Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:31:53.197Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The impact of the ethical review process for research using animals in the UK: attitudes to training and monitoring by those working under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

IFH Purchase*
Affiliation:
Institute of Medicine, Law and Bioethics and School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK
M Nedeva
Affiliation:
Policy Research in Engineering, Science and Technology, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A questionnaire-based survey of attitudes to the introduction of the Ethical Review Process (ERP) was carried out in late 1999, some 6-9 months after the introduction of the ERP to all establishments involved in animal experimentation in the UK. Five categories of people working under the Act were surveyed (Certificate Holders, Named Veterinary Surgeons, Project and Personal Licensees and Named Animal Care and Welfare Officers) and about 45% of the 1636 questionnaires were returned. In general, respondents believed that licensees received training in their responsibilities under the Act and that all groups received training in animal welfare and ethics. A high proportion of respondents believed that the quality of training in animal welfare was good or excellent, but about a quarter thought it only adequate. Training in ethics was believed to be of lower quality. A high proportion of Named Veterinary Surgeons and Project Licensees, but fewer Personal Licensees, reported that they attended seminars, talks and training courses about animal welfare and ethics. The majority of respondents believed that the ERP had had no effect on training and animal welfare, although a minority thought it had led to improvements. About two thirds of licensees and Named Veterinary Surgeons reported that their work with animals was monitored, although a third or more believed that their competence was not assessed. The adequacy of training and the assessment of competence are essential for maintaining high standards of animal welfare. Certificate Holders believed that training and monitoring was more effective, and Personal Licensees believed it less effective, than did other groups.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2004 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Home Office 2000 Guidance on the Operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. The Stationary Office: London, UK. Available at: http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/hoc/321/321-00.htmGoogle Scholar
Jennings, M and Hawkins, P 1998 Developing the ethics component of the UK modular training system for laboratory animal scientists: A LASA workshop report. Animal Welfare 7: 445458Google Scholar
LASA 2001 Directory of Animal Research Training Courses 2001/2002. Laboratory Animals Science Association: Staffordshire, UKGoogle Scholar
Purchase, I F H and Nedeva, M 2001 The impact of the introduction of the ethical review process for research using animals in the UK: implementation of policy. Laboratory Animals 36: 6885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purchase, I F H and Nedeva, M 2002 The impact of the introduction of the ethical review process for research using animals in the UK: attitudes to alternatives among those working with experimental animals. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 29: 727744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J A and Jennings, M 1998 Ethics training for laboratory animal users. Laboratory Animals 32: 128136CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed