COMPETENCY AND PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT OF ANIMAL CARE TRAINING PROGRAMS IN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS

COMPETENCY AND PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT OF ANIMAL CARE

TRAINING PROGRAMSIN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS

Elizabeth Dodemaide B.V.Sc., M.A.Associate Director, Laboratory Animal Services

Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey

Challenges in a Large Academic Institution

Diversity of Research:

Field Studies

to

Farm Animals

to

Cancer

to

Neuroscience

Challenges in a Large Academic Institution

• Diversity of Researchers:– Professors– Post docs– Students

• Graduate, Undergraduate, High School

• Animal care staff

• Cultural diversity

Challenges in a Large Academic Institution

• Numerous facilities

• Distance

How do we determine competency?

• Adequate animal welfare

• Research results

• Non-compliant findings

• Observation of technical and surgical procedures

How do we achieve competency?

• Training– Orientation program– Hands-on training– Department/ lab meeting visits– Re-training

Responsibility for Training

• IACUC delegates Laboratory Animal Services veterinarians to provide Orientation Training

• Principal Investigators responsible for registering all individuals and ensuring training in protocol specific procedures

• Protocol approval contingent on PI completing Orientation training

Orientation Programs

Face-to-face

• Negatives - Limited number of classes

– PIs, students have class scheduling conflicts

- Travel problems to location of class– Diverse group with very different needs

Orientation Programs

Face-to face

• Positives– Participants get to meet a veterinarian or

other Lab Animal Services staff member- Able to ask questions- Able to meet and interact with other animal

users

Orientation Programs

Online

• Negatives

– Impersonal, don’t meet LAS staff

- Can’t ask questions

- Computer access necessary

Orientation Programs

Online

• Positives– Can be completed at any time– Modules provide more focused training

Hands-on Training

• Species specific• Small groups

Negative- Voluntary

Positive- Trainer able to observe proficiency in techniques

Lab Visits

• Focuses on lab needs

• Dialogue often identifies areas for further training

Result:

• Improved compliance

Proficiency Assessment

• Observation of surgeries and certain procedures

• Often a condition of protocol approval

Result:

• Better animal welfare and compliance

Hazards

• Individual SOP for each hazard

• Tied to protocol approval

• Training of animal care and investigator’s staff

• Observation of first procedure with Health and Safety person – often done as dry run

Field Studies

• Training & observation can be difficult

• May require study specific occupational health/hazard training

Summary

• Providing adequate training for all animal users is challenging

• Good communication with PIs is vital

• Need continual critical evaluation to update and improve programs

THE END