simplebooklet thumbnail

ATW December 2020

Vol 19 No 3 December 2020
IAT Journal
Animal Technology
and Welfare
ISSN 1742-0385
Offi cial Journal of the Institute of Animal Technology
and European Federation of Animal Technologists
Level 6 Diploma projects
AWERB Lessons from Covid-19
Celebrating Making a Difference
New posters – part two
i
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Editorial
Jas Barley, Chair of the Editorial Board
The relationship between employee
participation and job satisfaction
Cheryl Yalden
Improving animal welfare at Newcastle
University by introducing the low stress
handling of mice
Emma Hamilton
PAPER SUMMARY TRANSLATIONS
French, German, Italian, Spanish
AWERB review of lessons learned from COVID-19 experience
Laboratory Animal Science Association, Laboraory Animal Veterinary Association,
Institute of Animal Technology, Royal Society of Biology, National Centre for the
Replacement Reduction and Refinement of Animals in Research, Royal Society for the
protection of Animals, European Federation of Animal technologists, European Society
of Laboratory Animal Veterinarians, Understanding Animal Research
TECH-2-TECH
A picture paints a thousand words
Joanna Malton
LOOKING BACK – Celebrating making a difference
Animal Technology at the National Institute for Medical Research:
A Century of Innovation
Alan Palmer
Optimising mouse production – good practice for efficient colony management
and implementation of the 3Rs
Hannah Easter
Time’s up for tick-over colonies … Do we now need to maintain so many GA
mouse lines?
Stuart Newman and Stephen Woodley
203
195
205
221
217
209
169
ix
Vol 19 No 3 December 2020
Editorial
Jas Barley, Chair of the Editorial Board
Report of the 2019 RSPCA/UFAW Rodent
Welfare Group meeting
Chloe Stevens, Emily Finnegan, Jasmine Clarkson,
Charlotte Burns, Sonia Bains, Colin Gilbert,
Caroline Chadwick, Samantha Izzard, Charlotte Inman,
Penny Hawkins (Secretary) and Huw Golledge
Reduction of the negative effects of
methionine on bone parameters in broilers’
embryos by intra-egg injection of Vitamin B
12
Mohammad Naser Nazem, Shima Tasharofi,
Negin Amiri and Sepideh Sabzekar
The care of the Children’s Python
(Antaresia children)
Alexander Hosking and Gary Martinic
Feline-assisted therapy: a promising part of animal assisted therapy (AAT)
Eliska Mi
č
ková and Krityna Machova
The care of Central and Pygmy Bearded Dragons
Alexander Hosking and Gary Martinic
PAPER SUMMARY TRANSLATIONS
French, German, Italian, Spanish
LOOKING BACK
Physical hazards in the laboratory animal house
R.T. Charles
The incidence of a pathogenic strain of pseudomonas in a rabbit colony
G.R. Alpen and K. Maerz
TECH-2-TECH
Development of a sifting cage change method for rats to improve welfar e
Seonagh Henderson
Vol 1 9 No 2 August 2020
CONTENTS
i
August20:Animal Technology and Welfare 4/8/20 10:48 Page i
185
ii
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
POSTER PRESENTATIONS
Assessing pain in models of Rheumatoid Arthritis
Samuel Singleton, Meriam Nefla, Ngaire Dennison, Simon Arthur and Tim Hales
Refinements to health monitoring
Hannah Jones and Rebecca King
Biosecurity risks and the pre-implantation embryo; lessons from the mouse
Jean Cozzi, Mendy Verrier and Jimmy Mancip
Environmental enrichment for a small colony of rats
Nick Blackburn, Gemma Cronshaw and Mike Mitchell
Oestr us checking increasing productivity and embracing the 3Rs
Samantha Hoskins and Jack Brown
Using habituation to reduce stress for rats being transported short distances
Sarah Taylor
Shining a light on rearing pigmentless Zebrafish
Jacqueline Glover, Thom Berriman, Dimitra Mantzor ou, William Havelange,
Sam Berry and Bruno Correia da Silva
The jacket with pulling power a novel approach to early stage evaluation
of magnetic nanoparticles
Alison Ritchie, James Dixon, Phil Clarke and Anna Grabowska
ii
CONTENTS
Index to Advertisers
ABPI ..................................................................x,xi LBS ..................................................................ii
AS-ET ...............................................................OBC Somni Scientific ................................................iv
Datesand Ltd......................................................IFC Special Diets Services .....................................viii
Institute of Animal Technology ...............................vii Tecniplast UK Ltd .............................................xii
IPS Product Supplies Ltd.....................................IBC
August20:Animal Technology and Welfare 12/8/20 07:54 Page ii
224
238
234
241
249
245
243
Time for change? Practicalities of implementing non-aversive methods for
handling mice
John Waters
Rat litters in trouble – can they be helped?
Joanna Malton
Food trials conducted to improve the survival and development of Zebrafi sh
Nicola Goodwin, Elisabeth Busch-Nentwich, Ross Kettlebourgh, David MacDonald,
Robert Mottram, Peter Thompson, Diane Hazlehurst, James Bussell and Derek Stemple
Covance animal environmental enrichment program – In-house enrichment
items, their benefi ts and the process of implementation
Michael Emmott
POSTERS
Mouse to Man: an overview of the impact that mouse model research has had
on the development of gene and stem cell therapies and the increasing use of
personalised medicine
Steven Cubitt
Do Buccal swabs from Zebrafi sh give enough of a sample of DNA to be used as a
viable non-invasive method of genotyping?
Sarah Lawton
Alternative training method using a mouse simulator in intravenous lateral tail
vein procedures
Carmen Abela
Surgery refi nements improve success rates in rat bile collection
Hans van Wijk, Dawn Haida, Christina Duncan, Michael Bainbridge, Thomas Visockis and
J. Kendrick
iMAD Award – Recognition to those that have made a difference
Index to Advertisers
251z
Avid plc ..............................................................vii
College of Laboratory Animal Science and
Technology (CLAST) ............................................x,xi
Datesand Ltd ....................................................IFC
Institute of Animal Technology ...................208, OBC
IPS Product Supplies Ltd ...................................IBC
LBS Serving Biotechnology Ltd .............................iv
Somni Scientifi c ..................................................iii
Special Diets Services .......................................viii
Tecniplast UK Ltd ................................................xii
Vet-Tech Solutions Ltd ......................................248
iii
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
INHALATION ANAESTHESIA EQUIPMENT AND SERVICE
SOMNI Scientific is centered on the animal welfare and
research community with a focus on clinical accuracy,
clinician/technician safety, economic performance and
intuitive functionality.
SOMNI PROVIDES UNPARALLELED CUSTOMER SERVICE, CLINICAL AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT.
(T) 0800 0129101 (D) 01872 248890 (M) 07798 969805
enquiries@somniscientific.com www.somniscientific.co.uk
SCHEDULE SERVICE TODAY
0800 0129101
Inspection of the carrier gas system (O2,
Air, N2O, etc.) including flow meters, flow
control, seals, regulators, quick disconnects,
and hoses
Inspection of fresh gas delivery system
(rebreathing system, non-rebreathing
system, induction chamber, etc.)
Cleaning and lubrication where appropriate:
Inspection of all tubing, conduit, stopcocks,
valves, O2 flush, etc.
Inspection of the waste anaesthetic gas
management system(s)
Provide a detailed report for each system
Specialising in anaesthesia systems specific to
Animal Health and Welfare.
• ISO 13485:2003 standards.
• Clinical and technical support.
Vaporisers are life critical, precision instruments
When manufactured and serviced properly, they will
deliver accurate concentrations of anaesthetic agent.
Veterinary Service and
Vaporiser Calibration
Your Health is Important
Machine Service
Your Health is Important
Machine Service
enquiries@somniscientific.com www.somniscientific.co.uk
Tony Davidge and Nimesh Joseph
iv
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Developed to look like natural nesting materials such
as thin grass stems, Nesting Cups are made from high
quality, food approved ne kraft paper in preformed
portions, available in 4g, 6g, 8g, 10g & 12g sizes.
Low dust product.
Ready for use straight out of the box, without
additional actions.
Easy to dose per cage.
You know the xed costs per cage with each use.
Helps mice with their thermoregulation and
reduces stress.
Analysis available.
Autoclavable.
Tel: +44 (0)1293 827940
Email: sales@lbs-biotech.com
Contact LBS - your trusted supplier, serving
the needs of the Biotechnology Industry
www.lbs-biotech.com
Nesting Cups
Dose controlled nesting material enabling mice
to full their natural instincts. Supplied
exclusively in the UK by LBS.
v
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
v
OFFICERS
President
Dr Robin Lovell-Badge CBE FRS
Immediate Past President
Professor Sir Richard Gardner MA PhD FRSB
FIAT (Hon) FRS
Vice-Presidents
Senga Allan MIAT RAnTech, David Anderson MRCVS,
Stephen Barnett BA MSc FIAT (Hon) CBiol FRSB
RAnTech, Miles Carroll PhD, Brian Cass CBE,
Paul Flecknell MA Vet MB PhD DLAS DipLECVA
MRCVS, FIAT (Hon), Penny Hawkins PhD BSc, Wendy
Jarrett MA, Judy MacArthur-Clark CBE BVMS DLAS
FRSB DVMS (h.c.), DipECLAM FRAgS DipACLAM
MRCVS, Fiona M
cEwen BSc BVM&S MSc MRCVS,
Tim Morris BVetMed PhD DipACLAM DipECLAM CBiol
FRSB CertLAS MRCVS, Clive Page OBE PhD BSc,
Jan-Bas Prins PhD MSc, Vicky Robinson CBE BSc PhD,
Paul Sanders MIAT RAnTech, David Spillane FIAT,
Gail Thompson RLATG, Robert Weichbrod PhD RLATG
Life Members
Ken Applebee OBE FIAT CBiol FRSB RAnTech,
Charlie Chambers MIAT RAnTech, Roger Francis MSc
FIAT RAnTech, Pete Gerson MSc FIAT RAnTech,
Cathy Godfrey FIAT RAnTech, John Gregory BSc (Hons)
FIAT CBiol F
RSB RAnTech, Patrick Hayes FIAT DipBA
RAnTech, Robert Kemp FIAT (Hon) RAnTech,
Phil Ruddock MIAT RAnTech, Ted Wills FIAT (Hon)
RAnTech
Honorary Members
Mark Gardiner MIAT RAnTech, Sarah Lane MSc FIAT,
Sue McHugh BSc FIAT, Norman Mortell BA (Hons)
MIAT RAnTech, Wendy Steel BSc (Hons) FIAT
Members of Council
Matthew Bilton, Kally Booth, Steven Cubitt,
Simon Cumming, Haley Daniels, Glyn Fisher,
Nicky Gent, Alan Graham, Nathan Hill, Linda Horan,
Sam Jameson, Elaine Kirkum, Adele Kitching,
Theresa Langford, Sylvie Mehigan, Steve Owen,
Alan Palmer, Allan Thornhill, John Waters,
Lynda Westall, Carole Wilson, Adrian Woodhouse
Council Officers
Chair: Linda Horan BSc (Hons) MIAT RAnTech
Vice Chair: Glyn Fisher FIAT RAnTech
Honorary Secretary:
Simon Cumming BSc FIAT RAnTech
Treasurer: Glyn Fisher FIAT RAnTech
Chair of Board of Educational Policy:
Steven Cubitt MSc FIAT RAnTech
Chair Registration & Accreditation Board:
Glyn Fisher FIAT RAnTech
ATW Editor: Jas Barley MSc FIAT RAnTech
Bulletin Editor: Carole Wilson BSc MIAT
ATW/Bulletin Editorial Board:
Jas Barley (Chair), Matthew Bilton, Nicky Gent,
Patrick Hayes, Elaine Kirkum, Carole Wilson,
Lynda Westall
Branch Liaison Officer:
Kally Booth MIAT RAnTech
EFAT Representatives:
Glyn Fisher, Alan Palmer
Website Coordinator:
Allan Thornhill FIAT RAnTech
Animal Welfare Officers and LABA
Representatives:
Matthew Bilton (Chair), Kally Booth, Lois Byrom,
Simon Cumming, Nicky Gent, Sylvie Mehigan,
John Waters
Board of Educational Policy:
Steven Cubitt (Chair), Adele Kitching (Secretary)
Communications Group:
Adrian Woodhouse (Chair), Nathan Hill,
Elaine Kirkum, Teresa Langford, Sylvie Mehigan,
Allan Thornhill, Lynda Westall
IAT REPRESENTATIVES
August20:Animal Technology and Welfare 26/8/20 12:39 Page v
Developed to look like natural nesting materials such
as thin grass stems, Nesting Cups are made from high
quality, food approved ne kraft paper in preformed
portions, available in 4g, 6g, 8g, 10g & 12g sizes.
Low dust product.
Ready for use straight out of the box, without
additional actions.
Easy to dose per cage.
You know the xed costs per cage with each use.
Helps mice with their thermoregulation and
reduces stress.
Analysis available.
Autoclavable.
Tel: +44 (0)1293 827940
Email: sales@lbs-biotech.com
Contact LBS - your trusted supplier, serving
the needs of the Biotechnology Industry
www.lbs-biotech.com
Nesting Cups
Dose controlled nesting material enabling mice
to full their natural instincts. Supplied
exclusively in the UK by LBS.
vi
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
BRANCH SECRETARIES 2 020
Cambridge: Tony Davidge cambridgebranch@iat.org.uk
Edinburgh: Kery-Anne Lavin-Thomson edinburghbranch@iat.org.uk
Huntingdon, Suffolk & Norfolk: Jo Martin hssbranch@iat.org.uk
Ireland: Lisa Watson irelandbranch@iat.org.uk
London: Rebecca Towns londonbranch@iat.org.uk
Midlands: Ian Fielding midlandsbranch@iat.org.uk
North East England: Zoe Smith and John Bland northeastbranch@iat.org.uk
North West: Nicky Windows cheshirebranch@iat.org.uk
Oxford: Adam Truby oxfordbranch@iat.org.uk
Surrey, Hampshire & Sussex: Francesca Whitmore shsbranch@iat.org.uk
West Middlesex: Josefine Woodley westmiddxbranch@iat.org.uk
Wales & West: Rhys Perry waleswestbranch@iat.org.uk
West of Scotland: Joanne King westscotlandbranch@iat.org.uk
IAT OFFICERS MAY BE
CONTACTED VIA:
IAT Administrator:
admin@iat.org.uk
OR VIA THE IAT WEBSITE AT:
www.iat.org.uk
OR THE REGISTERED OFFICE:
5 South Parade, Summertown,
Oxford OX2 7JL
Advertisement Managers:
PRC Associates Ltd
Email: mail@prcassoc.co.uk
Although every effort is made to ensure that no inaccurate or misleading data, opinion or statement appear in the
journal, the Institute of Animal Technology wish to expound that the data and opinions appearing in the articles,
poster presentations and advertisements in ATW are the responsibility of the contributor and advertiser concerned.
Accordingly the IAT, Editor and their agents, accept no liability whatsoever for the consequences of any such
inaccurate or misleading data, opinion, statement or advertisement being published. Furthermore the opinions
expressed in the journal do not necessarily reflect those of the Editor or the Institute of Animal Technology.
© 2020 Institute of Animal Technology
All rights reser ved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without permission from the publisher.
CPD Officer: Alan Palmer MIAT RAnTech
Registration and Accreditation Board:
Glyn Fisher (Chair), John Gregory,
Cathy Godfrey, Kathy Ryder (Home Office),
Stuart Stevenson
Observer: Ngaire Dennison (LAVA)
Congress Committee:
Alan Graham (Chair), Haley Daniels, Adele Kitching,
Allan Thornhill, John Waters
Diversity Officer:
Haley Daniels MBA MSc MIAT RAnTech CIPD
UK Biosciences ASG Representative/
Home Office:
Alan Palmer MIAT RAnTech
vi
August20:Animal Technology and Welfare 12/8/20 07:54 Page vi
vii
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
viii
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Expert in the world
of research diets
www.sdsdiets.com
the essential resource for quality research diets
SD
S
Special Diets Services
Special Diets Services
PO Box 705, Witham, Essex,
England CM8 3AD
Telephone: +44 (0) 1376 511260
Fax: +44 (0) 1376 511247
Email: info@sdsdiets.com
Special Diets Services is the
largest supplier of Laboratory
Animal diets in Europe and the
only dedicated manufacturer
in the UK.
Special Diets Services has a
global reputation for the quality
of its diets and manufacturing
and storage facilities.
ix
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Expert in the world
of research diets
www.sdsdiets.com
the essential resource for quality research diets
SD
S
Special Diets Services
Special Diets Services
PO Box 705, Witham, Essex,
England CM8 3AD
Telephone: +44 (0) 1376 511260
Fax: +44 (0) 1376 511247
Email: info@sdsdiets.com
Special Diets Services is the
largest supplier of Laboratory
Animal diets in Europe and the
only dedicated manufacturer
in the UK.
Special Diets Services has a
global reputation for the quality
of its diets and manufacturing
and storage facilities.
August 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Editorial
Jas Barley
Chair of the Editorial Board
Looking back over issues of the Journal through its various identities, one thing is appar ent and that is the contribution that
overseas authors have made to the content. Topics have varied from dealing with exotic species, lack of sophisticated equipment,
different attitudes to everyday problems, staff training and education and disease outbreaks. However, the resolute that has b
een
constant throughout, despite the differences across the world, is the love and concern for the animals being cared for.
Many include interesting photographs but I unfortunately am unable to use them as the quality of images is so poor when
repr oduced, to the extent in some cases, they become worthless.
Obviously, things have changed over seven decades and the technology described in contributions from overseas is less different
from what we use in the UK. This issue w
elcomes contributions from Australia, the Czech Republic and Iran as well, of course
from the UK. Since ATW became an Open Access publication and is being published electronically, it is enjoying a wider audience
and is attracting mor e contributions than usual. Not all are relevant to our profession, but knowledge is transferable so what
seems ‘off beat’ today may become useful in the future. However, as Editor I will always strive to maintain the quality of our
publications a
nd the usefulness to our readers.
In this issue we include the RSPCA 2019 Rodent and Rabbit Welfare group meeting repor t. The 26th meeting that the RSPCA have
organised focussed on ‘sentience, positive welfare and psychological well being’. The repor t contains contributions from 11
presenters as well as notes on the interactive discussion session on sentience that closed the meeting.
A paper from Iran, a first as far as I can see for the Journal, on reducing the negative e
ffects of methionine on bone parameters
in broilers’ embryos may seem of little relevance but it offers a better understanding of how methionine affects bone structure
which is important to most species. Similarly, Feline Assisted Therapy as described by the team at the University of Life Sciences
Prague does not appear to fall into the realms of Animal Technology but it gives us a better understanding of how animals can have
a positive effect on some people, which in the current situation may be of significant benefit to a wider population. Our final paper
from the team at Western Sydney University, details the care of the Children’ Python and two species of Bearded Dragons. Not
perhaps the run of the mill laboratory animals but just as important to many Animal Technologists globally as mice and rats. If you
keep reptiles at home or know of someone who is contemplating one as a pet these papers make useful reference documents. We
also offer two papers from previous issues of the Journal which were very different in appearance and content than today’s Journal
of Animal Technology and Welfare and not only because of the change of title. Issues were printed in black and white and in the very
early days were produced by hand. The paper from France on Physical Hazards in the laboratory animal house will bring back many
memories for some of the older technicians, myself included, but not necessarily good ones. The use of ether as an anaesthetic
which I know is still used in some countries where resources are limited, for human sur gery, presented a very real danger to both
animals and staff. Disease in laboratory animal units was often a recurring problem, bacterial infections such as Pseudomonas as
described in the reprint of the article were still presenting Animal Technologists with problems as late as the end of the 1980s. When
importing animals and tissues from overseas it is important to realise that they may be carrying disease not seen in the UK for
several decades. In recent times, Ectromelia was introduced into a unit in the USA via antibodies produced overseas. Precautions
must be taken until such time as you are sure that the animals and tissues are clear of any underlying infections.
We a
re also able to offer in this issue an interesting Tech-2-Tech article by Seonagh Henderson of the University of Glasgow, on
a novel technique of cage cleaning which has
a p
ositive effect on the welfare of laboratory rats. Finally, we included several posters
prepared for AST2020 but sadly at the moment remain unpresented.
Thanks again to all of our authors, past and present, both internationally and here in the UK. There would not have been 70 years
of the Journal without you. Here is to the next seven decades and beyond.
THE INSTITUTE OF ANIMAL TECHNOLOGY
ETHICAL STATEMENT
“In the conduct of their Professional duties, Animal Technologists have a moral and legal
obligation, at all times, to promote and safeguard the welfare of animals in their care,
recognising that good laboratory animal welfare is an essential component of good
laboratory animal technology and science.
The Institute recognises and supports the application of the principles of the 3Rs
(Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) in all areas of animal research.”
ix
August20:Animal Technology and Welfare 12/8/20 07:54 Page ix
December 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
This issue marks the close of the 70
th
anniversary year of the foundation of what became the Institute of Animal Technology. The
IAT had planned to celebrate this achievement with a series of events but unfortunately thanks to a nasty little coronavirus it has
not been possible. However we still have cause to celebrate, albeit in a somewhat muted style.
Firstly, we should be celebrating the fact that Animal Technologists in all our many guises have shown repeatedly, that despite the
problems the world has experienced during this year, that nothing stops them placing welfare as their first priority. To all of you I offer
my heartfelt congratulations for carrying on against the odds and I am proud of every one of you.
We can also look back over the past 7 decades and celebrate the difference we have made to the animals in our care. As you know
we have been using the theme of ‘Making a Difference’ throughout the year and this issue continues the look at our achievements.
Although I was not around in 1950, I am old enough to have witnessed many of the changes our members have made to the lives of animals
used in scientific research. Some of these may not have been huge leaps forward but cumulatively they have transformed the way we care
for animals for the better as well as our own working lives. In the first issue of this year we looked at education and how we have developed
our qualifications and the status we enjoy within the scientific world. Over the years we have made improvements to animal welfare,
due to a better understanding gained through education of the requirements for animals to be not only physically and microbiologically
healthy but also not to be stressed/distressed and to be able to express natural behaviours. This issue looks at some of the changes
the Journal in its many guises has reported on and which have been adopted by our professions and the researchers we work with.
I asked members of Council which developments in their opinion have made the greatest impact and the responses showed that in
most cases it was the changes to basic husbandry that have improved animals lives the most. I think all of us understand that the
work of Jane Hurst and the team at Liverpool University on non-aversive handling has made the most basic task we undertake less
stressful to a huge number of mice in our care. Some of us will remember with discomfort, the days when rats were restrained by
the base of their tails. Thankfully, that is no longer a general practice and now the handling of mice is also changing for the better.
Emma Hamilton’s project for her Level 6 Diploma course reports on a project to change the culture at the University of Newcastle
and introduce non-aversive handling of mice to the researchers there. Emma mentions John Waters’ presentation at Newcastle on
the tunnel handling and cupping methods as being a seminal point in changing attitudes and we reprint John’s paper in this issue.
John received the Andrew Blake Tribute Award (ABTA) for his work spreading the word on how a relatively simple change, mainly in
technologists and researchers attitudes to handling, could improve animal welfare.
Other ABTA papers are also printed in this issue including Joanna Malton’s: Rat litters in trouble – can they be helped? Joanna’s
study showed that more complicated efforts to reduce pre-weaning losses were less effective than stopping post-partum mating
by removing the male just before a litter was due so that the dam’s lactation was not impaired by trying to produce milk whilst also
carrying a developing litter. Time’s up for tick-over colonies ….Do we now need to maintain so many GA mouse lines? from Stuart
Newman and Stephen Woodley discusses how the need to maintain colonies of Genetically Altered (GA) mice can be eliminated by
cryopreservation, thereby dramatically reducing the numbers of mice bred unnecessarily.
Other developments in refinement may have also won a ABTA if only they had entered the competition. One of the major achievements
of the last 70 years is how Branch meetings, Congress and the Journal has enabled technologists to learn about changes in how
we can improve an animal’s life.
We have also included a retrospective look by Alan Palmer at the way Animal Technology changed by innovation at the National Institute
for Medical Research (NIMR) during its century of existence. The review is a fascinating look into the past and illustrates how far we have
developed since those early days. Now part of The Francis Crick Institute, Alan and the team are still innovating and improving animal welfare.
We will be continuing a look back into the past in future issues of ATW and hopefully compare with modern methods of improved welfare.
Obviously, the loss of AST2020 due to its non-viability in the face of the pandemic greatly reduced the number of posters available for
publication. My thanks go to the authors who have kindly allowed the poster they had prepared for the meeting to be published in the Journal.
Although I am writing this in September, I would like to take this opportunity to wish you all and your families a healthy and happy
Christmas and New Year.
Editorial
Jas Barley
Chair of the Editorial Board
x
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
College of Laboratory
Animal Science & Technology
Animal Law &
Welfare
Explore the legislation and
ethical principles governing
the use of animals in science,
essential knowledge for all
existing and prospective
NACWOs.
Biological
Science
Explore the principles
of animal anatomy and
physiology, and learn how
to apply this knowledge to
improve animal welfare and
scientic research.
Disease Recognition
& Control
Discover how the mammalian
body defends itself against
disease and how to
utilise those defences for
experimental and husbandry
purposes.
Genetic Alteration
Technologies
All you need to know about
breeding. Maintaining and
using GA animals, including
the maintenance and
development of specic
animal models.
Physiology of
Pain & Stress
Consider the biological
basis of pathological change
and animal behaviour with
particular reference to pain
and stress.
Toxicology
An introduction to the theory,
methods and regulations
governing the assessment of
biochemical toxicology and the
role of the study director.
CONTINUAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT UNITS
CLAST oers 11 dierent subjects to tailor your education to meet your specic needs
Animal Facility
Management & Design
Learn about the process
of animal facility design,
construction and modication,
and develop your ability
to reect on management
theories and strategies.
Supervisory
Management Skills
An introduction to supervisory
management within an
animal facility, focusing on
the legislative responsibilities
and management principles
needed in the workplace.
Experimental
Design
An introduction to
the principles of good
experimental design and
reporting. Develop your skills
in eective research, review
and analysis.
Applied Learning
& Development
Develop your skills in
reection, research and the
creation of eective plans.
Particularly useful for existing
or prospective NACWOs,
NTCOs and NIOs.
Project Planning
& Project
Research, review, analyse
and debate current scientic
theories, and learn how to
manage a project eectively
through your chosen research
topic.
ACADEMIC SKILLS
MANAGEMENT SKILLS
ANIMAL HEALTH & WELFARE
xi
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
College of Laboratory
Animal Science & Technology
Animal Law &
Welfare
Explore the legislation and
ethical principles governing
the use of animals in science,
essential knowledge for all
existing and prospective
NACWOs.
Biological
Science
Explore the principles
of animal anatomy and
physiology, and learn how
to apply this knowledge to
improve animal welfare and
scientic research.
Disease Recognition
& Control
Discover how the mammalian
body defends itself against
disease and how to
utilise those defences for
experimental and husbandry
purposes.
Genetic Alteration
Technologies
All you need to know about
breeding. Maintaining and
using GA animals, including
the maintenance and
development of specic
animal models.
Physiology of
Pain & Stress
Consider the biological
basis of pathological change
and animal behaviour with
particular reference to pain
and stress.
Toxicology
An introduction to the theory,
methods and regulations
governing the assessment of
biochemical toxicology and the
role of the study director.
CONTINUAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT UNITS
CLAST oers 11 dierent subjects to tailor your education to meet your specic needs
Animal Facility
Management & Design
Learn about the process
of animal facility design,
construction and modication,
and develop your ability
to reect on management
theories and strategies.
Supervisory
Management Skills
An introduction to supervisory
management within an
animal facility, focusing on
the legislative responsibilities
and management principles
needed in the workplace.
Experimental
Design
An introduction to
the principles of good
experimental design and
reporting. Develop your skills
in eective research, review
and analysis.
Applied Learning
& Development
Develop your skills in
reection, research and the
creation of eective plans.
Particularly useful for existing
or prospective NACWOs,
NTCOs and NIOs.
Project Planning
& Project
Research, review, analyse
and debate current scientic
theories, and learn how to
manage a project eectively
through your chosen research
topic.
ACADEMIC SKILLS
MANAGEMENT SKILLS
ANIMAL HEALTH & WELFARE
xii
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
169
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareDecember 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Background
The aim of the project was to explore the relationship
between employee participation and job satisfaction
by carrying out four workshops relating to the
implementation of the 3Rs and working towards a
Culture of Care with clearly defined shared values. The
participants were members of the Biological Services
Unit at King’s College London Guy’s Campus involved in
the care of animals used for medical research.
The 3Rs are a set of principles that provide a framework
for more ethical and humane animal research.
1
They
stand for Replacement, Reduction and Refinement.
Where possible, the use of animals should be replaced
by another method when they can provide the same
quality of research e.g. computer models. If it is not
possible to replace animals, then all efforts should
be made to reduce the number of animals used.
Refinement methods should be utilised to reduce the
amount of pain, suffering or lasting harm experienced
by the animals, this can be obtained for example, by
improving housing, procedure methods and pain relief.
Institutions that work with research animals are highly
regulated by legislation and guidelines. However, such
institutions should endeavour to go beyond the legal
obligations and treat the animals with compassion and
empathy by establishing a Culture of Care. Improved
animal welfare has continually been shown to increase
the reproducibility of research and promote good
science. This culture should be extended to the people
that work with the animals where “Institutional culture
influences the productivity and performance of many
enterprises”.
2,3
Low morale and motivation in staff can
be linked to low job satisfaction, increased sickness and
bad public perception of an organisation. According to
the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
(CIPD) 2018 report, absences due to stress-related
illness and mental health issues including anxiety and
depression had increased in nearly 40% and 55% of
organisations, respectively.
4
Organisational culture is generally accepted, as defined
by Schein (1990), as “a set of beliefs and values shared
by members of the same organisation that influences
their behaviours”.
5
A research report by the CIPD
(2016) further found that culture ‘impacts the trust,
engagement, wellbeing and productivity of employees’
and ‘plays out in employees through how they behave
and the values they apply to the work they do…’ .
6
To obtain a Culture of Care around the animals, a
culture of care is required for those who care for the
animals. There are many motivational theories alluding
to the factors that influence and drive employees
and their work ethic. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is
a five-tier model of needs whereby needs lower down
in the hierarchy need to be met before higher needs
can be addressed.
7
The first four tiers are deficiency
needs whereby motivation is driven when these are not
met. The last tier is growth needs whereby motivation
increases as these needs are met. To get the most from
employees and keep them motivated, it is important to
identify what needs are currently fulfilled, what needs
need fulfilling and how these can be met to achieve
the stage of self-actualisation whereby individuals are
motivated to become the best that they can be. The
physiological and safety needs of employees should be
met already by the job. The use of workshops to allow
discussion and participation between staff should allow
for the belonging and esteem needs to be met if they
are not already being met. For example, Charles River
utilises monthly webinars where discussions regarding
animal welfare and strategies for implementing the 3Rs
can take place as part of their institutional framework
to promote a culture of care.
8
A study conducted by Bhatti and Qureshi (2007) across
34 organisations in the telecommunications, banking
and the oil and gas sectors of Pakistan, found that
employee participation had a positive and significant
effect on the job satisfaction of the employee. The study
also found that it was important that staff knew what
The relationship between employee
participation and job satisfaction
CHERYL YALDEN
Biological Services, Hodgkin Building, King’s College London, Guy’s Campus, London SE1 1UL UK
Correspondence: cheryl.yalden@kcl.ac.uk
Based on an IAT Level 6 Diploma in Laboratory Animal Science and Technology Project
170
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
was going on in the organisation so that they could
use the knowledge and concluded that information-
sharing programmes are integral to organisational
success.
Legislation regarding staff is also a factor that has
been considered so that no bias should be shown
with the intention that all staff members have equal
opportunities to benefi t from the project.
The project was feasible, as at least 4 workshops
were possible to implement within the timeframe with
little or no extra fi nancial cost. The time to carry out
the workshops was factored into the normal working
week and was agreed by senior management.
Improved staff welfare could lead to improved animal
welfare, increased productivity and reduced sickness.
These secondary factors were not assessed in
the current project due to time constraints and a
sample group that did not refl ect the whole company.
However, there is potential for future development of
the project.
Another limitation of the project is that there are many
factors both inside and outside of work that infl uence
motivation, morale and job satisfaction in staff.
Objectives
Scoping
1. Identify stakeholders (high infl uence: high interest)
1.1 How: Stakeholder mapping
1.2 Completion: End December 2019
2. Identify potential risks and mitigating factors
2.1 How: Risk Register
2.2 Completion: End December 2019
3. Create a budget overview including time costs
3.1 How: Estimated costs spreadsheet
3.2 Completion: End December 2019
Planning
1. Communicate with primary stakeholders (High
infl uence: High interest) by meeting in person to
discuss the remit of project and identify concerns
1.1 How: In person
1.2 Completion: Mid-January 2020
2. Communicate with secondary stakeholders (High
infl uence: Low interest or Low infl uence: High interest)
2.1 How: Email
2.2 Completion: End January 2020
3. Communicate with tertiary stakeholders (Low
infl uence: Low interest)
3.1 How: Organisation’s website
3.2 Completion: End January 2020
4. Design a job satisfaction survey that can be put
online to allow for anonymous and honest answering
4.1 Completion: End-January 2020
5. Confi rm content of workshops by talking to the
Named Information Offi cer (NIO) and Named Training
and Competency Offi cer (NTCO)
5.1 How: Meeting in person
5.2 Completion: Mid-January 2020
6. Communicate with suitable industry members to
lead workshops
6.1 How: Email or phone
6.2 Completion: Mid-January 2020
7.
Book suitable space to effi ciently carry out
workshops
7.1 How: Email or phone
7.2 Completion: Mid-January
Implementation
1. Design workshop questionnaires
1.1 How: paper questionnaire consisting of
approximately 10 questions
1.2 Completion: End January 2020
2. Inform staff of the workshops
2.1 How: In person
2.2 Completion: End January 2020
Figure 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
171
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
3. Carry out workshops twice a month on Thursday
afternoon taking a maximum of 1hr 30mins
3.1 How: Active participation
3.2 Completion: 4 workshops by Mid-March 2020
4. Obtain workshop feedback
4.1 How: anonymous paper questionnaire
4.2 Completion: after every workshop
5. Obtain results of job satisfaction as result of
workshops survey
5.1 How: anonymous online questionnaire through
survey monkey
5.2 Completion: Mid-March
Evaluation
1. Compare and analyse results
2. Meet with senior management to discuss results
and positives and negatives of the project and where
the project can move
3. Create report
3.1 Completion: Early March 2020
4. Report to stakeholders
4.1 How: Presentation
4.2 Completion: Mid-March 2020
5. Gain feedback
5.1 How: staff survey and open discussion
5.2 Completion: End March 2020
Primary Stakeholders
The primary stakeholders are the key players in the
project that have a high level of infl uence and high level
of interest in the project. It was important to ensure
that these stakeholders remained satisfi ed throughout
the project.
Secondary Stakeholders
The secondary stakeholders were those with either a
high infl uence and low interest (potential change agents)
or high interest and low infl uence (Back-Yarders). It was
important to identify how they may be affected by the
project and to keep them informed.
Tertiary Stakeholders
Tertiary stakeholders have low interest and low infl uence
in the project and minimal effort was required to keep
them informed but they were considered.
Figure 2. Categories of Stakeholders
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
POTENTIAL CHANGE AGENTS
172
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
7
Risk
ID
Identified
Category
Risk The risk is caused by Effects of Risk
Mitigating Action
In Place
Impact
Level
1
21/11/2019
DISHONEST
FEEDBACK
Participants feeling
pressured to respond in
a certain way in order to
please employer and
avoid negative retaliation.
Non-
reproducible
outcomes
that are not
representative
to the project.
All questionnaires
will be anonymously answered.
Medium
2
21/11/2019
LACK OF TIME Time for day-to-day
tasks allows no time for
the project.
Project gets
overlooked and
is unable to be
completed in
time frame.
Time allocation for the project
will be agreed with the director
and line manager ahead of time
and protected in writing. Staff will
be motivated to finish their work
in time in order to attend sessions.
High
3
21/11/2019
LACK OF
INDIVIDUAL
PARTICIPATION
Absence due to
sickness, annual leave
or part-time working
hours.
Equal
opportunities
affected if not all
can take part
and reduced
statistically
significant
results with a
smaller sample
size.
Sessions to be carried out on a Thursday when annual
leave is lower and part-time working hours coincide.
Low
4
05/01/2020
LACK OF
OVERALL
PARTICIPATION
Lack of interest or
motivation as a whole to
attend sessions.
A small or non-
existent sample
group would
prevent the
project from
being carried out.
Sessions will be mandatory and positively promoted.
Senior staff will also be encouraged to be absent from
the sessions to aid interaction from the staff.
High
5
05/01/2020
LACK OF
SUPPORT
Line managers not
wanting to free up time
or to receive feedback
that may reflect
negatively on their
management style.
Will make it
harder for the
project to be
carried out
successfully and
could negatively
affect morale.
The positives of the project will be promoted and the
sessions will take place at a point in the week when the
workload is lower.
Medium
6
21/11/2019
LACK OF
CONTENT
Not deciding on the
content or organising
someone to present it in
time.
Will delay the
implementation
of the project
and may
completely
hinder its
success.
Regular meetings from early on with the NTCO to
determine content and arrange for a presenter and
book for definite time.
High
7
05/01/2020
LACK OF
SPACE
Not booking a suitable
area in adequate time or
the space becoming
unexpectedly
unavailable.
May delay the
project and
reduce morale.
Determine early on how much space is needed and
book specific areas for specific dates. Reserve a
backup space in case of unforeseen problems.
Medium
Date
Risk Register – planning
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
173
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Budget Overview Example questionnaire
Kings College London
Guys Campus Biological Services
PROMOTING A CULTURE OF CARE
Order of magnitude Costs
£3,600
Planning
Time 420
Materials 10
Implementation
Time 2,400
Space 600
Materials 50
Analysis and Evaluation
Time 150
TOTAL £3,600
Planning document
Workshop 1
The workshop will cover: What the 3Rs stand for and
how they are linked to a Culture of Care. This workshop
will establish what the core values of the organisation
are.
Workshop 2
This workshop will focus on: How the 3Rs can be
implemented at the technician level. Examples of
previous ways the 3Rs have been implemented that are
relevant to the staff will be given.
Workshop 3
The workshop will be based around examples of project
protocols that are not designed with best practice
and discussion in groups on how the 3Rs could be
implemented.
Workshop 4
This workshop will be creative, involving employees to
take what they have learnt and apply it to a specific
species or procedure to apply the 3Rs to design a
technique or piece of equipment that would improve
animal welfare.
Each workshop will be followed by a brief questionnaire
that is designed to be anonymously completed.
Workshop 1 Feedback
Directions: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement
with each of these statements in response to having participated
in the workshop.
Q1. I have an improved understanding the principles of the 3Rs.
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Q2. I have improved my understanding of the link between the
3Rs, good animal welfare, and good science.
Q3. I am more confident of my ability to apply the principles of
the 3Rs.
Q4. My understanding of what a Culture of Care is, has improved.
Q5.
I have thought about the 3Rs and how to implement them, more
than I normally would.
Q6. I feel more confident that I am able to contribute my ideas
and that I will be listened to.
Q7. I feel more motivated to look for new ways to apply the 3Rs.
Q8. I will be able to get more satisfaction from my job by actively
applying the principles of the 3Rs.
Q9. I feel I know more of what is expected of me in my job role
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
174
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
After all workshops had been carried out, participants
were asked to complete an anonymous survey on
SurveyMonkey® to give feedback on the workshops
regarding job satisfaction and certain aspects that
can affect job satisfaction. This feedback was used
to analyse and evaluate the relationship between
employee participation and job satisfaction.
Participation workshops feedback
Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement
with the following statements as a result of attending
the 3Rs workshop.
Communication with stakeholders
A key tool when communicating with stakeholders was
the POURS method whereby:
Plan (what to tell and what to ask)
Outline (your understanding, clarify objectives and
seek feedback)
Use (open questions)
Refl ect (use closed questions for confi rmation)
Summarise (agree actions)
Key players
The POURS method for communicating with key players
included the site manager, my line manager and Named
Training and Competency Offi cer (NTCO). I met in person
with these stakeholders and used a plan for which
information to provide and which information to gain
from them regarding the scope of the project. I outlined
the objectives of the project and sought feedback.
Open questions were used to gain detailed information
and closed questions used to refl ect on some of the
information to confi rm answers. The end of the meeting
was used to summarise and agree on the actions to
be taken. Communication regarding the project with
these stakeholders was on a fortnightly basis following
completion of each workshop.
Communication with technical staff was informal
and took place as group discussions and feedback
questionnaires.
Potential change agents
The POURS method was also utilised to communicate
with the director in face to face meetings at the beginning
and end of the project. Human resources and Named
Information Offi cer (NIO) will be informed by email at the
beginning and end of the implementation of the project.
‘Back-Yarders’ and the indifferent
Tertiary stakeholders including researchers, general
public, project holders and administration can be
kept informed via a blog on the company’s respective
website after each workshop.
20
1. I feel more able to influence how things are done in my
team w
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
2. I am better informed and trained to do my job well w
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
3. A positive culture is visible where I work w
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
4. I feel encou raged to come up with new and better wa ys
of doing things w
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
5. I have a greater feeling of personal accomplishment w
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
21
6. I am more invested in the shared values of the
company w
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
7. I am more satisfied overall in my job w
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
8. How many of the workshops did you attend? w
1
2
3
4
9. What aspects of the workshops were good? w
10. What would you change about the workshops? w
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
175
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
7
5.01.2020
LACK OF SPACE
Not booking a
suitable area
in adequate
time or the
space
becoming
unexpectedly
unavailable.
May delay the
project and
reduce morale.
Determine early
on how much
space is needed
and book
specific areas
for specific
dates. Reserve a
backup space in
case of
unforeseen
problems.
24.01.20
Successful
workshops will be
carried out in
adequate spaces to
facilitate the
experience.
Low
Risk Register – Post Implementation
Risk
ID
Date Identified
Category
Risk
The risk is
caused by
Effects of Risk
Mitigating
Action
In Place
End Date
Results of
mitigation action
Final
Impact
Level
1
21.11.19
DISHONEST
FEEDBACK
Participants
feeling
pressured to
respond in a
certain way in
order to
please
employer and
avoid
negative
retaliation.
Non-
reproducible
outcomes that
are not
representative
to the project.
All
questionnaires
will be
anonymously
answered.
03.03.20
The responses
obtained
throughout the
project will more
accurately reflect
the true feelings of
the participants.
Low
2
21.11./19
LACK
OF TIME
Time for day-
to-day tasks
allows no
time for the
project.
Project gets
overlooked and
is unable to be
completed in
time frame.
Time allocation
for the project
will be agreed
with the
director and
line manager
ahead of time
and protected
in writing. Staff
will be
motivated to
finish their work
in time in order
to attend
sessions.
13.03.20
Time to implement
the project will be
protected so that it
can be effectively
carried out to
completion, whilst
still providing
enough time to do
the normal day
day work.
Medium
3
21.11./19
LACK OF
INDIVIDUAL
PARTICIPATION
Absence due
to sickness,
annual leave
or part-time
working hours.
Equal
opportunities
affected if not
all can take part
and reduced
statistically
significant
results with a
smaller sample
size.
Sessions to be
carried out on a
Thursday when
annual leave is
lower and part-
time working
hours coincide.
13.03.20
More people being
able to attend will
promote equal
opportunities and
give more
statistically
significant results.
Low
4
5.01.2020
LACK OF
OVERALL
PARTICIPATION
Lack of
interest or
motivation as
a whole to
attend
sessions.
A small or non-
existent sample
group would
prevent the
project from
being carried
out.
Sessions will be
mandatory and
positively
promoted.
Senior staff will
also be
encouraged to
be absent from
the sessions to
aid interaction
from the staff.
13.03.20
Workshops will be
more successfully
attended with more
interaction and
contribution from
the staff.
Medium
5
5.01.2020
LACK OF
SUPPORT
Line managers W
not wanting
to free up
time or to
receive
feedback that
may reflect
negatively on
their
management
style.
make it
harder for the
project to be
carried out
successfully and
could
negatively
affect morale.
The positives of
the project will
be promoted,
and the
sessions will
take place at a
point in the
week when the
workload is
lower. 13.03.20
Workshops are
more likely to be
attended and
professional
relationships will be
improved.
Low
6
21.11.19
LACK OF
CONTENT
Not deciding
on the
content or
organising
someone to
present it in
time.
Will delay the
implementation
of the project
and may
completely
hinder its
success.
Regular
meetings from
early on with
the NTCO to
determine
content and
arrange for a
presenter and
book for
definite time.
13.03.20
Workshops will be
structured providing
the staff with a
informative and
enjoyable session.
Medium
Will
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
7
5.01.2020
LACK OF SPACE
Not booking a
suitable area
in adequate
time or the
space
becoming
unexpectedly
unavailable.
May delay the
project and
reduce morale.
Determine early
on how much
space is needed
and book
specific areas
for specific
dates. Reserve a
backup space in
case of
unforeseen
problems.
24.01.20
Successful
workshops will be
carried out in
adequate spaces to
facilitate the
experience.
Low
176
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Project programme of work
Kings College London,
Guys Campus Biological Services
PROMOTING A CULTURE OF CARE
Workshop Costing
Workshop 1
Planning
Time 140
Materials 10
Implementing
Time 600
Space 150
Materials 20
TOTAL 920
Workshop 2
Planning
Time 140
Materials 10
Implementing
Time 620
Space 150
Materials 20
TOTAL 930
Workshop 3
Planning
Time 140
Materials 10
Implementing
Time 600
Space 150
Materials 20
TOTAL 910
Workshop 4
Planning
Time 140
Materials 10
Implementing
Time 600
Space 150
Materials 20
TOTAL 930
Analysing and Evaluating
Time 150
TOTAL 150
TOTAL 3,840
Chart 1. Project programme of work.
Project Implementation document
Delivery Methodology
Control
Element
What is
likely to go
wrong?
How and
when will
know?
What will be
done about
it?
Quality Workshops
may not
inspire
participation
or improve
job
satisfaction
.
Results
obtained from
end of session
questionnaires
and end
of project
questionnaire.
Use feedback
after each
workshop
to make
improvements
.
Cost Costs
including
time may
exceed
budget.
Employ
a budget
analysis
after each
workshop.
Reduce costs
of latter
workshops
if projected
expenditure
is likely
to exceed
budget.
Time Workshops
may not be
completed
within the
project
timeline.
When
structuring
and
planning the
workshops.
Workshops
will be
altered to
fit around
schedule.
Quantity The number
of planned
workshops
may not be
possible in
timeframe
or space not
available.
When
booking
room for
workshops.
Information
will have to
be structured
so that it can
be delivered
in fewer
hours.
Table 1. Control point identification
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
177
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Problems
Due to work commitments and holidays, staff could not
attend the original proposed dates for the workshops
and so the dates had to be changed. Suitable locations
to hold the workshops were only available for 3 of the
new dates in the afternoon, therefore the content of the
4 workshops had to be restructured to be presented in
3 workshops.
Workshop 1 Format
Ice breaker activity - employees were randomly put into
groups. The groups were each given a different item
and were to come up with an argument as to why their
item would be the best to have on a desert island. The
aim of the ice breakers in each workshop was to relax
the staff and create a clear division between the normal
workday and the workshops.
The information – presented as a slideshow and
focussed
on the theory of culture and the 3Rs and a
tour of the NC3Rs website.
Discussion – open on how the 3Rs could be implemented
in the workplace.
Workshop 2 Format
Ice breaker activity – staff put into teams and stand
in a queue. The person at the back gets an image and
draws it on the back of the person in front with their
finger. This person then does the same to the person in
front of them without seeing the image. The person at
the front draws the image on a piece of paper based on
the image drawn on their back.
Information – a quiz based on the previous workshop
and on some welfare issues in the workplace. A brief
talk on enrichment for toads and then in groups design
toad enrichment.
Discussion – presentation on the enrichment designed
and how it incorporates the 3Rs.
Workshop 3 Format
Ice breaker – the same as in Workshop 2 as it went
down well.
Information – a guest presenter on a project that had
incorporated the 3Rs to improve animal husbandry. An
example of a bad protocol was given to the staff. In
groups they analysed the proposed protocol to make
suggestions on how it could be improved by utilising
the 3Rs.
Discussion – each person was given a chance to report
back on the different aspects of the proposal, on what
they would improve or where they would need more
information to determine whether it was ethical.
Revised programme of work
Description Start
Date
End
Date
Duration
(Days)
Overall
programme
1/12/19 18/3/20 109
Communicate
with primary
stakeholders
8/12/19 15/12/19 8
Agree content of
workshops
6/1/20 24/1/20 19
Communicate
with secondary
stakeholders
6/1/20 31/1/20 26
Communicate
with tertiary
stakeholders
24/1/20 31/1/20 8
Arrange content
and presenters
18/1/20 13/3/20 56
Design evaluation
questionnaire
17/1/20 26/1/20 10
Book times and
rooms
18/1/20 31/1/20 14
Design workshop
1 content
17/1/20 11/2/20 26
Design workshop
1 questionnaire
17/1/20 11/2/20 26
Workshop 1
questionnaire
12/2/20 13/2/20 2
Mid- point review 21/2/20 28/2/20 8
First workshop 12/2/20 12/2/20 1
Design workshop
2 questionnaire
13/2/20 3/3/20 20
Design workshop
2 content
13/2/20 3/3/20 20
Workshop 2
questionnaire
4/3/20 5/3/20 2
Second workshop 4/3/20 4/3/20 1
Design workshop
3 content
5/3/20 10/3/20 6
Design workshop
3 questionnaire
5/3/20 10/3/20 6
Workshop 3
questionnaire
11/3/20 12/3/20 2
Third workshop 11/3/20 11/3/20 1
Give out overall
questionnaire
12/3/20 13/3/20 2
Analyse results 14/3/20 17/3/20 4
Evaluate 14/3/20 17/3/20 4
Present project 18/3/20 18/3/20 1
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
178
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Budget – Earned Value Analysis
Chart 2. Revised Project programme of work.
32
Earned Value Analysis (EVA). Performed 22nd
February 2020
Cost Baseline
A 4 month, £2910
project
Actual
Cost
Planned Value (PV)
1
2
3
4
£595
Dec Jan Feb Mar
Planned
Value
(PV)
%
completed
Earned
Value (EV)
Workshop 1 planning
13
98
39
150
100%
150
Workshop 1
implementing 770 770 100% 770
Workshop 2 planning 150 150 30% 45
Workshop 2
implementing 780 780 0% 0
Workshop 3 planning
86
64
150
0%
0
Workshop 3
implementing 760 760 0% 0
Analysis and Evaluation
150
150
0%
0
PV= 13 98 1825 974 2910 965
Earned Value (EV)
965
Actual Cost (AC)
595
Earned Value Analysis (EVA). Performed 22nd February 2020
Earned Value (EV) 965 Cost variance (CV) 370 Schedule Performance Index (SPI) 0.49845
Actual Cost (AC) 595 Schedule Variance (SV) -971 Estimated Cost at Completion E[C] 1794.249
Planned Value (PV) 1936 Cost Performance Index (CPI) 1.621849 Estimated Time at Completion E [T] 8.02487
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
179
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
34
Earned Value Analysis (EVA). Performed 5th
March 2020
Cost Baseline
A 4 month, £2910
project
Actual
Cost
Planned Value (PV)
1
2
3
4
£1,025
Dec Jan Feb Mar
Planned
Value (PV)
%
completed
Earned
Value (EV)
Workshop 1 planning
13
98
39
150
100%
150
Workshop 1 implementing
770
770
100%
770
Workshop 2 planning
150
150
100%
150
Workshop 2 implementing
780
780
100%
780
Workshop 3 planning
86
64
150
0%
0
Workshop 3 implementing
760
760
0%
0
Analysis and Evaluation
150
150
0%
0
PV=
13
98
1825
974
2910
1850
Earned Value (EV)
1850
Actual Cost (AC)
1025
Planned Value (PV)
1936
Cost variance (CV)
825
Schedule Variance (SV)
-86
Earned Value Analysis (EVA). Performed 5th March 2020
Earned Value (EV) 1850 Cost variance (CV) 825 Schedule Performance Index (SPI) 0.955579
Actual Cost (AC) 1025 Schedule Variance (SV) -86 Estimated Cost at Completion E[C] 1612.297
Planned Value (PV) 1936 Cost Performance Index (CPI) 1.804878 Estimated Time at Completion E [T] 4.185946
36
Earned Value Analysis (EVA). Performed 13th
March 2020
Cost Baseline
A 4 month, £2910
project
Actual
Cost
Planned Value (PV)
1
2
3
4
£1,585
Dec Jan Feb Mar
Planned Value
(PV)
%
completed
Earned
Value (EV)
Workshop 1 planning
13
98
39
100%
150
Workshop 1 implementing
770
770
100%
770
Workshop 2 planning
150
150
100%
150
Workshop 2 implementing
780
780
100%
780
Workshop 3 planning
86
64
150
100%
150
Workshop 3 implementing
760
760
100%
760
Analysis and Evaluation
150
150
0%
0
PV=
13
98
1825
974
2910
2760
Earned Value (EV)
2760
Actual Cost (AC)
1585
Planned Value (PV)
1936
Cost variance (CV)
1175
Schedule Variance (SV)
824
Cost Performance Index (CPI)
1.741325
Earned Value Analysis (EVA). Performed 13th March 2020
Earned Value (EV) 2760 Cost variance (CV) 1175 Schedule Performance Index (SPI) 1.42562
Actual Cost (AC) 1585 Schedule Variance (SV) 824 Estimated Cost at Completion E[C] 1671.141
Planned Value (PV) 1936 Cost Performance Index (CPI) 1.741325 Estimated Time at Completion E [T] 2.805797
Actual cost at completion = £1735 and time of completion = 3.5 months
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
180
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Results
Participants comments:
What aspects of the workshops were good?
“...Interactions...”
“Well structured with Ice Breaker activities to
improve the chances of attendees feeling that they
can listen and be listened to. Topic was relevant
to the job and that it helps challenge you to think
beyond the confines of just carrying out the tasks
that are expected of you which could help promote
making the workplace better for both employees and
the animals that are in their care.”
“I felt the group activities and ability to express
ideas whilst also demonstrating the principles of the
3Rs were the best bits.”
“Lots of team-based activities.”
“Social interactions with other units, discussing new
ideas.”
“I enjoyed the ability to approach new topics and
consider the issues from different perspectives.”
“Fun activities allowed socialising with colleagues
Informative Educational.”
“The interactive element, being able to voice your
views/answers without fear of being judged.”
“Teamwork parts were fun, having time to talk about
important welfare aspects out of work.”
“The “out of the box” thinking.”
39
Results
Chart 3. Response to Workshop 1.
Chart 4. Response to Workshop 2.
30.8%
53.8%
38.5%
38.5%
23.1%
1
5
.
4
%
38.5%
38.5%
38.5%
38.5%
23.1%
46.2%
53.8%
61.5%
46.2%
46.2%
30.8%
38.5%
30.8%
23.1%
15.4%
7.7%
15.4%
38.5%
15.4%
30.8%
23.1%
1. I understand the principles of the
3Rs more
2. I understand the link between
the 3Rs, good animal welfare, and
3. I am more confident to apply the
principles of the 3Rs
4. I understand what a culture of
care is more than I did before
5. I have thought about the 3Rs and
how to implement them more
6. I feel I am more able to
contribute my ideas and be…
7. I feel more motivated to look for
new ways to apply the 3Rs
8. I will be able to get more
satisfaction from my job by
9. I feel I know more of what is
expected of me in my job role
Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
44.4%
44.4%
55.6%
44.4%
44.4%
77.8%
44.4%
44.4%
44.4%
55.6%
66.7%
66.7%
22.2%
22.2%
33.3%
1. I understand the principles of the 3Rs
more
2. I am more confident to carry out my job
efficiently
3. I am more confident to apply the
principles of the 3Rs
4. I have thought about the 3Rs and how
to implement them more than I normally
5. I feel I am more able to contribute my
ideas and be listened to
6. I feel more motivated to look for new
ways to apply the 3Rs
7. I feel part of a team more
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
44 4%
.
22.2%
39
Results
Chart 3. Response to Workshop 1.
Chart 4. Response to Workshop 2.
30.8%
53.8%
38.5%
38.5%
23.1%
1
5
.
4
%
38.5%
38.5%
38.5%
38.5%
23.1%
46.2%
53.8%
61.5%
46.2%
46.2%
30.8%
38.5%
30.8%
23.1%
15.4%
7.7%
15.4%
38.5%
15.4%
30.8%
23.1%
1. I understand the principles of the
3Rs more
2. I understand the link between
the 3Rs, good animal welfare, and
3. I am more confident to apply the
principles of the 3Rs
4. I understand what a culture of
care is more than I did before
5. I have thought about the 3Rs and
how to implement them more
6. I feel I am more able to
contribute my ideas and be…
7. I feel more motivated to look for
new ways to apply the 3Rs
8. I will be able to get more
satisfaction from my job by
9. I feel I know more of what is
expected of me in my job role
Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
44.4%
44.4%
55.6%
44.4%
44.4%
77.8%
44.4%
44.4%
44.4%
55.6%
66.7%
66.7%
22.2%
22.2%
33.3%
1. I understand the principles of the 3Rs
more
2. I am more confident to carry out my job
efficiently
3. I am more confident to apply the
principles of the 3Rs
4. I have thought about the 3Rs and how
to implement them more than I normally
5. I feel I am more able to contribute my
ideas and be listened to
6. I feel more motivated to look for new
ways to apply the 3Rs
7. I feel part of a team more
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
44 4%
.
22.2%
39
Results
Chart 3. Response to Workshop 1.
Chart 4. Response to Workshop 2.
30.8%
53.8%
38.46153846%
38.46153846%
23.07692308%
15.38461538%
38.46153846%
38.46153846%
38.46153846%
38.5%
23.1%
46.2%
53.8%
61.5%
46.2%
46.2%
30.8%
38.5%
30.8%
23.1%
15.4%
7.7%
15.4%
38.5%
15.4%
30.8%
23.1%
1. I understand the principles of the
3R’s more
2. I understand the link between
the 3R’s, good animal welfare, and
3. I am more confident to apply the
principles of the 3R’s
4. I understand what a culture of
care is more than I did before
5. I have thought about the 3R’s and
how to implement them more
6. I feel I am more able to
contribute my ideas and be…
7. I feel more motivated to look for
new ways to apply the 3R’s
8. I will be able to get more
satisfaction from my job by
9. I feel I know more of what is
expected of me in my job role
Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
44.4%
44.4%
55.6%
44.4%
44.4%
77.8%
44.4%
44.4%
44.4%
55.6%
66.7%
66.7%
22.2%
22.2%
33.3%
1. I understand the principles of the 3R’s
more
2. I am more confident to carry out my job
efficiently
3. I am more confident to apply the
principles of the 3R’s
4. I have thought about the 3R’s and how
to implement them more than I normally
5. I feel I am more able to contribute my
ideas and be listened to
6. I feel more motivated to look for new
ways to apply the 3R’s
7. I feel part of a team more
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
Chart 3. Response to Workshop 1.
Chart 4. Response to Workshop 2.
Chart 5. Response to Workshop 3.
40
Chart 5. Response to Workshop 3.
Chart 6. Overall workshop feedback
23.1%
38.5%
30.8%
38.5%
23.1%
30.8%
53.8%
61.5%
46.2%
53.8%
38.5%
61.5%
53.8%
30.8%
7.7%
1. I have a better understanding of how
the 3Rs are used when reviewing a…
2. I am more aware of the role of the
AWERB
3. I understand what good practices
and bad practices are
4. I have thought about the 3Rs and
how to implement them more than I
5. I feel I am more able to contribute
my ideas and be listened to
6. I feel more motivated to look for
new ways to apply the 3Rs
7. I feel I have discussed the 3Rs with
other technologists more than I…
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
11.1%
22.2%
66.7%
44.4%
11.1%
55.6%
66.7%
33.3%
77.8%
55.6%
66.7%
22.2%
11.1%
22.2%
22.2%
1. I feel more able to influence how things are done in my
team
2. I am better informed and trained to do my job well
3. I feel encouraged to come up with new and better ways
of doing things
4. I have a greater feeling of personal accomplishment
5. I am invested in the shared values of the company
6. I am more satisifed overall in my job
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
40
Chart 5. Response to Workshop 3.
Chart 6. Overall workshop feedback
23.1%
38.5%
30.8%
38.5%
23.1%
30.8%
53.8%
61.5%
46.2%
53.8%
38.5%
61.5%
53.8%
30.8%
7.7%
1. I have a better understanding of how
the 3Rs are used when reviewing a…
2. I am more aware of the role of the
AWERB
3. I understand what good practices
and bad practices are
4. I have thought about the 3Rs and
how to implement them more than I
5. I feel I am more able to contribute
my ideas and be listened to
6. I feel more motivated to look for
new ways to apply the 3Rs
7. I feel I have discussed the 3Rs with
other technologists more than I…
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
11.1%
22.2%
66.7%
44.4%
11.1%
55.6%
66.7%
33.3%
77.8%
55.6%
66.7%
22.2%
11.1%
22.2%
22.2%
1. I feel more able to influence how things are done in my
team
2. I am better informed and trained to do my job well
3. I feel encouraged to come up with new and better ways
of doing things
4. I have a greater feeling of personal accomplishment
5. I am invested in the shared values of the company
6. I am more satisifed overall in my job
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
Chart 6. Overall workshop feedback
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
181
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
What would you change about the workshops?
“The length or frequencies at which the workshops
are carried out so that: (A) more in depth discussion
and understanding can be gained from them (B)
more chances to actually attend them given the fact
that it may not be possible to attend due to work
constraints. (C) Another thing to consider would be
similar to the poster ‘homework’, is that research
could be advised to be done so that we are better
prepared for discussion sessions or so we feel that
we can contribute more without being put on the
spot as much.”
“Not much I would change, content was interesting,
perhaps a little more detail about the concept of
care and how best we can train ourselves to apply it
in our everyday work.”
“Longer lecture focussed segments.”
“Have them every 4-6 weeks.”
“As someone with social anxiety I did not enjoy the
Ice Breakers. I can appreciate their intended purpose
but it distracted from valuable time focusing on the
main aims of the workshop.”
“Nothing.”
“The length, some parts felt a bit rushed as there
simply wasn’t enough time.”
“It would have been good to have a research paper,
book chapter, etc., to read and questions to answer
prior to the session. We could then discuss the
answers. The use of animals in research is a very
controversial and complex topic so I think it might be
interesting to look at it from different viewpoints.”
“Better online tools.”
Stakeholder Engagement
Animal Technologists as key stakeholders and the
subjects of the project were highly engaged in the
process. They were kept well informed of the details
of the project and how change was to be managed.
Communication took the form of participation and
taking on an aspect of ownership of the project.
The line manager had a high interest and high influence of
the project and its outcomes but had a lower expectancy
of the merits of the project. Therefore, it was important
to communicate the outcomes and feedback of each of
the workshops to them and keep them involved in the
information delivered to the technicians throughout the
project.
The director had a high level of influence and a high
interest in the merits of the project but was less directly
affected by the project and the changes that it brought.
It was therefore important to get the information to the
director but not as often or in as much detail throughout
the project.
Project Evaluation
Methodology Analysis
The initial method had to be altered since available
space and technologist time was not enough to support
the original plan for 4 workshops with 2 weeks between.
Therefore, the plan was changed to 3 workshops given
at irregular intervals.
Stakeholder feedback
Animal Technologists – feedback has been gained from
these key players in the feedback forms after each
workshop and the overall survey at the end of the project.
These players have been very involved in the project and
their feedback makes up the results section of the project.
45
The director had a high level of influence and a high interest
in the merits of the project but was less directly affected by
the project and the changes that it brought. It was therefore
important to get the information to the director but not as
often or in as much detail throughout the project.
Figure 5. Stakeholder engagement.
Figure 5. Stakeholder engagement.
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
Animal Technologists
182
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Director feedback will be obtained via the following
questionnaire.
1. The project has been successful in promoting a
Culture of Care
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
2. The goals of the project were communicated clearly
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
3. Project was executed effectively
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
4. The change process was managed effectively
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
5. Information was communicated in a timely manner
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
7. The benefits of the project were clearly expressed
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
6. The project closed at an appropriate time
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Figure 6. Line Manager Feedback questionnaire Figure 7. Director feedback questionnaire
Line manager feedback was be obtained via the
following questionnaire.
1. The project has been successful in promoting a
Culture of Care
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
2. The goals of the project were communicated clearly
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
3. Project was executed effectively
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
4. The project closed at an appropriate time
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
5. The benefits of the project were clearly expressed
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
7. I was involved in the aims of the project
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
6. There is scope to extend the project
Strongly
Agree
Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
183
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Conclusions
Each of the individual workshop feedback forms and
the overall survey indicated at improvements in some
respects that could give higher overall job satisfaction.
Results of Workshop 1 show that staff felt that they
knew
more of what was expected of them in their jobs
(77%
agree) and they felt more motivated to look for new
ways to apply the 3Rs (84.7% agree).
Feedback from Workshop
2 indicated that staff felt more
confident to carry out their jobs efficiently (77.8% agree)
and that they felt part of a team more (77.8% agree).
Results from Workshop 3 state that the employees felt
more able to contribute their ideas and to be listened to
(100% agree).
The overall feedback survey utilised 6 statements
from the NHS Culture of Care Barometer (2015) that
relate to aspects that indicate job satisfaction or
dissatisfaction.
10
Each of the statements also link to
fulfilment of the belongingness and esteem needs in
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
7
Feedback shows that the
staff felt invested in the shared values of the company
(100%) improving their sense of belonging with each
other and in the organisation.
6
Staff also felt more able
to influence how things are done in their team because
of participating in the workshops (66.7%) which
improves their sense of belonging and their esteem.
Results also showed that staff felt better informed and
trained to do their jobs well (88.9%) and that they have
a greater feeling of personal accomplishment (77.8%).
Both statements indicate that the employees esteem
needs are being more fulfilled. As belongingness and
esteem needs are met, staff can be more motivated to
reach self-actualisation and perform to the best of their
abilities. This motivation is shown as the staff felt more
encouraged to come up with new and better ways of doing
things (100%). These needs and motivational factors
being met should lead to increased job satisfaction and
staff felt they were more satisfied overall in their jobs
as a result of the workshops (77.8%).
Some aspects of the workshops that were well received
were the Ice Breaker activities. Participation in the
workshops increased with each workshop even with the
more reserved and reluctant members of staff.
A restriction to the project is that there was not
sufficient space available to carry out the workshops at
the original desired dates and times. To improve this, I
would plan the workshops and their content 2 months
in advance and reserve the space then. Availability for
staff to attend was also restricted due to sickness
absence, annual leave and work commitments. In
future I would therefore introduce 2 dates in the same
month for the same workshop to allow flexibility for
staff to attend.
Due to the restrictions in place, only a small sample size
of approximately 12 employees from 2 units attended
from a possible 50 employees across 7 units. For future
extension of the project I would offer the workshop
to all technologists across all facilities within the
establishment. I would also aim to work with the director
and line managers of all the units to make workshop
attendance compulsory and by having 2 sessions of the
same workshop, staff can be split into two groups allowing
for half the workforce to continue the normal workload,
thus making compulsory attendance more attainable.
Having more sessions of the same workshop also allows
for smaller groups instead of all 50 employees, meaning
that individual participation is more likely.
The staff that did not attend the workshops may have
been the people that were less invested in the culture
of the organisation and could be the ones to benefit the
most from the workshops. Therefore, the project could
be improved, and its aims more thoroughly tested by
making attendance to the workshops mandatory.
Feedback on the aspects of the workshop that could be
improved consistently suggested that workshops were
not long enough to go through the material in sufficient
depth and allow for more qualitative and quantitative
discussion. Spreading staff across workshops makes it
possible to have longer sessions of up to 3 hrs.
Some feedback also suggested that those with social
anxiety did not enjoy the Ice Breaker tasks. However,
the Ice Breakers are not just for fun but perform a
crucial role in preparing the staff to become more
relaxed and able to participate in the workshops without
feeling judged. Therefore, it is important to keep the
ice-breaker activities in place but reassess the types of
activity that are utilised.
Other changes I would make would be to involve staff in
choosing the topics for workshops and give them time
to research the topic ahead of the workshop so that
they are more comfortable to contribute.
The way that I have learnt through carrying out this project
is through Kolb’s experiential learning cycle whereby the
“Concrete Experience” of doing a workshop is followed
by “Reflective Observation” through feedback. “Abstract
Conceptualisation” whereby positives and negatives of
the experience are concluded, and changes made.
12
These changes are then planned and tried out based
on what I learnt through “Active Experimentation”. This
is again followed by “Concrete Experience”.
Justification
As explained in the scoping document, an individuals’
motivation, morale and overall satisfaction in their job
can be affected by many factors including influences
outside of the organisation and this project looks at
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
184
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
just a small area. As explained by Maslow’s Hierarchy
of Needs’, higher levels will not be obtained when the
lower levels are not fulfilled e.g. if a person has debt at
home it will be hard to motivate them with self-esteem
factors to encourage them to perform to the best of
their abilities.
7
In such situations, the workshops may
appear to offer no improvement to job satisfaction.
Although there were limitations to this project including
time and space availability as well as a small sample
size, some positive conclusions can be drawn from
the results of the project. Although these conclusions
cannot directly prove that job satisfaction can be
improved and a culture of care promoted solely by
implementing participatory workshops, aspects alluding
to motivation and satisfaction at work were improved.
Feedback directly showed a link between participation
and an increased sense of belonging and increased
self-esteem. Simone (2009) states “Institutional culture
influences the productivity and performance of many
enterprises” and so the Culture of Care that animal
research organisations are aiming for should be extended
to the people who work with the animals.
2
The Chartered
Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) reported
that absences due to anxiety had increased in nearly
40% of organisations and absences due to depression
had increased in nearly 55% of organisations in 2018.
4
It could therefore be argued that increased morale,
which relates to improved mental health could reduce
such sickness absence although it would need to be
more thoroughly explored to prove whether participatory
workshops could help reduce sickness absence.
A more direct outcome from having more engaged and
informed staff through workshops is that they will be
more invested in the shared values of the organisation
and be more motivated to promote a culture of care.
This in turn leads to staff wanting to implement the 3Rs
where possible and use better practices. Utilising better
practices whenever and wherever possible improves
animal welfare. Animals that have better welfare make
better research models as they are otherwise healthier
and there is less variation, so results obtained are
better correlated to the experimental research being
conducted. Less variation also means that the science
is more reproducible. Good science means more ethical
science and results in better treatments. Better human
and animal welfare, and more ethical science, improves
public perception of the organisation and the field of
animal research in medical science. This is increasingly
important as more organisations seek to offer a level of
transparency to the general public, and therefore further
extension of the current project would be beneficial.
References
1
Russell, W.M.S. and Burch, R.L., (1959). The
Principles of Humane Experimental Technique,
Methuen, London. ISBN 0900767782.
2
Simone, J.V. (2009) Simone, J.V. (2009). Institutional
culture. Oncol Times 31(5): 5–6.
3
Brown, M. et al (2018). Culture of Care: Organizational
Responsibilities. Management of Animal Care and
Use Programs in Research, Education and Testing.
2nd Edition. Available online from: https://www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK500402/
4
CIPD (2018) Health and Well-being at work- Public
Sector. Issued: May 2018 Reference: 7669 © CIPD
2018.
5
Schein (1990) Organizational Culture. American
Psychologist Vol. 45, No. 2, 109--119.
6
CIPD (2016). A duty to care? Evidence of the
importance of organisational culture to effective
governance and leadership. Available online
from: https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/a-duty-
to-care_2016-evidence-of-the-importance-of-
organisational-culture-to-effective-governance-and-
leadership_tcm18-14220.pdf [Accessed 25/1/20]
7
McLeod, S. (2018). Maslow’s Hierarchy of
Needs. Available online from: https://www.
simplypsychology.org/maslow.html [Accessed
25/1/20].
8
Brown, M. (2014). Creating a culture of care.
Available online from: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/
news/creating-culture-care [Accessed 28/11/19]
9
Bhatti, K.K. and Qureshi, T.M. (2007). Impact
of Employee Participation On Job Satisfaction,
Employee Commitment And Employee Productivity.
International Review of Business Research Papers.
Vol.3.
10
Rafferty, A. M., Philippou, J., Fitzpatrick, J. M., &
Ball, J. (2015). Culture of Care Barometer: Report
to NHSEngland on the development and validation of
an instrument to measure ‘Culture of Care’ in NHS
Trusts. London: King’s College, London.
11
UNUM (2019). Sickness absence management: a
simple guide. Available online from: https://www.
unum.co.uk/sickness-absence-management-simple-
guide#section2 [Accessed 2/12/19].
12
Kolb. D. A., & Fry, R. (1975). Towards an applied
theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.),
Theories of Group Process. London: John Wiley.
The relationship between employee participation and job satisfaction
185
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Improving animal welfare at Newcastle
University by introducing the low stress
handling of mice
EMMA HAMILTON
Newcastle University, Comparative Biology Centre, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
Correspondence: emma.hamilton@newcastle.ac.uk
Based on an IAT Level 6 Diploma in Laboratory Animal Science and Technology Project
Abstract
The aim of this project was to implement a change of
handling method for laboratory mice to reduce stress
and improve animal welfare. Using a Low Stress
handling
Project scoping document
Introduction
The primary focus of this project was to introduce the
low stress handling of mice to Newcastle University
and resulting in all researchers and technicians using
this method. The focus of the project was for research
staff to adopt this method. Technicians began using
this method in 2019 following the guidance from
Kathy Murphy the director of the department. Tunnel
handling method was first investigated by Hurst JL,
Figure 1. Traditional handling method using the tail.
taming anxiety in laboratory mice.
1
This information
had not been widespread which suggests why some
animal facilities had been slow to adopt the method. It
was not until a scientist at Newcastle University began
investigating this method that a strong movement for
change at Newcastle began.
This idea of the project arose when an esteemed scientist
Dr J Roughan from Newcastle University received funding
from the National Centre for Replacement, Refinement
and reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) to conduct
experiments on ‘implementation of non-aversive use
handling for welfare refinement and reduction of mouse
numbers.
2
It was concluded in these experiments that
anxious animals may provide inconsistent data as they
cope poorly during scientific testing thus increasing
statistical noise. The evidence suggested that this
results in an increased number of animals being
needed for the results to become reliable. At this point
in 2019 there was compelling evidence that using the
tunnel rather than the tail lowers anxiety, enhancing
welfare and also increasing the chances of obtaining
more precise results in the experiments.
Since 2017, Dr Roughan has been presenting lectures
to Animal Technologists and researchers throughout
Newcastle University in order to promote non-aversive
handling and to explain the benefits. The attitude
of several technicians particularly between 2017 to
2019 were somewhat negative regarding this method.
The feedback and consensus within the department
from a large majority of technicians was that, ‘it takes
too long’ and ‘we’ve always done it this way, so why
change?’. This negative attitude could account for the
delayed implementation of the handling technique. The
senior management team were very supportive and
approved of the idea of the new method however there
were delays with implementing as a proactive team was
needed to champion and direct the change.
December 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
186
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
One of the turning points regarding a change of attitude
from a number of Animal Technologists, including
myself, was when John Waters from the University of
Liverpool, came to present at Newcastle University on
the benefits to animal welfare that he has seen as an
Animal Technologist since adopting the new method of
handling.
The Animal Technologists at Newcastle University could
relate to this and it sparked a reaction, animal welfare
being the top priority for Animal Technologists who are
always looking for ways to improve practices. A team of
line managers and technicians was then brought together
in October 2019 to steer and champion the change.
The Home Office was also very keen for Newcastle to
begin using this method and this became one of the
drivers for change. The Director of the department then
proposed that all Animal Technologists should use this
method and agreed that we could create a plan to help
the researchers to change to the new method.
The focus was to encourage the team to develop ideas
on how we could help improve the Culture of Care at the
university and to get the researchers to use this method
of low stress handling. Throughout this scoping and
planning document I have carried out smart objectives,
swot analysis, pestle analysis, compiled risk registers
and Gantt charts. This helped with preparation to make
the project attainable by preparing and troubleshooting
potential setbacks that may have arisen. The main
threat to the project is that researchers will not willingly
adopt the method; strategies were therefore put in
place to mitigate this.
I also focussed on Motivational Theory by Elton Mayo
to persuade the researchers and assist with motivation
within the team.
3
This theory developed in the 1920s
where productivity was the focus of business. Professor
Elton Mayo began his experiments (the Hawthorne
Studies), to prove the importance of people for
productivity. Communication is crucial as it has been
shown in the Hawthorn Studies that regular feedback
increases productivity.
The management system that would benefit this project
would be based on Human Relations Theory, which
allows people to act autonomously.
4
It is very important
that this is a team effort and that everyone contributes.
This theory suggests that people desire to be part
of a supportive team that facilitates development
and growth. We hypothesised that if technicians and
researchers receive special attention they could be
encouraged to participate. Less aversive handling or
tunnel handling as it is often called, can therefore be
seen as important, having significance which hopefully
motivates individuals.
A stakeholder grid has been produced which indicates
who has low and who has high interest. Communication
techniques were planned with regards to timings and
how information would be delivered, particularly to
researchers with communication being analysed and
planned beforehand. The result of the project was
planned for March 2019, which was attainable due
to the in- depth plan and the support from the highly
skilled team.
It was also important for this proposal to be presented
at the Animal Welfare Ethical Review Body (AWERB).
One of our objectives being to introduce a policy for
the University whereby people adopt this method. This
project had a professional team on board that were
already motivated to change, ultimately this project
demonstrated how Newcastle University have complete
dedication when it comes to maximising animal welfare.
Synopsis
Tunnel handling of mice is a relatively new method
that was first introduced when a scientist Jane L Hurst
carried out a study called Taming Anxiety in Laboratory
Mice.
1
This presented scientific evidence of the benefits
to animal welfare and science from tunnel handling.
The NC3Rs is a national organisation which helps
advance the principles of Replacement, Reduction
and Refinement for humane animal research.
5
The
NC3Rs’ website is an excellent resource for up to
date information on best practices to maximise animal
welfare and advise on their website that it is important
when handling mice to use appropriate techniques in
a skilful way and advise tunnel handling as a result of
evidence gained from experiments.
The original research carried out by Jane Hurst showed
that signs of high anxiety levels are; greater urinating,
avoidance of human gloved hand, defecation during
handling, higher frequency of protected stretch attend
postures, fewer arm entries and less time spent on
the open arms of elevated plus maze.
1
Based on
this evidence, the NC3Rs advises that this method
should be used to help ensure that the mouse will
accept human contact thus enabling procedures to be
carried out efficiently and safely and not causing harm
Figure 2. Low Stress handling of mice.
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
187
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
or hinderance to animal welfare. If routine handling
procedures are aversive animals are likely to develop
anxiety and show exaggerated stress response when
approached.
6
The stress caused by handling has also been shown
to cause unwanted variable within experiments. The
NC3Rs now recognises and promotes that non-aversive
handling not only benefits the animal but also the
handler and leads to reliability of the data gained in
experiments (NC3Rs). This was demonstrated where
mice handled by a tunnel showed substantially improved
performance in a simple behavioural test (habituation-
dishabituation paradigm) compared to picking up by the
tail.
7
Roughan and Sevenoaks (2018) investigated if handling
methods affected anxiety in mice before restraint and
when being tattooed or having ear tags.
8
This study
showed that the mice that were tunnel handled were
less fearful as they had more interaction with the
handler. Anxiety was shown in the tail handled mice as
they had higher score on the grimace scale after they
had been acclimatised to handling and testing.
9
These experiments show compelling evidence and
this is influencing the positive changes in handling
techniques throughout the Animal Technology world.
The Home Office is also encouraging our industry to
adopt this method which provided great support for the
completion of the project successfully.
Project objectives
Throughout the project I applied SMART values when
establishing my objectives. The mnemonic/acronym
are commonly taken to mean S-specific, M-measurable,
A-achievable, R-realistic, T-time-bound.
Communicate the proposal
S – Communication with the researchers via an email
sent from senior management team.
M – Success criteria, 80% of cages tunnel handled by
March 2020.
A – Must be achievable by March 2020, refer to
stakeholder grid.
R – This is realistic as we have tunnels however
communication was delayed to researchers etc., due to
Managers workload during Christmas period.
T – this stage will finish by 5
th
January 2020.
Communicate method to AWERB
S – Presentation of the proposal to AWERB in order to
make this policy for the department.
M – 1 technician/manager will do the presentation at
the meeting.
A – Achievable by March 2020.
R – Realistic target as AWERB meetings held every 2
weeks.
T – Presentation must be delivered at the latest by
beginning of January 2020.
Implementing
S – Put clear handling tunnels in the cages of mice.
M – Must confirm how many tunnels available contact
to confirm.
A – Already have tunnels for half of the unit and more
on order, hopefully no delay.
R – Yes, as on order however may be a delay until
February.
T – Could have delays with resource of tunnels will do
risk assessment.
Produce harmonised researcher checklist
S – This form will create a record for the Animal
Technologists as to which researchers have received
verbal information and training regarding low stress
handling.
M – This can be produced on excel by January 2020.
A – This is not a large task and will benefit the
organisation.
R – This can be done at work.
T – This does not require substantial time resource as
estimated computer time is 30 minutes.
Training researchers how to tunnel handle
S – Contact all researchers and arrange the 1 to 1
training = 15 minutes.
M – Produce list of research teams in the unit and tick
off, line manager of the unit will arrange meeting with
each research team.
A – Yes as we have time to train.
R – This could be challenging due to researcher time
resource at minimum.
T – To be done by March 2020.
Demonstrating the 3RS
S – This will show that Newcastle University have
animal welfare as a priority.
M – A publication can be made on the departments,
University website and possibly on NC3RS.
A – The Named Information Officer (NIO) is responsible
for the department’s newsletter and could keep staff
and researchers up to date.
R – Currently there is already approximately 17% of
animal’s tunnel handled therefore a larger percentage
is needed.
T – by March 2020.
Complete user guide to low stress handling mice
S – Provide researchers with a fact sheet on tunnel
handling.
M – When completed send to researchers.
A – One person can perform this task which may be
challenging due to time resource.
R – This is achievable as we have the technology to
produce this.
T – This can be delivered to researchers when they
have the individual 1 to 1 meeting training.
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
188
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Organisational context
Stakeholders:
researchers
technicians
line management
senior management
Researchers
These were the priority in terms of influencing and
creating maximum interest. For new researchers to the
unit it was not a challenge as during the induction process
the persons will be shown the tunnel handling method
only. Researchers who have been at the University for
a
long time could be the most challenging to influence
and they will require more interest and dedication.
Animal Technologists
Many Animals Technologists at Newcastle University
were already champions of this method and were
involved in the team to help implementation. They
needed to be kept satisfied to maintain motivation and
momentum of the project as they will be the leaders
of the change and major influencers. There are some
Animal Technologists who were less interested and
required more influence. This is where Motivational
Theory became useful.
11
I consider that it is also
important to mention that line mangers and senior
managers need to ensure that all Animal Technologists
were using the new handling method as it would be
easy to revert back to tail handling out of habit.
Line managers and Senior management
The managers are providing full support as they are
providing time resource and providing the clear tunnels,
these persons therefore need less interest and did not
need influencing.
Stakeholder grid
PESTLE Analysis
Political: Home Office support can assist in encouraging
adopting this method.
Economic: There will be a period at the start of
introducing this method that tasks such as cleaning out
may take longer than at the present. Time will also be lost
through
technicians taking time to train researchers and
do other tasks to help. The financial cost of the clear
tunnels is also a small factor of the budget to consider.
Social: This proposal will help work on the attitudes of
staff in the department and hopefully as a result, create
a shared belief that this is increasing the welfare of the
mice therefore everyone should be using this method.
Technological: We can use technology to make the
posters, send emails and create training records.
Legislative: Working practices can be produced for
the department on this new method; AWERB will also
be involved in the implementation. We all have a legal
responsibility to enhance the welfare of animals in our
care and this supports the 3Rs.
Environmental: Plastic resource not environmentally
friendly however reusable making this sustainable.
Budget
High
level
of
influence
Low
Keep satisfied
Research staff
Senior
management
Animal care
technicians
Named Training
Compliance officer
Named Animal care
and welfare officer
Manage closely
Research staff
Animal
Technicians
Monitor (Minimal Effort
)
Establishment
licence holder
Human resources
Keep informed
Research staff
Animal
Technicians
Management
Named Training
Compliance officer
Named Animal care
and welfare officer
Low INTEREST Level High
Newcastle University Low Stress handling Project
Implementation Costs
1. Technical time for meetings to organise tasks =
11 technicians x 3 hours = 33 hours
(Animal Technician hourly rate = £10 per hour)
33 x 10 = £330
2. Tunnels @ £5 each x 700 = £3500
3. Presentations to researchers by FGU staff =
4 technicians for 15 minutes x 11 = 11 hours
Animal Technician hourly rate = £10 per hour) =
11 x 10 = £110
4.
Labour of training = 4 technical 30 minutes x 11 =
22 hours
(Animal Technician hourly rate = £10 per hour) =
22 x 10 = £220
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
189
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Project planning document
Method statement
The project was to introduce low stress handling of mice
to Newcastle University Comparative Biology Centre and
Centre for Life, Genetics Unit. It aimed to bring a team
together, working to promote and communicate the
commitment to utilising low stress handling methods
for mice. This project involved a team of technologists
who created ideas and contributed to successful
implementation. The project also involved establishing
University policies for future use. Meetings with
research teams to promote this method and change
culture, booklets, induction processed was also part
of this.
The plan was to create a team and meet to discuss
ideas on how low stress handling implementation could
be achieved. Time is a valuable resource therefore the
App called Microsoft Planner was be used in order to
reduce time taken in face to face meetings. This should
be an effective method to communicate each person’s
progress with task.
Stakeholder engagement
Senior Management
This liaison was to be less frequent with just updates
when major breakthroughs were achieved. Permission
to implement actions possibly needed. However,
communication with these stakeholders is important and
they must keep informed as they are major influencers.
Line Managers
Should be fully supportive as they are NACWOS and
leaders of the team and are high influencers. Line
mangers should have weekly team meetings which will
involve face to face communication. Theses were ‘in-
house’ and informal and Animal Technologists were
able to report information regarding progress in the
animal unit.
Project team for implementing the change
Momentum must be maintained. Face to face meeting
for discussion as a team on how the project team would
move forward and to agree the main objectives was held
late December. A project tracker board was established
in Microsoft that listed the task assigned to each team
member. Updates from each member of the team on
progress, persons notified, etc., were uploaded. A face
to face meeting planned for the end of February 2020;
this would provide team members with more autonomy
over this project which would increase motivation.
Researchers
Many researchers mostly new to the University, have
already started using tunnel handling. Forms of
communication used were face to face meetings and
email. An email was sent out to each researcher and
a meeting arranged for that group. This meeting was
Technical time for meetings to organise tasks
(Animal Technician hourly rate = £10 per hour)
11 Technicians x 3 hours = 33 hours
December 11 hours x 10 = £110
January 11 hours x 10 = £110
February 11 hours x 10 = £110
Tunnels £5 each x 700 = £3500
Labour of training 4 Technical 30 minutes x 11 =
22 hours
December 5.5 hours x 10 = £55
January 5.5 hours x 10 = £55
February 5.5 hours x 10 = £55
March 5.5 hours x 10 = £55
organised by the line manager at the Genetics Unit
and there was a presentation on how to use the new
method and to assist researchers in using the method
themselves. Preparation needed to be done beforehand
as we anticipated some negative feedback of not
wanting to change. The documentation provided helped
with concerns and face to face communication helped
influence. It was very important to support and create a
good rapport to gain trust and also help influence.
Budget
Animal Welfare and Ethics Review
Board (AWERB)
It was important that this proposal was taken to an
AWERB meeting as they will help support the change
and assist in defining the University’s expectations with
regards to the Culture of Care. The AWERB is a panel of
individuals who are there to share good practice within
the University, promoting animal welfare and the 3Rs.
A Named Animal Care and Welfare Officer (NACWO) and
Animal Technologist presented at the meeting as to
what the benefits were of introducing this new practice
and this was then opened for discussion.
This meeting had the NACWO for the area concerned
and the Named Veterinary Surgeon (NVS) present. A
layperson, an Animal Technologists and a scientist who
used mice in experiments was also present.
The aim was for a policy document to be produced for
the department that Animal Technologists and research
staff could refer too. This was produced by the Head of
Department and was sent to the Establishment Licence
Holder (ELH) for permission to be granted. The time
frame for this was completion by March 2020. A copy
of the draft policy document was also planned to be
available March 2020.
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
190
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Project Implementation
The implementation of the project began when a team
meeting was held; all members of the team from each
mouse unit throughout the department were present.
Objectives were established at this meeting and each
team member was set a task that they had volunteered
for. Several of the planning objectives had been met but
others had been delayed, these were as follows:
Communicating proposal of introducing the low stress
method – Completed 20.02.2020
It was decided by senior management that they wanted
to delay this email being sent until after the presentation
at AWERB.
Present to AWERB – Completed
Senior management decided to present this at the
earliest opportunity and this was communicated by a line
manager who is a NACWO and an Animal Technologist.
Implementing: Put tunnels used for low stress handling
in the mouse cages – Delayed and ongoing
This process began in December where we were able
to put 400 clear tunnels in mouse cages; to complete
this project in the Genetics Unit requires an additional
300 tunnels. I was informed on the 6th January that
more tunnels were on order however delayed. On the
26th February I contacted the person responsible for
ordering and was informed that the tunnels had arrived
some weeks previously however no communication had
been sent to the Genetics Unit.
Training researchers to tunnel handle – Ongoing
A tick sheet is being currently used and this details
which researchers have been trained, this is currently
at 70%. Each technician has researchers to help
train, particularly new staff; the Named Training and
Competency Officer (NTCO) is signing off a number of
individuals as competent.
The 3Rs, showing Newcastle University has welfare at
the forefront – Ongoing
This project has demonstrated that Newcastle University
has animal welfare at the forefront of their agenda by
actively contributing to the 3Rs. This has refined the
technique and could also have the potential to replace
and reduce mice being used in experiments.
Check list of researchers within the department,
confirming communication – Completed
This has been completed for all the units of the CBC
and sheets are available live on Excel to enable Animal
Technologists to update if researchers have had training
and or been spoken to.
Results:
The first milestone was reached when people
volunteered to join the project, in total there were 10
Animal Technologists and 1 line manager. After the first
team meeting the Genetics Unit’s line manger arranged
informal face to face meetings with each research team
in order to discuss the introduction of tunnel handling.
11 researchers were noted at the Genetics Unit
however, when reviewed again this was 20 as new staff
had started. Those that required training usually took
an average of 15 minutes. 14 persons were trained
and signed off as competent, leaving 6 remaining.
This organisational project brought about important
positive changes with regard to improvements of animal
welfare. The results of this project show that Newcastle
University is actively participating in finding ways to
introduce the 3Rs. Implementation of the project has
refined the handling technique and reduced potential
anxiety and stress in mice.
Clear tunnels have not been placed in all cages,
only approximately 400. However this has not been
detrimental as all of the cages are provided with a
cardboard tunnel, which can be used as a substitute.
An additional success is that this method of mouse
handling is departmental policy due to the recognition
and advice from the AWERB committee.
Stakeholder engagement:
John Waters’ Presentation:
John Waters is a NACWO from the University of Liverpool
who provided a presentation to the Director, managers
and Animal Technologists. John described his experiences
as an Animal Technologist whilst being involved in the
studies regarding tunnel handling. He talked about the
bond an Animal Technologist has with an animal and
explained his experiences on how the low stress handling
method increases this bond. A poignant observation John
used was ‘you wouldn’t pick a rat up by the tail, so why a
mouse?’. Following this presentation Animal Technologists
were put into groups and showed by John Waters and
Johnny Roughan how to perform the handling technique.
Researchers
They received regular feedback and daily reports from
individuals, our focus being to communicate as much
as possible to the researchers through varied methods.
This came with less challenges than expected which
was important as during the Hawthorne studies the
workers were consulted and allowed to give feedback
which improved productivity.
10
Both the team and I have liaised with researchers in the
unit on a daily basis. There was already a good working
relationship with researchers which may have contributed
to there being less difficulty in influencing the researchers.
During training, there were a several researchers who
needed to increase their confidence with the technique,
nevertheless interactions have been positive so far.
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
191
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Showing patience and support have helped enable this
transition. This, at times, interrupted normal husbandry
duties as technologists were asked to aid a small
number of researchers requiring encouragement. As a
team we tried to offer full support to the researchers as
this was a new learning experience for them.
AWERB:
A NACWO and Animal Technologist presented at the
meeting what the welfare benefits of introducing this new
practice would be and then followed an open discussion.
This meeting also included the NACWO and the NVS. A
layperson, Animal Technologist and scientists who use
mice for experiments were also present. A Policy was
then presented to the establishment licence holder for
final approval.
Policy Document
(distributed 20.2.2020)
This policy was sent out to all the staff and researchers
of the department please see below:
To support our University’s policy on the use of
animals in research, The Animal Welfare and Ethical
Review Body (AWERB) ensures that all animals are
housed and cared for in a way that promotes their
wellbeing and that all research work is carried out in
a manner that minimises any adverse effects on the
animals. To assist with this commitment the AWERB
develops Newcastle University animal care and
welfare standards for all staff involved in working
with research animals. Together we strive to be
sector leaders in laboratory animal care and welfare.
In all routine circumstances where mice and rats
have to be handled, low-stress methods (cupping,
tunnel handling) should be used. Tail capture
(suspending the animal by the tail) should not be used
in routine circumstances. Tail handling (holding the
tail to stabilise the animal) is permitted for restraint
purposes, as this may be necessary for examination
of the animal or conduct of a procedure. A series of
video tutorials for all methods is available via the
NC3Rs’ website (www.nc3rs.org.uk/how-to-pick-up-
a-mouse). This standard applies to all staff (animal
care staff and researchers). Routine circumstances
are defined as all handling required for husbandry or
procedural purposes, excluding work where AWERB
has granted an exemption from this standard or in
the event of an emergency such as the escape of
an animal. This standard applies in all Newcastle
University rodent units. Exemptions may be sought
from AWERB for specific scientific purposes. Such
applications will normally be considered by the
AWERB fast-track process meaning an applicant can
usually expect a decision within 2 weeks. Please
complete the online Exemption Application Form
to apply for exemption from Newcastle University’s
Rodent Low Stress Handling Standard, Newcastle
University, AWERB, (2020).
Researcher group meeting held
March 2020
The senior management team held a meeting to explain
the implementation of the policy and they also asked
if there were any questions or concerns, no response
occurred at the meeting and there was no opposition.
Animal Technologists
In each animal unit, daily feedback was introduced to
increase motivation and plan for the daily tasks, this
only took 5 minutes. Feedback was important as the
Hawthorne studies suggested that if workers received
increased attention it could increase job satisfaction
and productivity.
10
Providing Animal Technologists with
autonomy through arranging training, project tasks
and helping others proved successful as tasks were
completed.
Line managers and senior
management
An informal team weekly meeting with line manager
where we discussed weekly objectives and no face to face
communication was needed with senior management.
Project team meeting/workshop
This was where the team proposed ideas and people
could volunteer on how they would like to contribute.
A brainstorming session was completed on “blockers-
why has this project not been successful in the past?”
and “closing the gap – what could be done to make
this project successful?”. A forum on Microsoft Planner
was established so that we could communicate
progress. Members of this team had voluntarily joined
and consisted of 10 Animal Technologists and 1 line
manager.
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
BLOCKERS CLOSING THE GAP
Different priorities Training records
Change Order more clear tunnels
Lack of confidence Research meetings
Affecting data Posters and user guide
Old school attitude Opt out rule
Time resource
Build personal relationships
Indecision External collaborators
Lack of tunnels Assertiveness training
Technician engagement
192
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Summary of project tasks to be
completed
1. Low stress handling methods to be included in
Personal licence technique section with anaesthetic
code A/B and at induction – speak to NTCO and
confirm. NTCO will update induction form to include
demonstration of Low Stress Handling.
2. Redefine tail handling as a combination of Tunnel
Capture and Tail Restraint - run this new terminology
change via Johnny Roughan.
3. All units to identify number of tunnels required – will
order 2000 more.
4. Devise publicity email to include information and
links to Low Stress Handling demonstrations –
personnel identified to follow up.
5. Check if mice are still to be examined in the plastic
tubes and discuss whether two tubes still to be
supplied (one plastic, one cardboard).
6. Poster for flow-hoods and information boards are
now placed in at least one unit. Other units require
checking - contact Estates for wall mounting. NC3Rs’
poster link has been sent to relevant parties and
a further 5 posters have been ordered. These will
be placed in suitable positions to maximise their
exposure throughout the CBC.
7. Researchers require active encouragement to use
Low Stress Handling and arrange training where
needed. All technicians to actively participate in
talking to researchers about Low Stress Handling. A
harmonised researcher checklist will be created and
email follow-up method of recording that research
personnel have been spoken to about Low Stress
Handling.
8. Working practice to follow. All working practices
will then also form the basis for a CBC Low Stress
Handling current best practice guide.
9. The budget did alter throughout the project although
tunnel price did not change. Presentations and
training only took an average of 15 minutes; half
the time anticipated. This was difficult to monitor
as often more time was taken due to the ad hoc
approach. A budget for the increased time it took
Animal Technologists to change the mouse cages
and time taken to put tunnels in the cages could
also have been included. This increase of time only
occurred in January as technologists adapted to the
new handling method and increased in confidence.
Project evaluation
Methodology analysis
The smart objectives involved using differing methods
of communication and these were delivered quite
successfully. Challenges however did occur which were
evaluated and observations made included:
This unit is a satellite building therefore communication
was difficult at times. Tunnels were delivered to main
campus which is 2 miles away and arrangements
had to be made for delivery. When the tunnels did
not arrive on time, we should have investigated the
delay sooner.
Scheduling training with researchers posed
challenges at times when animal care duties took
priority.
Fewer researchers required training; new staff in
particular were already using this method as they had
been shown the method during their induction, although
previously this method had not been mandatory.
This project did constitute a success, it was a
team effort and members had responsibility for
and assisted progress. This could assist with
the progress. This could suggest that the Human
Relations Theory had an influencing part.
11
The project team mostly consisted of newer members
of staff who were still being trained. They showed
high levels of motivation to contribute, possibly
due to detailed review of performance. More senior
members have been doing the job for several years
which could account for them being more resistant
to change.
High influence of leadership could have contributed
to success. Clear goals were set to achieve a change
of culture at the University.
John Waters’ presentation was a huge motivator; this
could be because Animal Technologists may have
needed to understand benefits to pursue a goal.
When Animal Technologists were trained how to do
this technique they had increased confidence and
motivation.
Microsoft Planner proved to be a valuable
management tool as it created a system where
persons in the team could be accountable for tasks.
This also supports the Hawthorne effect with regards
to being monitored thus improving performance.
11
Research Technicians’ questionnaire
1. Do you prefer using the tunnel handling method or
the tail handling of mice?
2. Have you seen any animal behaviour differences
since using this method?
3. Do you feel more of a team and supported since this
project was introduced?
Animal Technologists’ questionnaire
1. Have you seen any positive difference with regards
to animal behaviour whilst using this method, if so
are you able to describe?
2. Did you feel that you were able to fully contribute to
this project?
3.
Do you feel more as a team since this project started?
4. Has this project improved your job satisfaction and if
so why?
Conclusion
This project came with challenges, however overall
significant positive changes were made to improve
animal welfare. The risks that were anticipated were not
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
193
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
as significant as first imagined and could be dealt with
effectively. Experiential learning has taken place and
throughout this conclusion Kolb’s experiential learning
cycle is appropriate and has been used.
12
Throughout
this project we have had sufficient resources of money,
people and high influence which could suggest a
contribution to the success.
One aspect that was observed was that people appeared
to become motivated when they had meaning and
objectives. One of the main reasons for this goal one
could argue was the vast improvements to animal welfare.
There was strong leadership and vision which could have
been a motivating factor, clear smart objectives were set
for people which allowed for team members autonomy.
Communication occurred regularly and this supports
Mayo’s theory that suggested that regular attention
can improve job satisfaction and support and allowing
autonomy can increase productivity.
14
This group could
have gained a sense of value due to increasing animal
welfare; this also supports the conclusions drawn from
the Hawthorn studies regarding a person’s needs are
based on sentiment.
13
There were high norms in the
team, a norm is an official level that organisations are
expected to reach. The persons who volunteered already
had an interest in participating, no one was forced to join
the team.
16
Each person’s contribution and commitment
demonstrated high cohesiveness and supports Mayo’s
motivational theory.
15
Being at a satellite animal unit did create small
communication challenges as there was a short delay
putting tunnels in all cages. Learning from this, the
risk should have been closely monitored, it would be
advised for future projects to schedule a calendar
reminder to prompt an action to chase up. This however
was not detrimental to implementation as we were
able to improvise and handle the mice in cardboard
tunnels rather than ones that were transparent. The
clear tunnels are however better for welfare standards
as technologists can do animal health checks more
effectively. John Waters confirms this on the NC3Rs’
website by explaining that “Clear tunnels have a real
advantage as animals can be seen inside them”.
6
Some smart objectives were dependant on senior
management. Due to this being a significant change
of normal working practices, careful consideration
had to
be made on how to approach this. Senior
management sent the email out to the researchers
about the proposed policy. This was appropriate as it
came from a high influencer with authority. I contributed
as being part of the team in one unit and followed the
Human Relations theory when making decisions on
how to communicate with both Animal Technologists
and staff.
14
Following on from the first large meeting,
written communications played an important part and
contributed to the organisation of the project immensely,
this was via emails, through user guides, Excel and
Microsoft Planner programmes.
The AWERB meeting occurred before the timeline in
January. This was a positive decision as one could
suggest it strengthened the influence of the project as
this supported the validation of the project with regards to
animal welfare. Upon reflection if this had been left until
the end of January it may have delayed progress. Following
this meeting the unit’s line manger decided to take the
step of introducing clear tunnels into cages in the unit.
Researchers did not need as much motivation as
had first been thought. In the scoping document it
was expressed that researchers would be most likely
a threat to the project. The view of this was due to
past experiences of hearing verbal comments from
researchers and their views of how difficult and how it
takes too long to use Low Stress Handling. This could
have been influenced by some Animal Technologists as
a number had expressed negative preconceptions of
this method. As a team we believed in the vision, were
positive and had enthusiasm, this could have been
an important influencer. Marie Dalton discusses that
research has shown persons with a positive attitude are
more successful than those with a negative viewpoint.
16
Trainee Animal Technologists appeared to have the most
enthusiasm for this project compared to the more senior
members of staff. The main personal motivator showed
to be the improvement to animal welfare. However the
fact that the technique was made mandatory by higher
authority may have been an influencer. The objectives
set could also be a factor in increasing motivation, as
we had a direction that had to be met. One could argue
that new Animal Technologists could have increased
motivation and were easier to influence due to wanting
to gain recognition and show their dedication when being
performance managed. This could support the theory of
the Hawthorn effect where it was found if workers were
being watched they improved performance.
14
However
Elton Mayo also analysed the findings of the experiment
and found that persons were not motivated through
environmental or pay factors.
14
Social and relational
factors played a bigger role in productivity.
This success should be celebrated due to a widespread
implementation of the 3Rs at Newcastle University. It
would be interesting to evaluate the reduction of animals
used in future experiments, as this has been shown in
comparable experiments due to there being less
variability. This project has however not only resulted in
vast improvements to animal welfare but it has created a
valuable social opportunity for the department, where the
whole team could come together to make a positive
change.
References
1
Jane L Hurst and Rebecca S West (2010) Taming
Anxiety in Laboratory Mice. Available at:
https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/media/livacuk/
mammalianbehaviour/ Taming, anxiety, in,
laboratory, mice.pdf [Accessed 6.1.2020].
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
194
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Hurst, J.L. and West, R.S. (2010). Taming anxiety in
laboratory mice. Nature Methods 7:825-826.
2
Johnny Roughan and Tatum Sevenoaks (2018)
w
elfare and scientific considerations of tattooing and
ear tagging for mouse identification. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
PMC6433351/
[Accessed 29.1.2020]
3
Expert management .com Mayo’s motivational
theory/hawthorn effect (2020) available from:
https://expertprogrammanagement.com/2018
/05/
mayos-motivation-theory-hawthorn-effect/
[Accessed 30.1.2020].
4
Business/human relations management theory basics
(2011) understand the basic premise behind the
human relations management theory. Available from:
https://www.business.com/articles/human-
relations-
management-theory-basics/ [Accessed 7.1.2020].
5
https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/
6
NC3Rs.org.uk (2020) mouse handling research.
Available at: papershttps://nc3rs.org.uk/sites/
default/files/documents/NC3Rs%20-%20
mouse%20handling%20research%20papers%20
table.pdf [Accessed 6.1.2020].
7
Gouveia K, Hurst Jl (2017) Optimising reliability
of mouse performance in behavioural testing: the
major role of non-aversive handling. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28322308
[Accessed 29.1.2020)
8
Johnny V Rouhan and Tatum Sevenoaks (2018)
welfare and scientific considerations of tattooing
and ear tagging for mouse identification. Available
at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
PMC6433351/ [Accessed 29.1.2020]
9
Langford DJ, Bailey AL, Chanda ML, Clarke SE,
Drummond TE, Echols S, et al (2010). Coding of facial
expressions of pain in the laboratory mouse. Nature
Methods 7(6): 447-449. doi:10.1038/nmeth.1455
10
Mayos Motivation theory/hawthorn Effect.
Available from: https://expertprogrammanagement.
com/2018/05/mayos-motivation-theory-hawthorn-
effect/ [Accessed 13th of February 2020].
11
Elton Mayo and his key theories: The
Hawthorne effect. Available from: https://www.
managementstudyhq.com/elton-mayo-theories.html
[Accessed 25th of March 2020].
12
Kolb’s learning styles and the experiential
learning cycle. Available from: https://www.
simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html [Accessed
30th March 2020].
13
Human relations theory by Elton mayo/Personal
attention. Available from: https://www.toolshero.com/
management/human-relations-theory-elton-mayo/
[Accessed 30th of March 2020].
14
Collins dictionary, Definition of norm (2020)
available from: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/
dictionary/english/norm
15
Management study HQ/ Elton Mayo and his
key theories. Available from: https://www.
managementstudyhq.com/elton-mayo-theories.html
[Accessed 26th of February 2020].
16
Dalton, M. Hoyle, D.G, Watts, M.W (2010)
Working towards goals: positive attitude. Available
from: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Ees7
AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA412&lpg=PA412&
dq=meaning+in+order+to+pursue+a+goal+hu
man+relationship&source=bl&ots=cmtQSWw
N4c&sig=ACfU3U0X5oBjVvup0dXuc-MDUexe
f8SIag&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRna_-p8-
LoAhXXMMAKHedAAVMQ6AEwC3oECAoQAQ#v=
onepage&q=meaning%20in%20order%20
to%20pursue%20a%20goal%20human%20
relationship&f=false [Accessed 15th March 2020].
Improving Animal Welfare at Newcastle University by introducing the low stress handling of mice
195
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
PAPER SUMMARY
TRANSLATIONS
December 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
CONTENU DE LA REVUE
Relation entre la participation des employés et la
satisfaction professionnelle
CHERYL YALDEN
Biological Services, Hodgkin Building, King’s College London, Guy’s Campus, London SE1 1UL UK
Correspondance: cheryl.yalden@kcl.ac.uk
Résumé
Il s’agit d’un projet entrepris dans le cadre du programme d’études de niveau 6 du diplôme de l’IAT en science et
technologie animales de laboratoire. Le projet avait pour but d’explorer la relation entre la participation des salariés
et la satisfaction professionnelle en réalisant quatre ateliers relatifs à la mise en œuvre des 3R et en travaillant à
une « culture des soins » comprenant des valeurs partagées clairement définies. Les participants étaient membres
de l’unité des services biologiques du campus Guy au King’s College de Londres, qui s’occupe des animaux utilisés
pour la recherche médicale.
Les 3R sont un ensemble de principes qui fournissent le cadre d’une recherche animale plus éthique et plus humaine.
1
Les institutions qui travaillent avec des animaux de recherche sont fortement réglementées par la législation et les
lignes directrices. Ces institutions doivent toutefois s’efforcer d’aller au-delà de leurs obligations légales et traiter les
animaux avec compassion et empathie en établissant une « culture de soins ». Il a constamment été démontré que
l’amélioration du bien-être des animaux permettait d’accroître la reproductibilité de la recherche et de promouvoir une
bonne science. Cette culture devrait être étendue aux personnes qui travaillent avec les animaux là où « la culture
institutionnelle influence la productivité et la performance de nombreuses entreprises ».
2,3
Un mauvais moral et une
faible motivation du personnel peuvent être liés à un manque de satisfaction professionnelle, à une augmentation
de la maladie et à une mauvaise perception publique de l’organisation. Selon le rapport du Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development (CIPD) de 2018, les absences dues à des maladies liées au stress et à des problèmes
de santé mentale, notamment l’anxiété et la dépression, ont augmenté dans près de 40 % et 55 % des organisations,
respectivement.
L’enquête globale ainsi que chacun des formulaires de rétroaction de l’atelier ont indiqué des améliorations qui, à
certains égards, pourraient permettre d’augmenter la satisfaction professionnelle dans son ensemble. Les rétroactions
montrent que le personnel s’est senti investi dans les valeurs communes de l’entreprise, ce qui améliorait son
sentiment d’appartenance au sein du personnel de l’entreprise et à l’entreprise elle-même.
Mots-clés. Satisfaction professionnelle, culture des soins, participation des employés
196
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020Paper Summary Translations
Améliorer le bien-être des animaux à l’Université de
Newcastle en introduisant une manipulation moins
stressante pour les souris
EMMA HAMILTON
Newcastle University, Comparative Biology Centre, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
Correspondance: emma.hamilton@newcastle.ac.uk
Résumé
Cet article est basé sur un projet entrepris dans le cadre du programme d’études de niveau 6 du diplôme de l’IAT en
science et technologie animales de laboratoire.
Le principal objectif de ce projet était d’introduire une manipulation moins stressante des souris à l’Université de
Newcastle et, par conséquent, tous les chercheurs et techniciens utiliseront cette méthode. Le projet sera axé sur
l’adoption de cette méthode par le personnel de recherche. La méthode de manipulation des souris de laboratoire à
l’aide d’un tunnel afin de soulager leur anxiété a d’abord été examinée par JL Hurst (2010). Cette information n’était
pas très répandue, ce qui pourrait indiquer pourquoi de nombreuses installations de recherche sur les animaux n’ont
pas adopté cette méthode. Ce n’est que lorsqu’un scientifique de l’Université de Newcastle a commencé à étudier
cette méthode qu’un mouvement fort en faveur du changement a commencé.
Cette idée du projet est née à la suite d’expériences sur la mise en œuvre d’une manipulation non-aversive des
souris pour améliorer leur bien-être et réduire le nombre de souris utilisées. Ces expériences ont conclu que les
animaux anxieux pouvaient fournir des données incohérentes car ils n’étaient pas en mesure de faire face à la
situation pendant les tests scientifiques, ce qui augmentait le bruit statistique. Il a été suggéré que cela entraînait la
nécessité d’utiliser un nombre accru d’animaux pour que les résultats soient fiables. À ce stade, en 2019, il existait
des preuves convaincantes indiquant que l’utilisation du tunnel plutôt que de la queue diminuait l’anxiété des souris,
améliorait leur bien-être et augmentait également les chances d’obtenir des résultats d’expérience plus précis.
L’attitude, en particulier de 2017 à 2019, était quelque peu négative à l’égard de cette méthode. La rétroaction et
le consensus culturel au sein du département étaient que « cela prenait trop de temps » et « nous avons toujours
procédé de cette façon, pourquoi changer ? ». Cette attitude négative pourrait expliquer le retard de mise en œuvre
de la nouvelle méthode.
L’objectif était d’amener l’équipe à développer des idées sur la façon dont nous pourrions aider à améliorer la culture
des soins à l’université afin d’amener les chercheurs à utiliser cette méthode de traitement réduisant le stress. Tout
au long de ce document de portée et de planification, les objectifs SMART, l’analyse SWOT, l’analyse de pilon, un
registre des risques et des diagrammes de Gantt ont été utilisés. Cela a aidé à préparer ce projet en prévoyant et
en palliant les éventuels revers qui pourraient survenir. La réticence des chercheurs constituait la principale menace
à l’introduction de la nouvelle méthode de manipulation. Des stratégies ont donc été mises en place pour atténuer
cette menace.
Un aspect observé était que la motivation du personnel semblait augmenter lorsque les choses étaient comprises et
que des objectifs étaient fixés. L’amélioration considérable du bien-être des animaux constitue l’une des principales
raisons que l’on pouvait avancer en faveur de cet objectif.
Ce projet s’est accompagné de défis, mais globalement des changements positifs importants ont été mis en place
pour améliorer le bien-être des animaux, ce qui a créé une occasion sociale de valeur pour le département, l’équipe
entière pouvant collaborer afin d’apporter un changement positif.
Mots-clés. Souris, manipulation moins stressante, bruit statistique, amélioration du bien-être, réduction du nombre
de souris.
197
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareDecember 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
INHALTVERZEICHNIS
Zusammenhang zwischen Mitarbeiterbeteiligung und
Zufriedenheit am Arbeitsplatz
CHERYL YALDEN
Biological Services, Hodgkin Building, King’s College London, Guy’s Campus, London SE1 1UL UK
Korrespondenz: cheryl.yalden@kcl.ac.uk
Abstract
Dieser Artikel basiert auf einem Projekt, das im Rahmen des IAT-Studienprogramms Versuchstierkunde und
-technik, Diplomstufe 6, durchgeführt wurde. Ziel des Projekts war die Untersuchung des Zusammenhangs zwischen
Mitarbeiterbeteiligung und Zufriedenheit am Arbeitsplatz. Dazu wurden vier Workshops durchgeführt, deren
Schwerpunkt die Umsetzung des 3R-Prinzips und einer Kultur der Sorgfalt mit klar definierten gemeinsamen Werten
war. Die Teilnehmer waren Mitglieder der Biological Services Unit am King’s College London Guy’s Campus, die mit
der Betreuung von für die medizinische Forschung verwendeten Tieren befasst sind.
Das 3R-Prinzip bietet einen Rahmen für eine verbesserte ethische und humane Tierforschung.
1
Einrichtungen, die
mit Versuchstieren arbeiten, sind durch Gesetzgebung und Richtlinien stark reguliert. Dennoch sollten sich solche
Einrichtungen bemühen, über die gesetzlichen Verpflichtungen hinauszugehen und die Tiere mit Mitgefühl und Einfühlung
zu behandeln, indem sie eine Kultur der Sorgfalt etablieren. Es hat sich gezeigt, dass ein verbesserter Tierschutz
die Reproduzierbarkeit wissenschaftlicher Ergebnisse erhöht und gute wissenschaftliche Praxis fördert. Diese Kultur
sollte auf Personen ausgedehnt werden, die mit Tieren dort arbeiten, wo “die institutionelle Kultur die Produktivität und
Leistung vieler Unternehmen beeinflusst”.
2,3
Eine niedrige Arbeitsmoral und Motivation der Mitarbeiter kann mit geringer
Arbeitszufriedenheit, erhöhtem Krankenstand und einer schlechten öffentlichen Wahrnehmung einer Organisation in
Zusammenhang gebracht werden. Einem Bericht des Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) von
2018 zufolge hat Abwesenheit aufgrund von stressbedingten Krankheiten und psychischen Gesundheitsproblemen
einschließlich Angst und Depressionen in fast 40 % bzw. 55 % der Organisationen zugenommen.
Die einzelnen Workshop-Feedback-Fragebögen und die Gesamtumfrage wiesen auf Verbesserungen in einigen Punkten
hin, die zu einer höheren allgemeinen Zufriedenheit am Arbeitsplatz führen könnten. Die Rückmeldungen haben
ergeben, dass sich die Mitarbeiter mit den gemeinsamen Werten des Unternehmens identifizieren, wodurch sich ihr
Gefühl der Zugehörigkeit untereinander und zur Organisation verbessert hat.
Schlagwörter: Zufriedenheit am Arbeitsplatz, Kultur der Sorgfalt, Mitarbeiterbeteiligung
198
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020Paper Summary Translations
Verbesserung des tierschutzes an der
Newcastle University durch Einführung
eines schonenden Umgangs mit Mäusen
EMMA HAMILTON
Newcastle University, Comparative Biology Centre, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
Korrespondenz: emma.hamilton@newcastle.ac.uk
Abstract
Dieser Artikel basiert auf einem Projekt, das im Rahmen des IAT-Studienprogramms Versuchstierkunde und -technik,
Diplomstufe 6, durchgeführt wurde.
Schwerpunkt dieses Projekts war die Einführung eines schonenden Umgangs mit Mäusen an der Newcastle University
und die künftige Anwendung dieser Methode durch alle Wissenschaftler und Techniker. Die Tunnel-Handling-Methode
wurde ursprünglich von Hurst JL untersucht, um Angstzustände bei Labormäusen zu überwinden (2010). Diese
Informationen waren nicht weit verbreitet, was erklären könnte, warum nur wenige Tierversuchseinrichtungen diese
Methode anwendeten. Erst als ein Wissenschaftler an der Newcastle University begann, diese Methode zu untersuchen,
wurde eine starke Dynamik für diesbezügliche Veränderungen in Gang gesetzt.
Diese Projektidee entstand im Anschluss an Experimente zum Thema “Implementierung nicht-aversiven Maus-
Handlings zur Verbesserung des Tierwohls und zur Reduzierung der Mauszahlen”. Fazit dieser Experimente war,
dass ängstliche Tiere u. U. inkonsistente Daten liefern, da sie wissenschaftliche Versuche schlecht bewältigen und
so statistisches Rauschen erhöhen. Es wurde vermutet, dass dies dazu führt, dass eine größere Anzahl von Tieren
benötigt wird, um Ergebniszuverlässigkeit zu erzielen. Es gab zu diesem Zeitpunkt im Jahr 2019 stichhaltige Beweise
dafür, dass Tunnel- statt Schwanz-Handling Angst verringert, das Wohlbefinden verbessert und auch die Chancen
erhöht, präzisere Versuchsergebnisse zu erhalten.
Insbesondere zwischen 2017 und 2019 herrschte eine bestimmte negative Einstellung gegenüber dieser Methode.
Feedback und Konsens innerhalb der Abteilung lauteten: “Es dauert zu lange” und “Wir haben es immer so gemacht,
warum jetzt ändern?” Diese negative Einstellung könnte der Grund für die zögerliche Einführung der neuen Methode sein.
Es ging darum, das Team zur Entwicklung von Ideen anzuregen, wie wir zu einer besseren Kultur der Sorgfalt an
der Universität beitragen könnten, und die Forscher zu überzeugen, diese Methode des schonenden Umgangs zu
nutzen. Für das gesamte Scoping- und Planungsdokument wurden intelligente Zielsetzungen, SWOT-Analysen, Pestel-
Analysen, ein Risikoregister und Gantt-Diagramme verwendet. Dies trug bei der Vorbereitung dazu bei, dieses Projekt
realisierbar zu machen, indem potenzielle Rückschläge antizipiert und entsprechende Lösungen erarbeitet wurden.
Das größte Risiko für die Einführung der neuen Handling-Methode bestand darin, dass die Forscher nicht hinter ihr
stehen würden, und daher wurden Strategien zur Abschwächung dieses Risikos ergriffen.
Ein Aspekt, der beobachtet wurde, war, dass sich Mitarbeiter offenbar motiviert fühlen, wenn sie Sinn und Ziele
erkennen. Als ein wesentlicher Zweck dieser Zielsetzung kann die enorme Verbesserung des Tierschutzes ins Treffen
geführt werden.
Dieses Projekt war nicht frei von Herausforderungen, doch insgesamt wurden bedeutende positive Veränderungen zur
Verbesserung des Tierschutzes vorgenommen, und es bot der Abteilung einen wichtigen sozialen Rahmen, in dem das
gesamte Team gemeinsam eine positive Veränderung bewirken konnte.
Schlagwörter: Maus, schonender Umgang, statistisches Rauschen, Verbesserungen des Tierschutzes, Reduzierung
der Mauszahlen
199
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareDecember 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
INDICE DELLA REVISTA
Il rapporto fra partecipazione del dipendente e
soddisfazione sul lavoro
CHERYL YALDEN
Biological Services, Hodgkin Building, King’s College London, Guy’s Campus, London SE1 1UL UK
Corrispondenza: cheryl.yalden@kcl.ac.uk
Estratto
Il presente progetto è stato svolto nell’ambito del programma di studi per il Diploma IAT di Livello 6 in Scienza e
Tecnologia degli Animali da Laboratorio. Scopo del progetto era quello di esplorare il rapporto fra partecipazione del
dipendente e soddisfazione sul lavoro tramite lo svolgimento di quattro workshop relativi all’attuazione delle 3R e il
lavorare a una “cultura della cura” con obiettivi condivisi e chiaramente definiti. I partecipanti erano membri dell’Unità
Servizi Biologici presso il Guy’s Campus del King’s College di Londra, coinvolti nella cura degli animali usati per la
ricerca medica.
Le 3R sono una serie di princìpi che forniscono un quadro di riferimento per una ricerca sugli animali che sia più etica
e umana.
1
Le istituzioni che lavorano con gli animali da ricerca sono molto regolamentate da legislazione e linee guida.
Tuttavia, esse dovrebbero impegnarsi ad andare oltre gli obblighi di legge e a trattare gli animali con compassione
ed empatia, creando una “cultura della cura”. È stato continuamente dimostrato che il miglioramento del benessere
degli animali aumenta la riproducibilità della ricerca e promuove una buona scienza. Questa cultura dovrebbe essere
estesa alle persone che lavorano con gli animali laddove “La cultura istituzionale influenza la produttività e i risultati di
molte imprese”.
2,3
Livelli bassi di morale e di motivazione nel personale sono riconducibili a una scarsa soddisfazione
sul lavoro, a periodi di malattia più lunghi e a una cattiva percezione di un’organizzazione da parte del pubblico.
Secondo il rapporto del Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) del 2018, le assenze per malattie
legate allo stress e problemi di salute mentale, fra cui ansia e depressione, sono aumentate rispettivamente in quasi
il 40% e il 55% delle organizzazioni.
Ciascuno dei moduli di commento individuale sui workshop e i sondaggi generali hanno indicato miglioramenti che,
per alcuni aspetti, potrebbero offrire una maggiore soddisfazione complessiva sul lavoro. I commenti mostrano che il
personale si è sentito investito dei valori condivisi dell’azienda, con il risultato di un maggiore senso di appartenenza
reciproca e nei confronti dell’organizzazione.
Parole chiave: soddisfazione sul lavoro, cultura della cura, partecipazione dei dipendenti
200
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020Paper Summary Translations
Il miglioramento del benessere animale
nell’Università di Newcastle con l’introduzione di
tecniche di manipolazione dei topi a basso stress
EMMA HAMILTON
Newcastle University, Comparative Biology Centre, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
Corrispondenza: emma.hamilton@newcastle.ac.uk
Estratto
Il presente articolo si basa su un progetto svolto nell’ambito del programma di studi per il Diploma IAT di Livello 6 in
Scienza e Tecnologia degli Animali da Laboratorio.
Scopo principale del progetto era quello di introdurre nell’Università di Newcastle tecniche di manipolazione dei topi
a basso stress e di conseguenza l’utilizzo di questo metodo da parte di tutti i ricercatori e i tecnici. L’obiettivo del
progetto era l’adozione del metodo da parte di tutto il personale di ricerca. Il metodo di manipolazione con tunnel è
stato studiato inizialmente da Hurst J.L., “Taming anxiety in laboratory mice” (2010). Queste informazioni non hanno
avuto ampia diffusione, il che potrebbe spiegare perché non molte strutture di ricerca hanno adottato questo metodo.
Una forte spinta al cambiamento è partita solo quando uno scienziato dell’Università di Newcastle a cominciato a
studiare il metodo.
L’idea di questo progetto è nata in seguito agli esperimenti sull’“attuazione di tecniche di manipolazione dei topi
non repulsive per il miglioramento del benessere e la riduzione del numero degli animali.” La conclusione di questi
esperimenti è stata che animali ansiosi possono fornire dati incoerenti, in quanto mal sopportano i test scientifici,
incrementando così il rumore statistico. L’indicazione è che ciò conduce alla necessità di un maggior numero di
animali perché i risultati siano attendibili. A questo punto, nel 2019 ci sono state prove convincenti del fatto che
l’utilizzo del tunnel anziché della coda abbassa l’ansia, migliora il benessere e aumenta inoltre le probabilità di
ottenere risultati più precisi durante gli esperimenti.
L’atteggiamento nei confronti di questo metodo è stato alquanto negativo, soprattutto dal 2017 al 2019. I commenti
e il consenso nella cultura dipartimentale erano: “richiede troppo tempo” e “abbiamo sempre fatto così, perché
cambiare?”. Tale atteggiamento negativo potrebbe essere stato il motivo per la ritardata adozione del nuovo metodo.
L’obiettivo era quello di far sì che il personale sviluppasse idee su come contribuire a migliorare la cultura della
cura nell’Università e convincere i ricercatori a usare questo metodo di manipolazione a basso stress. Durante la
delimitazione della portata e pianificazione degli obiettivi SMART del documento, si sono utilizzati l’analisi SWOT,
l’analisi PESTLE, un registro dei rischi e i diagrammi di Gantt. Ciò ha agevolato la preparazione di un progetto
realizzabile, definendo e risolvendo le potenziali problematiche che sarebbero potute insorgere. La principale minaccia
all’introduzione del nuovo metodo di manipolazione consisteva nella non accettazione da parte dei ricercatori, pertanto
sono state messe in atto delle strategie per la mitigazione di tale problema.
Un aspetto osservato è che le persone sono sembrate motivate quando hanno avuto un significato e degli obiettivi.
A tale scopo, una delle principali ragioni che si potevano addurre era il notevole miglioramento del benessere degli
animali.
Il progetto ha comportato delle sfide, tuttavia il benessere degli animali ha avuto nel complesso dei significativi
cambiamenti in positivo. Nel dipartimento si è anche creata una preziosa opportunità sociale, in quanto tutto il
personale si è unito per apportare un cambiamento positivo.
Parole chiave: topo, manipolazione a basso stress, rumore statistico, miglioramenti del benessere, riduzione del
numero di topi.
201
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareDecember 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
INDICE DE LA REVISTA
La relación entre la participación de los empleados
y la satisfacción laboral
CHERYL YALDEN
Biological Services, Hodgkin Building, King’s College London, Guy’s Campus, London SE1 1UL UK
Correspondencia: cheryl.yalden@kcl.ac.uk
Résumé
Este es un proyecto realizado como parte del programa de estudio del Diploma en Tecnología y Ciencia de Animales de
Laboratorio de Nivel 6 del IAT. El objetivo del proyecto era explorar la relación entre la participación de los empleados
y la satisfacción laboral llevando a cabo cuatro talleres en relación a la implementación de las 3 R y trabajando para
conseguir una «cultura de cuidado» con valores compartidos bien definidos. Los participantes eran miembros de
la Unidad de Servicios Biológicos del Guy´s Campus del King´s College London que participaban en el cuidado de
animales utilizados para la investigación médica.
Las 3 R son un conjunto de principios que ofrecen un marco para una investigación con animales que sea más
humana y ética.
1
Las instituciones que trabajan con animales de investigación están muy reguladas por leyes y
directrices. Sin embargo, dichas instituciones deberían comprometerse a ir más allá de las obligaciones legales
y tratar a los animales con compasión y empatía estableciendo una «cultura de cuidado». La mejora del bienestar
animal siempre ha demostrado que aumenta la reproducibilidad de la investigación y que fomenta la buena ciencia.
Esta cultura también debería llegar a las personas que trabajan con los animales cuando «la cultura institucional
influye en la productividad y rendimiento de muchas empresas».
2,3
Una moral y motivación bajas del personal puede
relacionarse con una baja satisfacción laboral, un mayor número de bajas por enfermedad y una mala percepción
pública de una organización. Según el informe del Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) 2018 las
ausencias debidas a enfermedades relacionadas con el estrés y problemas de salud mental, como la ansiedad y la
depresión, han aumentado en las organizaciones casi un 40 % y un 55 %, respectivamente.
Todos los comentarios individuales del taller y la encuesta general indicaron que las mejoras de algunos aspectos
podrían crear una mayor satisfacción laboral. Los comentarios muestran que el personal sentía que compartía los
valores de la empresa mejorando así su sentimiento de pertenencia a la organización.
Palabras clave. Satisfacción laboral, cultura de cuidado, participación de empleados
202
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020Paper Summary Translations
Mejora del bienestar animal en la Universidad
de Newcastle mediante la introducción de una
manipulación de bajo estrés para roedores
EMMA HAMILTON
Newcastle University, Comparative Biology Centre, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
Correspondencia: emma.hamilton@newcastle.ac.uk
Résumé
Este artículo se basa en un proyecto realizado como parte del programa de estudio del Diploma en Tecnología y
Ciencia de Animales de Laboratorio de nivel 6 del IAT.
El foco principal de este proyecto fue introducir una manipulación de bajo estrés para roedores en la Universidad
de Newcastle para que como resultado, todos los investigadores y técnicos podrán utilizar este método. El foco
del proyecto será que el personal de investigación adopte este método. El método de manipulación con tubo fue
investigado por primera vez por Hurst JL, Mejora de la ansiedad de los roedores de laboratorio (2010), sin embargo,
esta información no estaba muy difundida, por lo que se podría deducir el motivo por el que no muchas instalaciones
de investigación con animales adoptaban este método. Realmente no hubo un cambio signifi cativo en el sector hasta
que un científi co de la Universidad de Newcastle empezara a investigar este método.
Esta idea del proyecto surgió tras varios experimentos sobre la implementación de una manipulación de ratones no
invasiva para refi nar el bienestar y reducir el número de ratones utilizado. La conclusión de estos experimentos fue
que animales con ansiedad podían ofrecer datos inconsistentes al no rendir bien durante las pruebas científi cas,
aumentando así los errores estadísticos. Se dedujo que esto llevaba a un aumento del número de ratones necesarios
para que los resultados fuesen fi ables. En este momento en 2019, hubo pruebas concluyentes que indicaban que
usar un tubo en lugar de la cola del ratón reducía la ansiedad del animal, mejoraba el bienestar y aumentaba la
posibilidad de obtener resultados más precisos durante los experimentos.
La percepción de este método, en particular de 2017 a 2019, fue algo negativa. Los comentarios y el consenso
general dentro del departamento fue que «se pierde demasiado tiempo» y «siempre lo hemos hecho así, ¿por qué
cambiar ahora?». Esta recepción negativa podría ser el motivo por el que hubo una demora en la implementación de
este nuevo método.
El foco era hacer que el equipo desarrollase ideas sobre cómo podíamos ayudar a mejorar la cultura de cuidado en
la Universidad y hacer que los investigadores usasen este método de manipulación menos estresante. Durante todo
este documento de planifi cación y alcance se utilizaron objetivos inteligentes, análisis DAFO, análisis PESTLE, un
registro de riesgos y gráfi cos Gantt. Esto ayudó a que este proyecto fuera factible al preparar el terreno y resolver
posibles contratiempos. El principal riesgo en cuanto a la introducción de este nuevo método de manipulación fue que
los investigadores no estuvieran convencidos; por tanto se llevó a cabo una estrategia para resolver esta situación.
Un aspecto que se observó fue que la gente parecía estar más motivada al tener unos objetivos y encontrar una
relevancia. Uno de los principales motivos para este objetivo se podría decir que era las mejoras del bienestar animal.
Este proyecto llegó con problemas, sin embargo, se realizaron cambios positivos signifi cativos para mejorar el
bienestar animal y creó una oportunidad social valiosa para el departamento, al que todo el equipo podía unirse para
llevar realizar un cambio positivo.
Palabras clave. Ratón, manipulación de bajo estrés, errores estadísticos, refi namientos del bienestar, reducción del
número de ratones.
203
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
AWERB review of lessons learned from
COVID-19 experience
Laboratory Animal Science Association, Laboraory Animal Veterinary Association,
Institute of Animal Technology, Royal Society of Biology, National Centre for the
Replacement Reduction and Refi nement of Animals in Research, Royal Society for
the Protection of Animals, European Federation of Animal Technologists, European
Society of Laboratory Animal Veterinarians, Understanding Animal Research
Supported by:
The COVID-19 crisis resulted in many establishments
having to rapidly curtail, stop work or drastically alter
their working practices. It is essential that the AWERB
reviews the processes that were in place during the
crisis, and their outcomes, not only in the event of similar
future episodes, but also in reference to more general
disaster management plans so that improvements can
be made. This will support future business continuity,
as well as helping in the delivery of the AWERB task;
Establishment licence standard condition 6.3 https://
www.gov.uk/government/publications/establishment-
licence-standard-conditions/establishment-licence-
standard-conditions and Directive 2010/63 EU article
27.1 (c) to “Establish and review management and
operational processes for monitoring, reporting and
follow-up in relation to the welfare of animals housed or
used in the licensed establishment”.
Whilst what and how should be reviewed will need to
take local circumstances into account, it is suggested
that three phases are considered, as the actions taken
and likely issues raised in each phase will be different.
The impact on staff, and diffi culties they experienced
are also worthy of discussion, as well as considering
whether any changes have led to improvements in
processes.
Some suggested starting questions are offered here;
the focus should be on what can be learnt in order to help
in future decision making, rather than simply responding
to these (or other) specifi c questions. In reviewing the
issues and possible resolutions for the future, AWERBs
should consider sharing the experiences of their
establishments more widely, including looking at how
others dealt with the situation via mechanisms such as
the AWERB Hubs and industry related organisations.
The initial response to the outbreak
Were business continuity plans and/or emergency
plans in place?
If yes, were business continuity plans and/or
emergency preparations successful?
Have any gaps been identifi ed in these plans and
how were these remedied?
Where facilities were partially or fully shutdown, how
were decisions made regarding whether, and which,
animals to kill? What were the processes involved?
Who was involved in the decision making? Do these
people feel others should have been involved and
that they had enough support?
What criteria were considered for decisions to kill
animals, shut facilities or limit work? In hindsight
were these the right ones? Should any be added/
removed?
Could any of the studies that were stopped have
been completed or some of all of the animals used
in some other way or rehomed rather than killed?
How were the decisions and actions above
communicated and documented?
December 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
1 | Page
Supported by:
DOCUMENT DESIGNED TO AID
AWERB REVIEW OF LESSONS
LEARNED FROM COVID19
EXPERIENCE
1 | Page
Supported by:
DOCUMENT DESIGNED TO AID
AWERB REVIEW OF LESSONS
LEARNED FROM COVID19
EXPERIENCE
1 | Page
Supported by:
DOCUMENT DESIGNED TO AID
AWERB REVIEW OF LESSONS
LEARNED FROM COVID19
EXPERIENCE
1 | Page
Supported by:
DOCUMENT DESIGNED TO AID
AWERB REVIEW OF LESSONS
LEARNED FROM COVID19
EXPERIENCE
1 | Page
Supported by:
DOCUMENT DESIGNED TO AID
AWERB REVIEW OF LESSONS
LEARNED FROM COVID19
EXPERIENCE
1 | Page
Supported by:
DOCUMENT DESIGNED TO AID
AWERB REVIEW OF LESSONS
LEARNED FROM COVID19
EXPERIENCE
Institute of
Animal
Technology
204
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
Did actions include planning for the administrative
processes necessary to continue PIL and PPL
processing and the AWERB?
During lockdown itself
How was animal work prioritised?
Were deliveries cancelled or delayed? Were there
any difficulties in getting supplies of food/bedding,
etc., or with getting vital equipment serviced or
mended?
Were there any process or communications failures
such that animals were delivered that were not
required or could not be accommodated?
Were any decisions on breeding management
correct (tick-over versus shutdown of breeding)?
Was optimum use made of cryopreservation?
Were the patterns of work for personnel (shifts,
teams, etc.) effective or could there have been
better options?
Is there anything that could, or should have been
done to allow the use (or rehoming) of animals so
that killing of animals could have been avoided?
Were there any unique challenges presented
regarding animal husbandry and/or welfare of
animals?
Were records kept of all decisions taken?
Did AWERB continue to operate? If so how, and was
AWERB able to function successfully? If not, why,
and what could have been done to keep the AWERB
operational?
Does the AWERB consider the correct balance was
achieved between protecting staff from the risks of
COVID-19 whilst maximising the possible outcomes
that could be achieved from the animals who had
already been bred, delivered or had started on
study?
Re-commencement of work and
ongoing preparedness
Was the timing with respect to sourcing animals/
recommencing and/or expansion of any breeding
correct in terms of allowing commencement of work
but without creating additional wastage? If not, how
could things have been done differently?
What period did it take to return to (near) or “new”
normal levels of activity? Were there actions that
could have speeded this up without causing issues
for personnel or wastage of animals?
What were the main barriers to returning to work?
Can any of these be reduced or removed for the
future?
Did planning include consideration of a further wave
of infection?
Are there contingency plans for further waves of
infection (e.g. for staffing, staff support, use or
rehoming of animals, supply of consumables, etc.)?
How will a culture of preparedness be maintained?
Staff Care and Concerns
What was the experience of Animal Technicians? Do
they feel that their safety, wellbeing and their own
concern for the animals were taken into account? Do
they feel that their work during the COVID outbreak is
appreciated? Did they get enough support in respect
of their role if they needed it?
If the office-based managers worked remotely did
the technicians feel communication was adequate?
Have there been issues with training for new staff?
What was the experience of the veterinarians,
researchers, administrators and other members
of staff involved in decision making around animal
studies and/or ongoing care (or killing) of the
animals? Specifically, were decisions transparent,
timely and clearly communicated? Were researchers
properly engaged in the decisions about their own
work?
Have differences in working patterns created
concerns or difficulties (for example the need for
some people to work longer hours or more days than
others), particularly with respect to relationships
between staff?
Were there particular challenges related to animal
studies from changes to “virtual” operating
environments?
Have staff had an opportunity to debrief? Were
relevant support systems available and accessible to
staff, for example to address possible compassion
fatigue?
How can you best canvass opinions from staff as to
any of the above (e.g. via an anonymous survey) to
ensure the Culture of Care is maintained? Consider
utilising questions to probe whether conversations
were open and honest. Do people feel they were
listened to?
We have all had to adapt to new ways of working
through the COVID crisis. In addition to reviewing what
was less successful in your approaches to dealing
with the situation caused by COVID, it is important
to consider if there have been any positive outcomes
and whether any of the challenges may present
opportunities for improved processes.
Looking Forward
Which, if any of your new processes/ways of working
do you consider worth keeping post COVID?
Which, if any, existing processes have you found to
be unnecessary?
Are there ongoing issues preventing recommencement
of work? What ethical, animal welfare, 3Rs or
regulatory consequences might result from these?
AWERB review of lessons learned from COVID19 experience
49
Haven’t the time to write a paper but want to have something published? Then read on!
This section offers readers the opportunity to submit informal contributions about any
aspects of Animal Technology. Comments, observations, descriptions of new or refined
techniques, new products or equipment, old products or equipment adapted to new use,
any subject that may be useful to technicians in other institutions. Submissions can be
presented as technical notes and do not need to be structured and can be as short or as
long as is necessary. Accompanying illustrations and/or photos should be high resolution.
NB. Descriptions of new products or equipment submitted by manufacturers are welcome
but should be a factual account of the product. However, the Editorial Board gives no
warranty as to the accuracy or fitness for purpose of the product.
What 3Rs idea have you developed?
EMMA FILBY
Mira Building, University of Cambridge, University Biomedical Services,
Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge CB3 0FS
Correspondence: emma.filby@admin.cam.ac.uk
Based on an article written for the National Centre for the 3Rs
April 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
TECH-2-TECH
Background
Emma was invited to write an article as a 3Rs
champion in NC3Rs ‘Tech 3Rs’ Issue 5, November
2019.
Here is her response describing how she has used an
automated system to reduce how frequently mouse
cage bedding is
changed without compr
omising
cleanliness.
Introduction
Our unit opened in 2017, during the procurement of
new equipment we had the opportunity to purchase a
digital ventilated rack system from Tecniplast UK. The
cages are referred to as the Digitally Ventilated Cage or
DVC. This system uses the data collected by sensors
below the cage to flag when to clean out based on the
change in an electromagnetic signal. To have this
functionality we first needed to create an algorithm
during a learning phase.
The learning phase: devising an
algorithm
We held a meeting to agree what warranted a cage base
change based on pictures to avoid being subjective. We
referred to the Home Office Codes of Practice for the
housing and care of animals bred, supplied or used for
scientific purposes (HOCoP) for advice on husbandry
practices to set our criteria, balancing hygiene and the
importance of olfactory cues to rodents and their need
for control over their environment.
1
We started the trial, noting when the cage reached the
point it required a base change. We a
ssessed air
quality, what proportion of the cage base was wet and
whether the animals still had choice over their
environment and their ability to show spatial separation
of different behaviours such as nesting and excretion,
for example their nest was free of faeces. During the
learning phase’ we as ke d our Name d Veterinary
Surgeon (NVS) and Home Office inspector (HOI) to
check that they agreed with our assessment.
APRIL_1-628207435_4-628196990.e$S:Animal Technology and Welfare 24/9/20 06:51 Page 49
205
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
49
Haven’t the time to write a paper but want to have something published? Then read on!
This section offers readers the opportunity to submit informal contributions about any
aspects of Animal Technology. Comments, observations, descriptions of new or refined
techniques, new products or equipment, old products or equipment adapted to new use,
any subject that may be useful to technicians in other institutions. Submissions can be
presented as technical notes and do not need to be structured and can be as short or as
long as is necessary. Accompanying illustrations and/or photos should be high resolution.
NB. Descriptions of new products or equipment submitted by manufacturers are welcome
but should be a factual account of the product. However, the Editorial Board gives no
warranty as to the accuracy or fitness for purpose of the product.
What 3Rs idea have you developed?
EMMA FILBY
Mira Building, University of Cambridge, University Biomedical Services,
Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge CB3 0FS
Correspondence: emma.filby@admin.cam.ac.uk
Based on an article written for the National Centre for the 3Rs
April 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
TECH-2-TECH
Background
Emma was invited to write an article as a 3Rs
champion in NC3Rs ‘Tech 3Rs’ Issue 5, November
2019.
Here is her response describing how she has used an
automated system to reduce how frequently mouse
cage bedding is changed without compromising
cleanliness.
Introduction
Our unit opened in 2017, during the procurement of
new equipment we had the opportunity to purchase a
digital ventilated rack system from Tecniplast UK. The
cages are referred to as the Digitally Ventilated Cage or
DVC. This system uses the data collected by sensors
below the cage to flag when to clean out based on the
change in an electromagnetic signal. To have this
functionality we first needed to create an algorithm
during a learning phase.
The learning phase: devising an
algorithm
We held a meeting to agree what warranted a cage base
change based on pictures to avoi
d being subjective. We
referred to the Home Office Codes of Practice for the
housing and care of animals bred, supplied or used for
scientific purposes (HOCoP) for advice on husbandry
practices to set our criteria, balancing hygiene and the
importance of olfactory cues to rodents and their need
for control over their environment.
1
We started the trial, noting when the cage reached the
point it required a base change. We assessed air
quality, what proportion of the cage base was wet and
whether the animals still had choice over their
environment and their ability to show spatial separation
of different behaviours such as nesting and excretion,
for example their nest was free of faeces. During the
learning ph ase’ we aske d our Name d Veterinary
Surgeon (NVS) and Home Office inspector (HOI) to
check that they agreed with our assessment.
APRIL_1-628207435_4-628196990.e$S:Animal Technology and Welfare 24/9/20 06:51 Page 49
A picture paints a thousand words
JOANNA MALTON
Imperial College, Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London W12 0NN UK
Correspondence: j.malton@imperial.ac.uk
Introduction
The old saying in many cases is true but it needs to
be the right picture and a clear image to get the point
across. Images can be used to help attract people’s
interest in an article.
Would you be more interested in reading an article
that is all words or one that has clear images that help
explain what the writer is saying?
Would you buy a magazine if all the pictures are out of
focus?
So what do you need to consider when deciding what
image to use in your article?
1. Is the picture relevant to what you are saying?
2. Is the image clear enough to be able to see what is
going on?
3. Is the subject well lit or is the image too dark/bright?
4. Is the subject likely to move as you take the photo?
How do you get a good image in the
first place?
There are several factors you need to consider when
taking a photo of your subject;-
1. What equipment do you have available? Phone/
camera?
As technology improves phones now have the capability
to produce higher quality images which means you do
not necessarily need a camera to take a good photo. It
is advisable to try a few practise shots with the phone/
camera that you are going to use so you have an idea
of your equipment’s capabilities. Also, where available
try out different settings on the camera – if the camera
is equipped with a sport/action mode this can be
useful when taking shots of subjects that may move.
Due to the faster shutter speed, sport mode can also
help reduce blurring due to hand-shake. The increased
shutter speed may mean you need an additional light
source to prevent the image being too dark.
If you need a more detailed image of a subject that is
not going to move, then try Macro or close-up mode.
December 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
TECH-2-TECH
206
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
This mode uses a longer shutter speed so may require
the use of a tripod or stand of some kind to help keep
the camera still enough to get a clear picture. If you have
the camera too close to the subject it may struggle to
focus. Try taking a photo from further away, if necessary
the image can be cropped later to enlarge the area you
want to show. Starting out with a larger image and then
cropping it will help maintain the details.
2. What resolution does the image need to be to be
suitable for printing? Is there a minimum/maximum file
size or specific file type that the publisher can use?
The resolution of an image refers to the image quality.
The resolution is measured in dpi (dots per inch, or the
number of pixels per inch). Ideally the image should be
a resolution of 300dpi or higher for printing.
Editor’s Note. Photos for the Journal need to be 300dpi
Before taking your photo check the settings in your
camera to make sure they are set at the right resolution,
also check the image quality is set to high or medium
(low will give a poor quality image).
File types – there are a number of different file types
that can be used for images, most cameras will have
the option of saving images as one or more file types;-
JPEG files tend to be used most commonly as they are
a more compact file so require less memory space,
however due to the way they reduce the file size some
of the detail in the image may be lost. This is worth
considering especially if you need to edit the image later.
Each time you save a copy more detail may be lost.
Raw files are the equivalent of the negative that you
would get from a film camera. This file type stores a
lot more information about the image so allows more
options when it comes to editing. However due to the
amount of information that is stored these files take
up a lot more memory space. These files need to be
processed or developed by a data convertor or other
compatible software.
TIFF files are similar to Raw files in that they store a lot
of information however they are easier to process as
they don’t require specific software.
3. How do you find out what resolution your image is?
To check a photo’s resolution on a Windows PC, select
the file you want to use. Right click on the image and
then select properties.
A window will appear with the image’s details. Go to the
Details tab to see the image’s dimensions and resolution.
4. Is the subject likely to move or do you need to get a
close-up image to show the finer details?
Where available try out different settings on the camera
– if the camera is equipped with a sport/action mode
Figure 1.
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Figure 2.
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Figure
In addition
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Figure 1.
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Figure 2.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Figure
3.
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
In addition
to your
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
to your
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
6
Under exposed/too dark
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
.
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
.
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
use a setting with a faster shutter
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Figure 1.
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Figure 2.
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Figure
In addition
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Figure 1.
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Figure 2.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Figure
3.
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
In addition
to your
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
to your
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
6
Under exposed/too dark
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
.
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
.
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
use a setting with a faster shutter
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Figure 1.
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Figure 2.
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Figure
In addition
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Figure 1.
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Figure 2.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Figure
3.
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
In addition
to your
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
to your
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Under exposed/too dark
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
6
Under exposed/too dark
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
Over exposed/too bright
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
exposure setting as long as the subject is not moving.
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
computers built in photo editor t
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
use a setting with a faster shutter
speed, or if possible reduce the amount of light on the subject
.
Correct exposure allowing all the details to be seen clearly
.
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
use extra lights if available or a longer
use a setting with a faster shutter
here are a number of
computer programs available online to help make minor adjustments to
Figure 1. Under exposed/too dark – use extra lights if
available or a longer exposure setting as long as the
subject is not moving.
this can be useful when taking shots of subjects that
may move. As explained earlier, due to the faster shutter
speed, sport mode can also help reduce blurring, due
to hand-shake; the increased shutter speed may mean
you need an additional light source to prevent the image
being too dark.
As mentioned before, if you need a more detailed image
of a subject that is not going to move, then try Macro or
close up mode. This mode uses a longer shutter speed so
may require the use of a tripod or stand of some kind to
help keep the camera still enough to get a clear picture.
5. Where are you going to be taking the photo? Is
the area/room well lit? If not do you have extra lights
available to help light the subject?
Figure 2. Over exposed/too bright – use a setting with
a faster shutter speed, or if possible reduce the amount
of light on the subject.
Figure 3. Correct exposure allowing all the details to be
seen clearly.
In addition to your computer’s built in photo editor there
are a number of computer programmes available online
to help make minor adjustments to photos such as
altering the lighting/colour, cropping the image so it just
shows required area. For example Fotor and Be funky.
These are free to use as long as you only need the basic
tools.
Tech-2-Tech
207
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Summary
The key points to remember;-
Check the camera’s resolution before you start.
Choose the right mode for the subject.
Take the photo.
Check the photo (zoom in to check the detail is clear).
If the first one doesn’t work make adjustments and
try again.
Tech-2-Tech
208
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
April 2014 Animal Technology and Welfare
TECH-2-TECH
Haven’t the time to write a paper but want to get something published? Then read on!
This section offers readers the opportunity to submit informal contributions about any
aspects of animal technology. Comments, observations, descriptions of new or refined
techniques, new products or equipment, old products or equipment adapted to new use,
any subject that may be useful to technicians in other institutions. Submissions can be
presented as technical notes and do not need to be structured and can be as short or as
long as is necessary. Accompanying illustrations and/or photos should be high resolution.
NB. Descriptions of new products or equipment submitted by manufacturers are welcome
but should be a factual account of the product. However, the Editorial Board gives no
warranty as to the accuracy or fitness for purpose of the product.
Animal technology at the National Institute
for Medical Research: a century of innovation
ALAN PALMER
Biological Services, National Institite for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill,
London NW7 1AA
Corresponding author: apalmer@nimr.mrc.ac.uk
Based on an IAT/LAVA Congress 2013 Platfor m Presentation
Summary
Understanding the past to appr eciate the present: A
century of animal science and technology at the MRC
NIMR.
As the MRC celebrates its centenary year this
presentation takes a look back at the histor y of animal
use at the National Institute for Medical Research. The
development of key principles, techniques and design
that improved animal welfare standards and helped
shape the modern animal technology industry, along
with the important scientific discoveries made using a
range of species will be described.
Particular attention will be paid from the 1940s through
to the 1970s, regarded by some as the ‘golden age’ of
Animal Technology and science; this period saw some
major advances in caging systems, breeding
techniques, laboratory animal nutrition, animal
technician training and education, the Laboratory
Animals Bureau and animal house design to name just
a few. Insights into these developments and the key
people who helped drive forward advances in animal
welfar e will be presented providing a fascinating
account into how life in the ‘animal house’ has changed
over the past 100 years.
Keywords: National Institute for Medical Research,
centenar y, advances, animal welfare
Introduction
The modern barrier maintained animal facility is
controlled with computer monitored environmental
conditions and staffed by highly trained technologists
caring for animals housed in state of the art caging
systems. However, it was not always like this and as
part of MRC National Institute for Medical Research
Centenary celebrations this presentation recounts a
collection of articles, anecdotes and pictures that
describe what life was like in the ‘Animal House’ and
how certain technologies and practices evolved.
27
ATW:Animal Technology and Welfare 25/9/20 13:34 Page 27
141
LOOKING BACK
Editor’s introduction
During the 70-year history of the Institute’s Journal our overseas contributors have been an impor tant source of
articles. They provide an interesting insight into both the differences and similarities between Animal Technology
in different countries and continents and a fascinating reminder of the way things have changed (or in some
cases have remained the same). These papers have not been edited and appear in their original style.
T
he first article from an author in France is taken fr om the Jour nal of the Institute of Animal Technicians, Volume
23. 4, December 1972 and was presented at the IAT Congress held that year in Newcastle upon Tyne. It predates
the passing of the UK legislation The Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 which was a forerunner to other similar
Acts concerning safety in the workplace outside of the UK.
The second paper discusses an incidence of Pseudomonas in a laboratory rabbit colony. Ta
ken from The Journal
Volume 20.2, June 1969. Many laboratory animals at this time were bred in house and disease outbreaks in
laboratory animals was often a common problem for technicians and research workers alike. Some organisms
made replication of results difficult and the loss of animals through disease, especially virulent outbreaks, was
extremely upsetting for Animal Technicians and Researchers. In addition, losses were also of considerable
economic impact b
oth due to the loss of animals and in the case of animals already on experiment, reagents
and research time was also lost. Thankfully thanks to the efforts of animal technicians globally, commercial
breeding companies and research workers, disease in laboratory animals is much less common although when
it does occur the effects remain the same.
August 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Physical hazards in the laboratory animal
house
R.T. CHARLES
World Health Organisation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
Although it is an employer’s responsibility to keep
working conditions as s afe as possible for his
employe es, the Superintendent or Chief Animal
Technician in charge of animal units should be
responsible for the safety of the personnel in his
charge.
In all laboratory house manipulations, common sense,
experience, and genuine desire to work safely are the
basic requirements. In all matters of safety perh
aps
t
he most important thing is to visualise the hazard and
to take adequate precautionary measures in advance.
When an accident does occur, it is important to know
what to do.
Accidents do not just ‘just happen’; They all have a
cause. To eliminate the possible danger of an accident,
it is necessary to find out exactly what these causes
are and to realise that there are two basic factors
involved in most accidents: (1) personal factors; (2) two
mechanical factors.
It has b ecome
common practise in most large
i
ndustrial organisations to employ a Safety Officer, who
is a trained specialist in this field, but if there is no
establishment within your own organisation for such a
person who would be responsible under normal
circumstances for the formation of a safety committee
directly answerable to the management, the need for
such a committee is still of paramount importance.
The Su per vis or of a large animal breeding or
experim ental uni t should be on
such a saf ety
c
ommittee or be able to report to the person directly
responsible to the management for the safety of the
unit. Too often, technical staff are work-orientated,
either in the production of animals, or the housing of
large groups of experimental animals, without giving a
August20:Animal Technology and Welfare 12/8/20 07:54 Page 141
209
August 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareAugust 2020 Animal Technology and WelfareDecember 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
April 2014 Animal Technology and Welfare
TECH-2-TECH
Haven’t the time to write a paper but want to get something published? Then read on!
This section offers readers the opportunity to submit informal contributions about any
aspects of animal technology. Comments, observations, descriptions of new or refined
techniques, new products or equipment, old products or equipment adapted to new use,
any subject that may be useful to technicians in other institutions. Submissions can be
presented as technical notes and do not need to be structured and can be as short or as
long as is necessary. Accompanying illustrations and/or photos should be high resolution.
NB. Descriptions of new products or equipment submitted by manufacturers are welcome
but should be a factual account of the product. However, the Editorial Board gives no
warranty as to the accuracy or fitness for purpose of the product.
Animal technology at the National Institute
for Medical Research: a century of innovation
ALAN PALMER
Biological Services, National Institite for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill,
London NW7 1AA
Corresponding author: apalmer@nimr.mrc.ac.uk
Based on an IAT/LAVA Congress 2013 Platfor m Presentation
Summary
Understanding the past to appr eciate the present: A
century of animal science and technology at the MRC
NIMR.
As the MRC celebrates its centenary year this
presentation takes a look back at the histor y of animal
use at the National Institute for Medical Research. The
development of key principles, techniques and design
that improved animal welfare standards and helped
shape the modern animal technology industry, along
with the important scientific discoveries made using a
range of species will be described.
Particular attention will be paid from the 1940s through
to the 1970s, regarded by some as the ‘golden age’ of
Animal Technology and science; this period saw some
major advances in caging systems, breeding
techniques, laboratory animal nutrition, animal
technicia n training and education, the Laboratory
Animals Bureau and animal house design to name just
a few. Insights into these developments and the key
people who helped drive forward advances in animal
welfar e will be presented providing a fascinating
account into how life in the ‘animal house’ has changed
over the past 100 years.
Keywords: National Institute for Medical Research,
centenar y,
advance
s, animal welfare
Introduction
The modern barrier maintained animal facility is
controlled with computer monitored environmental
conditions and staffed by highly trained technologists
caring for animals housed in state of the art caging
systems. However, it was not always like this and as
part of MRC National Institute for Medical Research
Centenary celebrations this presentation recounts a
collection of articles, anecdotes and pictures that
describe what life was like in the ‘Animal House’ and
how certain technologies and practices evolved.
27
ATW:Animal Technology and Welfare 25/9/20 13:34 Page 27
LOOKING BACK –
Celebrating making a difference
141
LOOKING BACK
Editor’s introduction
During the 70-year history of the Institute’s Journal our overseas contributors have been an impor tant source of
articles. They provide an interesting insight into both the differences and similarities between Animal Technology
in different countries and continents and a fascinating reminder of the way things have changed (or in some
cases have remained the same). These papers have not been edited and appear in their original style.
The first article from an author in France is taken fr om the Jour nal of the Institute of Animal Technicians, Volume
23. 4, December 1972 and was presented at the IAT Congress held that year in Newcastle upon Tyne. It predates
the passing of the UK legislation The Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 which was a forerunner to other similar
Acts concerning safety in the workplace outside of the UK.
The second paper discusses an incidence of Pseudomonas in a laboratory rabbit colony. Taken f
rom The Journal
Volume 20.2, June 1969. Many laboratory animals at this time were bred in house and disease outbreaks in
laboratory animals was often a common problem for technicians and research workers alike. Some organisms
made replication of results difficult and the loss of animals through disease, especially virulent outbreaks, was
extremely upsetting for Animal Technicians and Researchers. In addition, losses were also of considerable
economic impact both d
ue to the loss of animals and in the case of animals already on experiment, reagents
and research time was also lost. Thankfully thanks to the efforts of animal technicians globally, commercial
breeding companies and research workers, disease in laboratory animals is much less common although when
it does occur the effects remain the same.
August 2020 Animal Technology and Welfare
Physical hazards in the laboratory animal
house
R.T. CHARLES
World Health Organisation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
Although it is an employer’s responsibility to keep
working conditions as s afe as possible for his
employe es, the Superintendent or Chief Animal
Technician in charge of animal units should be
responsible for the safety of the personnel in his
charge.
In all laboratory house manipulations, common sense,
experience, and genuine desire to work safely are the
basic requirements. In all matters of safety perhaps
t
he m
ost important thing is to visualise the hazard and
to take adequate precautionary measures in advance.
When an accident does occur, it is important to know
what to do.
Accidents do not just ‘just happen’; They all have a
cause. To eliminate the possible danger of an accident,
it is necessary to find out exactly what these causes
are and to realise that there are two basic factors
involved in most accidents: (1) personal factors; (2) two
mechanical factors.
It has b ecome comm
on practise in most large
i
ndustrial organisations to employ a Safety Officer, who
is a trained specialist in this field, but if there is no
establishment within your own organisation for such a
person who would be responsible under normal
circumstances for the formation of a safety committee
directly answerable to the management, the need for
such a committee is still of paramount importance.
The Su per vis or of a large animal breeding or
experim ental uni t should be on such
a safety
c
ommittee or be able to report to the person directly
responsible to the management for the safety of the
unit. Too often, technical staff are work-orientated,
either in the production of animals, or the housing of
large groups of experimental animals, without giving a
August20:Animal Technology and Welfare 12/8/20 07:54 Page 141
Animal Technology at the National Institute
for Medical Research: A Century of Innovation
ALAN PALMER
Biological Services, National Institute for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill,
London NW7 1AA UK
Corresponding Author: alan.palmer@crick.ac.uk
Based on an IAT/LAVA Congress 2013 Platform Presentation
Reprinted from ATW Volume 13.1 April 2014
210
Animal Technology and Welfare August 2020
During the late 1940s the whole of the animal science
and technology industry was beginning to rapidly develop
and standardisation of feeding, maintenance, colony
management, breeding and supply was taking shape.
In response the Medical Research Council (MRC) set up
the Laboratory Animals Bureau (LAB) in 1947, later to
become the Laboratory Animals Centre (LAC) in 1958.
The main function of the LAB was to facilitate the
standardisation of the supply of animals for research.
Up until then many laboratory animals were sourced
from the commercial pet trade usually with inferior stock
which often resorted to