To cut, or not to cut? The answer to the question may lie in local policy rather than in federal regulations. Stein's protocol allowed for use of anesthetics, but the scenario did not indicate whether they would be used for surgery or a different procedure. Stein was an experienced researcher, but did she have prior training, experience or expertise in rodent surgery? The Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals1 recommends that in emergency situations, the appropriate course of action requires veterinary medical judgment but also states that some aspects of the veterinary care program can be carried out by personnel other than a veterinarian. Does Stein's IACUC have a policy in place that addresses clinical and surgical treatment of animals by non-veterinarians with or without initial veterinary consultation and direction?

Because the approved study involves evaluation of aggression, the protocol should have addressed animal welfare concerns, such as what would be done if an animal became injured. If the protocol did not address this issue, then the IACUC didn't do its job.

Should the IACUC throw the book at her? No. It might hit her in the eye, but more likely, doing so would only encourage her (and maybe her colleagues) to treat problems themselves without notifying the attending veterinarian (AV) or the IACUC.

Stein did, commendably, report the problem. She should be counseled in a positive way, and the AV should work more closely with her to detail the importance of professional (veterinary) judgment on assessing emergency situations, appropriate timing and techniques for surgical correction of the problem, proper post-operative analgesia and follow-up assessments. If Stein is convinced that the AV is equally concerned about the well-being and welfare of her animals and is present and available to provide timely emergency care, she may be more likely to call the AV in the future to provide professional care for her animals.

Return to Protocol Review