Home » Bulletin 2003
Recognising and assessing pain, suffering and distress in laboratory animals
The importance of good staff training
Pain and suffering among laboratory animals is one of the major concerns of those involved in experiments as well as the public at large. Recognising and dealing with it is likely to be among the thorniest problems discussed by European policy makers in the proposed revision of Directive 86/809. EBRA asked Penny Hawkins, from the Research Animals Department of the Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals, the major charity working in the field, to tell readers about their survey on the subject.
A key concern about the use of animals in research and testing is the potential for procedures to cause them pain, suffering or distress.Many laws that regulate animal experimentation require that suffering is reduced to a minimum, yet this cannot be successfully achieved unless discomfort, pain and suffering are effectively and quickly recognised. Unfortunately, recognising suffering can be very difficult because many animals are adapted to conceal signs of pain or distress, especially those species commonly used in the laboratory such as mice, rats and rabbits.
Even when suffering has been recognised, the ability to minimise it effectively is influenced by many factors. These include the methods chosen to observe and monitor animals, and the effectiveness with which they are used and reviewed; the training of animal users and/or carers; the role of ethics or animal care and use committees; and effective communication of good practice in pain recognition and relief.
Minimising suffering is absolutely vital if science is to be both good quality and humane. It is important for everyone involved in animal use to know how this is achieved, to implement all measures that can prevent or minimise suffering, and to share information about good practice. Different establishments take different approaches to achieving these goals, and so the RSPCA Research Animals Department thought it would be useful to evaluate current practice in the UK.
We visited establishments to gather information on a broad range of issues including: techniques used to help recognise, assess and record animal wellbeing, pain, suffering and distress; how animal users and/or carers are trained to recognise, assess and alleviate pain and suffering; how good practice is communicated; and the role played by ethics committees. Training in pain recognition was identified as an especially important issue and so this article will summarise the results, conclusions and recommendations on this aspect. Please see the full report1 for further information on this and the other issues listed above.
Some key survey results
The survey showed that people involved in animal experiments are very concerned about the potential for suffering and want to be able to detect and alleviate it effectively. Unfortunately, there are few if any specific behavioural indicators of pain, suffering or distress and the systems currently in use for assessing animals are heavily reliant on subjective criteria. This is of concern because the ability of scientists, technicians and vet-erinarians to make good use of effective techniques for assessing animals has a direct and profound influence on animal wellbeing.
It is therefore fundamentally important that everyone responsible for assessing animals and minimising their suffering receives good quality training that will help them to achieve this in practice. In the UK, training in pain recognition is an integral part of the formal training programme for licensees working under the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. All of the establishments visited during the survey also have their own training programmes.
Current training courses...
The content, training aids and time allocated to recognising and assessing pain, suffering and distress are consistent between establishments with their own training courses. Typical study topics are how to recognise "normal" animals as well as those experiencing pain and distress, the ethical and legal responsibility to minimise suffering, and use of score sheets. Training aids generally involve discussion periods, visits to the animal house to view stock ("normal") animals, and a slide set produced by the UK Laboratory Animal Veterinary Association. This slide set includes pictures of animals experiencing adverse effects and is used to help trainees become familiar with clinical signs that indicate suffering. Most establishments allocate one to two hours to cover all of these topics.
...and some positive and negative points
Participants in the survey feel that the mandatory training courses in the UK have had a significant, positive impact on people's awareness, competence and attitude with respect to monitoring animals and alleviating suffering. This change has occurred in association with underlying improvements in attitudes to, and concern for, animals in general, and increased recognition of the status and expertise of animal technicians. The in-house training period is seen as a chance to establish a local culture that will ensure that all animal use is carefully considered, justified and humane, to provide training that is better tailored to each person's projects and, very importantly, to assess trainees' abilities to empathise with animals.
However, the consensus is that more and better training aids are needed to help trainees recognise and assess pain, suffering and distress. More emphasis on the implementation of the law with respect to pain management is also required to ensure that everyone is aware of the legal requirements for pain relief and humane endpoints. Monitoring animals should not be left solely to technicians; participants believe that scientists also have key responsibilities in this area and would benefit from more effective training in animals' basic requirements and behaviour, including signs of pain, suffering and distress.
Conclusions
Training represents a prime opportunity to motivate people, challenge their assumptions about animals and animal behaviour, and provide them with the resources that they need to minimise suffering and spread good practice.
The results of the survey indicate that training courses should include:
a thorough understanding of relevant sections of the national law regulating animal experimentation, so that everyone is aware of the required actions when humane endpoints are reached;
comprehensive training in recognition and alleviation of pain and distress, directly relevant to the projects that each trainee will be carrying out;
demonstration (eg video) of one or more objective means of measuring pain to show that it may not be as easy to detect animal suffering as some trainees may think;
relevant information on the biology and behaviour of the study species, where trainees are made aware of the fact that this behaviour is likely to be innate in laboratory animals even if they do not have the opportunity to express it (see www.ratlife.org);
some training in retrieving information on animal assessment, including new developments, and how to ensure that this information is implemented appropriately in the trainee's own projects and throughout the establishment;
discussion time, so that trainees can explore how they feel about potentially causing animal suffering or caring for suffering animals.
It is essential to regularly review training syllabuses, materials and courses with respect to all of the above, so as to take account of new information, thinking and resources. The RSPCA is hoping to develop UK initiatives in these areas in association with relevant bodies such as the accreditation bodies, individual trainers and the UK Laboratory Animal Science Association
References
- Hawkins P (2002) Recognising and assessing pain, suffering and distress in laboratory animals: a survey of current practice in the UK with recommendations. Laboratory Animals 36, 375-395
A longer version with detailed results is available online at http://www.lal.org.uk/pain/recognisingpain.pdf