Assessment of Mouse Handling Techniques During Cage Changing

Area of Science:

• Laboratory animal science
• Animal welfare research
• Occupational ergonomics in research

Background:

• Traditional mouse handling with forceps poses ergonomic and animal welfare concerns.
• Biosecurity measures often dictate handling protocols, impacting efficiency and staff well-being.
• Need for evaluating alternative rodent handling techniques in research settings.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess alternative mouse handling methods for efficiency, biosecurity, and animal welfare.
• Compare forceps, gloved hands, plastic cups, and tunnel handling techniques.
• Evaluate implications for laboratory operations and research outcomes.

Main Methods:

• Comparative study involving plastic cups, gloved hands, two tunnel methods, and forceps.
• Evaluations included cage change speed, ATP-based sanitization assessment, and colony health/breeding data analysis.
• Time-motion studies and surface sanitation testing were conducted.

Main Results:

• Gloved hands and forceps were significantly faster for cage changes than cups or tunnels.
• ATP sanitization levels showed differences between gloves and forceps, but not on a per-cm² basis.
• Tunnel handling, though slower, provided indirect handling and shelter benefits; colony health remained similar across groups.

Conclusions:

• Gloved hand handling is an efficient alternative to forceps, reducing ergonomic strain.
• Tunnel handling may benefit sensitive mouse strains or studies requiring indirect contact.
• Careful glove management is crucial to prevent cross-contamination when using gloved hands.