There are two issues for discussion in this scenario: whether the rabbit should remain in its original assigned pain and distress category for the USDA annual report after clinical intervention, and whether it matters if the rabbit's injury was a spontaneous occurrence or a result of the study. Margolis assumed that the injury was caused in part by the osteoporosis study and that this rabbit should therefore be reported in a different pain and distress category because of the subsequent necessary clinical interventions.
There is no specific language in the Animal Welfare Act regulations to indicate whether or not clinical interventions should be considered when assigning animals to pain and distress classifications in the annual report1. If all unanticipated injuries, pain and distress were to be accounted for when writing this (or any) protocol, all animals would be placed in category E for all studies. USDA Policy 11 gives guidance regarding what may be considered a painful or distressful procedure and indicates that animals must be reported in the proper pain category in the final report2. USDA Policy 17 addresses pain and distress categories as they apply to teaching, research, experiments or testing: “List all locations where animals were housed or used in actual research, testing, teaching, or experimentation, or held for these purposes”3.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
