Effect of experience on medical students' attitudes toward animal laboratories in pharmacology education

Medical students' attitudes toward the use of animal laboratories in pharmacology courses may form a useful source of evaluative information about the laboratories' educational effectiveness.

In 1992-93, 144 second-year students at the Indiana University School of Medicine were surveyed--before and after completing four hands-on laboratories using dogs--for their assessments of educational and moral aspects of animal laboratories. Statistical analysis involved chi-square and Student's t test.

Of the 144 students in the course, 143 responded to the first survey and 86 responded to the second. From before to after the lab experiences, the percentage of students who agreed that the labs would reinforce/had reinforced the lecture material increased from 38% to 69%. In both surveys, 10% of the students objected to the use of any animals in labs, and 24% (before) and 21% (after) objected to the use of dogs. Whereas the percentage agreeing that the labs involved a morally wrong use of animals rose from 11% to 22%, the percentage disagreeing with that notion rose from 53% to 61%. Between 50% and 60% of the students in both surveys opposed doing the labs by computer simulation or videotaped demonstration.

Most students indicated that the laboratory experiences enhanced their understanding of the actions of drugs, were preferable to alternatives that did not use animals, and did not involve an immoral use of animals. On the other hand, the results suggest that the number of students who have negative feelings about the use of animals in laboratories, though small, tends to be larger than the number who express these feelings to faculty.