Dataset Information

A semi-structured questionnaire survey of laboratory animal rehoming practice across 41 UK animal research facilities.

ABSTRACT: If a laboratory animal survives an experiment without lasting compromised welfare, its future must be negotiated. Rehoming may be a consideration. This paper reports on research findings that provide an indication of the uptake of animal rehoming by UK facilities and the associated moral, ethical, practical and regulatory considerations that inform decisions to rehome or not. This research addresses a widely acknowledged gap in the literature to understand both the numbers, and types of animals rehomed from UK research facilities, as well as the main motivations for engaging in the practice, and the barriers for those facilities not currently rehoming. From the ~160 UK research facilities in the UK, 41 facilities completed the questionnaire, giving a response rate of approximately 25%. Results suggest rehoming occurs routinely, yet the numbers are small; just 2322 animals are known to have been rehomed between 2015-2017. At least 1 in 10 facilities are rehoming. There exists a clear preference for the rehoming of some species (mainly cats, dogs and horses) over others (rodents, agricultural animals and primates). Indeed, although 94.15% of species kept in laboratories are rodents, they make up under a fifth (19.14%) of all animals known to be rehomed between 2015-2017. The primary motivation for rehoming is to boost staff morale and promote a positive ethical profile for the facility. Barriers include concern for the animal's welfare following rehoming, high scientific demand for animals that leaves few to be rehomed, and, finally, certain animals (mainly those genetically modified) are simply unsuited to rehoming. The findings of this research will support facilities choosing to rehome, as well as those that are not currently engaging in the practice. By promoting the practice, the benefits to rehoming in terms of improving laboratory animal's quality of life, helping facility staff to overcome the moral stress of killing, and addressing public concern regarding the fate of laboratory animals, can be attained. It is only once an understanding of rehoming from the perspective of UK research facilities has been ascertained, that appropriate policy and support can be provided.

SUBMITTER: Skidmore T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7304590 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A semi-structured questionnaire survey of laboratory animal rehoming practice across 41 UK animal research facilities.

Skidmore Tess T Roe Emma E

PloS one 20200619 6

If a laboratory animal survives an experiment without lasting compromised welfare, its future must be negotiated. Rehoming may be a consideration. This paper reports on research findings that provide an indication of the uptake of animal rehoming by UK facilities and the associated moral, ethical, practical and regulatory considerations that inform decisions to rehome or not. This research addresses a widely acknowledged gap in the literature to understand both the numbers, and types of animals ...[more]

PMID: 32559221

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Strengthening capacity for public health research is essential to the generation of high-quality, reliable scientific data. This study focuses on a research capacity strengthening project supporting seven test facilities in Africa conducting studies on mosquito vector control products towards Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) certification. It captures the primary effects of the project on each facility's research capacity, the secondary effects at the individual and institutional level, and the ripple effects that extend beyond the research system. The relationships between effects at different levels are identified and compared to an existing framework for the evaluation of research capacity strengthening initiatives. Methods: To capture the views of individuals engaged in the project at all levels within each facility, a maximum-variation purposive sampling strategy was used. This allowed triangulation between different data sources. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals in three facilities and a combination of email and remote video-call interviews were conducted with individuals at two further facilities. Results: We found that, despite a focus of the GLP certification project at the institutional level, the project had effects also at individual (including enhanced motivation, furtherment of careers) and national/international levels (including development of regional expertise). In addition, we detected ripple effects of the project which extended beyond the research system. Conclusion: This study shows that research capacity strengthening interventions that are focussed on institutional level goals require actions also at individual and national/international levels. The effects of engagement at all three levels can be amplified by collaborative actions at the national/international level. These findings show that research capacity strengthening projects must develop plans that address and evaluate impact at all three levels. Capturing the ripple effects of investment in research capacity strengthening should also be planned for from the beginning of projects to support further engagement of all stakeholders.

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to understand health care provider barriers to referring patients to Medical Fitness Center Facilities within an affiliated teaching hospital system using referral of diabetic services as an example. The aims of this study include: (1) to assess health care providers' awareness and use of facilities, (2) to determine barriers to referring patients to facilities, (3) identify current and needed resources and/or changes to increase referral to facilities.MethodsA 20-item electronic survey and requests for semi-structured interviews were administered to hospital system directors and managers (n = 51). Directors and managers instructed physicians and staff to complete the survey and interviews as applicable. Perceived barriers, knowledge, utilization, and referral of patients to Medical Fitness Center Facilities were collected and examined. Descriptive statistics were generated regarding practice characteristics, provider characteristics, and referral.ResultsOf the health care providers surveyed and interviewed (n = 25) 40% indicated verbally suggesting use of facilities, 24% provided a flyer about the facilities. No respondents indicated that they directly referred patients to the facilities. However, 16% referred patients to other locations for physical activity - including their own department's management and prevention services. 20% do not refer to Medical Fitness Center Facilities or any other lifestyle programs/locations. Lack of time (92%) and lack of standard guidelines and operating procedures (88%) are barriers to referral. All respondents indicated a strong ability to refer patients to Medical Fitness Center Facilities if given education about referral programs available as well as standard clinical guidelines and protocol for delivery.ConclusionThe results of this study indicate that, although few healthcare providers are currently referring patients to Medical Fitness Center Facilities, health care providers with an affiliated Medical Fitness Center Facility not only want clinical standard guidelines, protocol, and training to refer patients to Medical Fitness Center Facilities, but believe they have the ability to increase referral if given these tools. The Medical Fitness Association has a unique opportunity to bridge health care providers to Medical Fitness Center Facilities by developing clinical practice guidelines in cooperation with the American Diabetes Association.

Dataset Information

A semi-structured questionnaire survey of laboratory animal rehoming practice across 41 UK animal research facilities.

Publications

A semi-structured questionnaire survey of laboratory animal rehoming practice across 41 UK animal research facilities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets