).

  5. United States Department of Agriculture. Animal Welfare Inspection Guide (2013)

  6. National Institutes of Health, Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare. Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Guidebook (2002).

  7. The IACUC Handbook 3rd edn. (ed. Silverman, J., Suckow, M. & Murthy, S.) (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2014).

  8. Petrie, W.K., Podolsky, M.L, Wallace, S.L., & Lukas, V. The Care and Feeding of an IACUC: The Organization and Management of an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1999).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Biosecurity, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO

    Carole R Baskin

  2. Department of Comparative Medicine, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO

    John Long, Cheri L West & Jana M Dodge

Authors
  1. Carole R Baskin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cheri L West
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jana M Dodge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baskin, C., Long, J., West, C. et al. Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Playing by the rules, but processes could be more PI friendly. Lab Anim 46, 419–420 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1366

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1366

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing