Both the AV and the IACUC have the authority to compel Morrison to keep postoperative medical records. Although Morrison is correct in his assertion that the AWRs do not apply to his research and that the ACLAM 'white paper' is only a guideline, institutions that receive federal funding have the obligation of following the Guide, which states, “The [AV] must provide guidance or oversight to surgery programs and oversight of postsurgical care1.” Furthermore, it is the IACUC's responsibility to “...oversee and evaluate the institution's animal program, procedures, and facilities to ensure that they are consistent with the recommendations in this Guide, the AWRs, and the PHS policy1.” Many institutions also choose to apply the standards detailed in the AWRs, the Guide, and even ACLAM 'white papers' to all research involving vertebrate animals regardless of funding source. In doing so, the IACUC ensures adequate veterinary care, improves animal welfare, and enhances the quality of animal research.
Although Morrison may be doing postoperative monitoring, documentation is essential. Documentation proves that the monitoring is actually occurring and that the protocol is being followed. Without documentation, how can one be certain that assessment of the animals really occurred? If it is Morrison's staff rather than Morrison himself doing the monitoring, then by requiring postoperative records, Morrison can be assured that his staff is doing the assessments on schedule and in a consistent fashion. Written records also show that decisions regarding the need for postoperative analgesia are consistent with current practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution