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: Not so simple a scenario

Lab Animal volume 47, pages 9–10 (2018)Cite this article

At first blush, this scenario appears straightforward, however, several issues come to mind right away. The approval by VVC seemed appropriate according to NOT-OD-14-126 Guidance on significant changes to animal activities1. The IACUC already had an SOP in place, and Blackmore's change in location had been submitted for approval. But, Blackmore's mice had not been in the cold room prior to the amendment, and in my opinion, despite the existing standard operating procedure, the veterinarian should have made a cursory inspection of the new housing area. If exposed wires were observed, inquiries could have been made to the vivarium manager to see if there was repairs scheduled that may cause an issue involved with housing the mice in that area.

When the inspection occurred it was obvious that there was a potential danger to people working with the mice and, as stated, in the ARENA2 Guidebook the PHS Policy3 places responsibility to ensure a safe working environment with the institution and the “natural point of convergence...at many institutions is the IACUC”. In this instance, it was a definite safety issue for the personnel. The IACUC took the proper steps and notified the vivarium manager who promptly called facilities maintenance and the situation was quickly remedied. Was it a significant deficiency? Yes, to a point due to danger to personnel. However, the definition of significant is unresolved or repeated deficiencies except this situation was attended to immediately by both the vivarium manager and facilities maintenance. In this case, the IACUC need not report it to OLAW since no animals were harmed. The incident will be in the minutes and in the annual report, but it was quickly resolved, and the animals were well out of danger on a table and the potential danger to personnel eliminated.

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. National Institutes of Health. Guidance on Significant Changes to Animal Activities. Notice NOT-OD-14-126.

  2. ARENA/OLAW. Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Guidebook 2nd edn. (OLAW, Bethesda, MD, 2002).

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

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Laboratory Animal Resources, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY

    Ellen J. Croxford

Authors
  1. Ellen J. Croxford
    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

Croxford, E. Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Not so simple a scenario. Lab Anim 47, 9–10 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1381

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1381

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