Online Issues

Journal Vol 48 (2)

Training Strategies for Research Investigators and Technicians

Stacey L. Conarello and Mary Jo Shepherd

Stacey L. Conarello, V.M.D., M.S., DACLAM, is a Staff Veterinarian in the Department of Veterinary Sciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ. Mary Jo ("MJ") Shepherd, D.V.M., is Director of the University of Pennsylvania IACUC, Philadelphia, PA.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Stacey Conarello, Department of Veterinary Sciences, Bristol Myers Squibb Co., PO Box 4000, Mailstop: G13-01, Lawrenceville, NJ 08543, or email Stacey.conarello@bms.com.

Abstract

Training programs for research personnel are discussed as a key resource that must be part of an effective animal care and use program. Because of the legal responsibility to ensure that research staff are qualified to use animals, many institutions have justified the necessity for a training coordinator and/or trainers for their animal care and use programs. Effective training programs for research personnel must meet the needs of the client base (research scientists and staff) so that they are relevant, practical, and timely. To meet these objectives, it is useful to involve the scientific staff in the analysis of their learning needs. To meet a performance standard necessary for quality research, a large percentage of the institutional staff must participate in the training program. Often it is the principal investigators who set the tone for their staff members regarding the importance of receiving training. Garnering support from this client base will create a culture that encourages training and engenders a positive attitude about humane animal care and use. One effective approach is to incorporate nonanimal models as alternatives to live animals to teach humane handling techniques and methods, thereby contributing to refinement, reduction, and replacement (the 3Rs). Also discussed are the necessity of timely feedback from clients, documentation of personnel training for regulatory purposes, and the collection of training metrics, which assists in providing justification for the granting of additional fiscal support for the program. Finally, the compliance procedures and opportunities for essential refresher training are discussed and related to high performance standards, humane animal use, and quality research, all of which contribute to the 3Rs.

Key Words: animal alternatives; compliance; documentation; IACUC; laboratory animal; research investigator; training coordinator, training program

Introduction

The regulatory requirements for training in the care and use of laboratory animals are well known and have been thoroughly reviewed in other articles in this issue. Institutions have a legal as well as an ethical obligation to provide adequate training to laboratory animal personnel. The responsibility for assuring that personnel are adequately trained is shared by institutional administrators, the institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC¹), the veterinary staff, and the principal investigators. Research investigators and technicians can be the most challenging group to train because often they have not had formal training in animal care and use such as that required for a master's degree in laboratory animal science (Mason and Silverman 2001). Although many investigators are highly skilled in the techniques they perform, some members of the research community may have previously received inadequate training, resulting in their use of suboptimal techniques. In addition, some research personnel may be more difficult to engage in training if they conduct their procedures in remote laboratories in the institution, rather than in the core laboratory animal facility. The attitudes of research investigators toward institutional training programs may influence the attitudes of their staff and may also affect the attitudes of other investigators (Rush 2000). A high-quality training program can increase voluntary and willing participation and create a culture that accepts and supports training in all facets of an animal care and use program.

Development of Training Programs

Assessment of Training Needs Through Targeted Surveys

It is essential to develop training programs with the client in mind. The goal of a program should be to meet the needs of the particular audience: students, investigators, and technicians (NRC 1991). Thus, a first step in developing a program is to conduct a survey of the potential client base. Such a survey can be in the form of interviews and/or written questionnaires. The survey can be managed by the IACUC, the Department of Regulatory Affairs & Compliance, the institutional official, and/or the animal resources department. Alternatively, the task can be outsourced by contract to an external company to develop and carry out a customized business survey. An external company may afford greater anonymity and elicit more candid responses. However, a major disadvantage of a professional survey is cost. It may be necessary to follow up with the surveyed population to ensure an adequate response rate. Ultimately, the goal is to create an unbiased summary of responses to identify key trends and topical issues. A survey of the client base may create goodwill in that it demonstrates the value that is placed on their opinions, with the ultimate goal of meeting their specific needs.

A survey may also provide useful insight into whether the research and veterinary staff believe there is sufficient training and education for new investigative staff regarding the appropriate care and use of laboratory animals. In addition, the survey may serve as a vehicle to determine whether the scientific staff would be willing to participate in new training. Furthermore, the surveys may permit insight into suggested topic areas for the training program and help determine the students' preferred learning methodologies (i.e., didactic course work, one-on-one training, conferences, computer/web-based learning, instructional videos on digital video disc [DVD¹] or compact disc [CD¹]) (ARENA/OLAW 2002).

Training Protocols

An indispensable aspect of developing an in vivo educational program is preparation of the training protocols. For hands-on techniques and species-specific training, this process will involve preparing multiple protocols to cover the range of techniques that are typically approved to be performed at the institution. Consultation with laboratory animal veterinarians and IACUC staff will assist in developing a list of the most commonly used techniques. Basic training protocols are typically species specific and may include methods of restraint, use of anesthetics, monitoring anesthetic depth, blood collection techniques, dosing routes (e.g., intravenous, oral/nasogastric, subcutaneous, intramuscular, intraperitoneal, intradermal), institutional standards for dosing volumes, and accepted euthanasia methodologies. As surgical programs are developed, the protocols will include aseptic technique, surgical procedures, and postoperative care. In general, carefully prepared protocols are the cornerstones of a successful hands-on training program.

Departmental and Scientific Community Support

It is essential to follow up on the recommendations of the surveyed population by evaluating the key trends identified by the survey. This evaluation can be accomplished by enlisting personnel from diverse backgrounds (focus groups) to review and contribute to the prospective program outline. A focus group may include members of the animal resources and regulatory department(s), scientific staff members of the institution, and external colleagues (i.e., trainers at other institutions).

The focus group concept involves assembling a panel of strategic personnel and requesting input via face-to-face meetings. It is important to include the key people who are intimately involved with the research and animal care and use. For example, a focus group from the animal resources and regulatory department(s) may include (but is not limited to) the following individuals: the operational director and/or attending veterinarian, animal care manager, animal care supervisors, veterinarians, veterinary associates, members of the animal care staff, and the IACUC coordinator. The IACUC coordinator can provide useful information about IACUC semiannual inspection and US Department of Agriculture (USDA¹) findings, which will assist in the program content development.

The scientific staff focus group should include investigators who use the largest number of animals. The IACUC coordinator or animal resources department personnel should help to identify which investigators use the most animals. Another approach is to involve representatives from the departments that hire the most interns or summer students and those that have high staff turnover because these departments may benefit the most from the training program. The largest animal-using groups may help to identify deficits in existing training programs and areas for training opportunities. Garnering support from these groups will also help to ensure a steady flow of students to the training program. In this regard, the principal investigator may be one of the most influential participants in the development of an effective training program. The time invested in meeting with the scientists will help to create a culture that supports education and training initiatives (Benoit and Bayne 2005). It is good practice to involve the students (the scientific staff) in the diagnosis of their learning needs, formulation of their learning objectives, planning of the course design and learning activities, and evaluation of their learning (Lee 1998).

Finally, trainers should take advantage of the experience and knowledge of other trainers in the field. The Laboratory Animal Welfare Training Exchange (LAWTE¹) organization provides trainers with opportunities to network and share best practices. LAWTE members may also serve as an external focus group, provided that the institution's proprietary issues are not compromised. We recommend seeking input from trainers with experience in academic, pharmaceutical, and commercial/vendor institutions because this diversity will provide the most comprehensive review.

The objectives of this complete review process are multidepartmental support for the program and the development of a comprehensive outline that will provide the structure and foundation of the new training program. These focus groups can be re-convened once the program has been in place for a period of time to solicit specific suggestions for improvements and additions in an effort to continually mold the program to the dynamic research environment (Cody et al. 2000). In addition to this needs-based approach to program development, an assessment of desired outcomes should also be carefully considered and incorporated into the program objectives. Utilization of these two assessment methods will set the foundation for a comprehensive training program.

Compulsory Versus Voluntary Attendance

A large percentage of the institutional staff should participate in the training program to meet the performance standard necessary for quality research and the expectations of regulatory agencies. The most uniform approach for meeting this training objective is to consider compulsory attendance (ARENA/OLAW 2002). With voluntary programs, a concerted effort to increase awareness of the program must be made. The training coordinator should be visible to the animal-using departments in the institution, and the programs should be advertised via posted flyers, electronic mailings, newsletters, website information, and brochures. Posted advertisements on facility bulletin boards and at entrances to the animal facility are helpful for capturing the attention of the targeted population. In addition, many institutions have a general orientation program in place for all new employees. This is another avenue of opportunity for training program advertisement. Flyers can be prepared and distributed as part of the proceedings of these "New Staff Orientation" programs, and/or the training coordinator can be a speaker at this program.

The IACUC will be instrumental in identifying personnel who need animal-related training. The animal use protocol serves as a vehicle to identify research personnel involved with in vivo studies and to describe their individual qualifications for performing animal-related techniques (Duffee et al. 2003). Participation of senior management, departmental chairpersons, and IACUC members in the training program sets a positive precedence for others to attend. Often it will be the principal investigators who set the tone for their staff members regarding the importance of training with the goal of humane conduct of animal studies (Rush 2000). Therefore, cultivating the support of high-level scientists will create a culture of acceptance of training programs that will ultimately have a positive influence on departmental staff members. In addition, the involvement of outside experts in a field of interest (i.e., discussion of a new animal model or novel surgical technique) may assist in drawing attention to the program and its useful content (ARENA/OLAW 2002). Flexibility of scheduling (i.e., offering multiple options of dates and times) will enable scientific staff to attend with minimal disruption to their research duties (NRC 1991). In conclusion, a combination of compulsory and voluntary training attendance will be optimal and can be based on the critical nature of the subject matter and skill required.

Training Coordinator Position

The legal responsibility for meeting training requirements related to animals used in research lies with the institution, and as a result this responsibility is often delegated to the IACUC (Rush 2000). The growing need for high-quality staff training in laboratory animal facilities has led to the creation of a critically important new staff position, the training coordinator. Many institutions have justified the need for a training coordinator to identify, administer, oversee, and document the training needs and participation of research personnel. Specific roles of the training coordinator may include orienting new personnel, retraining existing personnel, maintaining individual and departmental training records, reviewing protocols, and conducting compliance inspections (Kennedy 2002). The trainer often functions as a liaison with institutional scientists and regulatory agencies (Kennedy 2002). An important role of the coordinator position is to provide periodic updates to the IACUC members, upper level management, and the animal resources department. Updates should include program successes and challenges (Rush 2000).

The training coordinator will also identify key personnel who have well-developed skills within the institution and to incorporate them as "specialists" within the training programs. Training in specialized animal research techniques may be best taught by investigative staff who routinely perform these procedures (Rush 2000). Engaging research personnel to serve as ancillary training staff can be an effective way to expand offerings while conserving resources (Rush 2000). In addition, animal facility staff such as veterinarians, veterinary associates, animal care staff, and managers/supervisors should be involved in the training initiative as much as possible. This opportunity for "mentorship" of investigative staff by laboratory animal personnel may represent a welcomed opportunity for diversity in job tasks. An important role of the trainer is to catalog the expertise that exists within the institution and to utilize this resource when scheduling permits. All personnel contributing to the training initiative should be recognized and rewarded appropriately by the training coordinator and institution through established recognition programs and/or timely communications with the individual's manager (ARENA/OLAW 2002).

Program Format

Program formats and the type of material that is best suited to each format are described in Table 1. The instructor:student ratio should be planned to optimize conditions for learning and skill development. In the case of a hands-on wet laboratory, it is important to maintain a ratio in the range of one instructor to a maximum of two to three students. For larger sized classes, two to three instructors may be required. Having multiple instructors for a single class affords the opportunity to illustrate different methods of performing a technique. Demonstrating multiple (acceptable) methods for a single technique may allow a student to choose the one that best suits his/her abilities and skill level. However, for didactic program formats, the student:instructor ratio becomes less critical. Self-directed learning methods such as on-line modules, various auto-tutorials, and other self-assessment educational tools provide a forum for individualized independent study. Using these methods should make it possible to readily identify areas of developmental opportunity for the personnel completing the program and to match those to available educational opportunities (NRC 1991).

When developing any educational course, it is good practice to set the climate for learning. For example, we recommend the following steps:

Select a physical and psychological environment that is conducive to learning (Lee 1998);
Identify a location (lecture room or laboratory) that will be comfortable for the intended program format;
Provide beverages and/or snacks during breaks in long programs (i.e., basic orientation programs) if the training budget permits; and
Ensure opportunities for a brief break for every 45 minutes of lecture time during the session.

At the beginning of the course, the trainer should facilitate students' introductions and encourage sharing of past experiences and skills in their respective field as they relate to in vivo research. Often research scientists have accumulated knowledge or experience that may serve as a resource to the instructor and other students alike. By taking these steps, the underlying message conveys respect for the student and acknowledges their active role in the learning process.

Program Content

All research investigators and technicians must complete a basic orientation program that is described by Hrapkiewicz and colleagues (2007) elsewhere in this issue. This orientation includes the ethical concerns associated with the use of animals in the laboratory. It is generally agreed that animals have intrinsic as well as utilitarian value (van Zutphen and van der Valk 1995). Ethics training should generate a healthy attitude toward the use of animals and prepare trainees to take responsibility for the welfare of the animals under their care (Jennings and Smith 2004). Employees with this attitude often become more skilled at handling animals, and they recognize pain and distress more quickly (Overhulse 2002).

It is essential to discuss alternatives as a part of the ethical section. Presenting the regulatory, economic, and scientific reasons for the application of alternatives, in addition to reviewing examples of alternative methodologies, assists in this discussion (NRC 1991). Students might be asked to review and assess published papers with regard to the alternatives concept. They might also be given a science problem for which they are then required to write a research protocol (van der Valk and van Zutphen 2004). They might also be referred to pertinent web sites such as isogenic.info (http://www.isogenic.info/html/design.html), which is directed toward scientists who use laboratory animals. The web site information focuses on steps one may use to apply alternatives principles in the design of experiments. Experimental design factors that potentially affect the application of alternatives include species and strain, randomization, coding, sample size, and statistical analysis. Students should come away with a solid understanding of refinement, reduction, and replacement (the 3Rs¹; Russell and Burch 1959) and should be able to apply them in day-to-day activities.

Training must be species specific. Most hands-on training sessions cover rodent species, but less common species may be used at some institutions depending on the research programs. Investigators and their staff should provide the trainers with information pertaining to their level of expertise and experience with various species and procedures. Because investigators or their staff may participate in daily animal care due to some experimental requirements, basic husbandry should be included in the species-specific training. This inclusion is particularly important if animals will be housed in laboratories outside a core laboratory animal facility. General knowledge of husbandry practices helps investigators understand the important potential effects of these practices on study results.

Options for species-specific enrichment should be reviewed, and the benefits of using enrichment should be clarified. It may be necessary to review basic animal handling techniques with some personnel. Asking the trainees to demonstrate their technical proficiency with particular procedures is helpful in ensuring competence. Commonly used procedures should be covered as well. In rodents, this coverage would include restraint, various routes of injections, gavage, or blood collection techniques. Other species may require more detailed and specialized training to ensure that proper techniques are used. Methods for reducing pain and distress are important, and the inclusion of this topic could lead to creative ways to implement refinement methodologies. The recognition of pain/distress in the specific species is critical to animal well-being and should be included. Visual images assist greatly in helping personnel recognize healthy and unhealthy animals. Keeping a library of photographs that can be used repeatedly is helpful in creating this part of the training program.

It is legally and ethically imperative for research facilities to provide appropriate training for surgical procedures. Institutions must assure that all personnel who perform surgical procedures are trained adequately. This assurance must be made regardless of personnel background or prior training. Surgery may be performed by veterinarians, physicians, dentists, individuals with Ph.D. degrees, or technical staff, all of whom have very different educational histories. Physicians, in particular, may not have training in animal analgesia, anesthesia, and perioperative care. Dentists have rarely received training in animal surgery (Brown et al. 1993). The individuals with Ph.D. degrees may not have been trained to work with whole animal models. Technical staff should perform surgery only under the direction of veterinarians or technical staff qualified to perform the procedures until it has been determined and documented that they are competent.

Surgical training programs for inexperienced personnel should start with didactic sessions presented by the veterinary staff. These sessions should cover all aspects of perioperative care as well as surgical techniques and equipment. The use of appropriate facilities should be discussed, and regulatory requirements concerning surgical facilities should be reviewed. Hands-on technique training should begin with nonliving models. Once techniques have been mastered by these methods, the use of practice nonsurvival surgeries is recommended before recovery procedures are conducted. Criteria to assess proficiency for survival surgeries may include adequate hemostasis, appropriate wound closure, recovery from anesthesia, and lack of postoperative complications. Individuals should not be permitted to conduct procedures without supervision until a competent instructor or observer has approved their proficiency.

Training related to the use of analgesics, tranquilizers, and anesthetics should ideally be conducted by the veterinary staff. Sessions should be tailored to the audience and the species with which they work. Part of the training should be used to review signs of pain and distress in the species being discussed. Again, visual aids can assist in training for the recognition of pain and distress. Selection of anesthetic agents should be based on the procedure to be conducted, a thorough understanding of the agents to be used, prior experience, and available equipment and facilities (Brown et al. 1993). Investigators should be educated about relative properties of analgesics, which may have differing efficacy and duration of action depending on the species involved. Pre-emptive and multimodal approaches to pain management of laboratory animals are important discussion points that should be included in the training program (Karas 2006). Finally, veterinarians must be involved in the planning of studies that require the use of these drugs (USDA 2001, 9 CFR 2.31). This discussion can create an additional opportunity for training investigators while assisting in the planning of a study.

Pre- and postprocedural care should be included in the training program. Preoperative care should include an appropriate acclimation period, animal health status assessment, clinical laboratory assessments if deemed necessary, proper handling and restraint, and antimicrobial prophylaxis as needed (Brown et al. 1993). Surgery requires significant perioperative care and planning. Proper anesthetic techniques and skilled surgical techniques during surgery can hasten recovery and improve healing. Appropriate postoperative care is important to ensure animal welfare and a successful surgical outcome.

Noninvasive procedures that require anesthesia also require pre-, intra-, and postprocedural care similar to that needed for surgery, therefore training should be provided with regard to these techniques. Simple procedures such as skin biopsies with local anesthesia still require adequate postprocedural care to ensure proper wound healing. Personnel should be trained in postprocedural observations for techniques such as gavaging as well as how to respond in the event of a complication. Because noninvasive techniques are often conducted in varying ways by different individuals, it is important to assess each student's performance to ensure that the techniques he or she has developed are acceptable.

Research personnel who perform euthanasia also must be trained adequately. According to the American Veterinary Medical Association 2000 Report of the AVMA Panel on Euthanasia, training for euthanasia should include proper restraint, knowledge of the normal behavior of each species, and an understanding of the mechanism of each method of euthanasia (AVMA 2000). Methods to ensure death are critical, and some institutions require confirmatory procedures to ensure death. Personnel should learn proper methods for the disposal of carcasses according to institutional standard operating procedures. Individuals should be required to demonstrate proficiency before they are allowed to perform the procedures independently. Some methods of euthanasia require personnel to receive training related to personal safety. Methods such as decapitation and CO₂ asphyxiation can pose hazards to personnel if improper methods are used. Finally, the equipment used for some methods of euthanasia (e.g., a CO₂ chamber and tank) may require specialized training. Trainers should remind students of the ethical imperative of conducting euthanasia procedures properly.

Customized Training Programs

Customized training is often a very helpful adjunct to regularly scheduled training courses. It may include refresher training for animal users who have not performed certain procedures for a period of time. It may also be offered to personnel who are expected to conduct procedures they have not performed before. If such customized training is not available, it may be necessary for personnel to wait for a regular training session or, worse yet, they may attempt to conduct the procedures with inadequate training. The research community should be provided with a contact person(s) for customized training. Because important research activities may arise suddenly, these trainers should be given adequate time in their schedules both to arrange sessions on short notice and to ensure that trainees achieve the proper skill levels.

Customized training generally covers procedures that are less common than the basic techniques included in organized training classes. Customized training may include retro-orbital blood collection in rodents, ear vein injections in rabbits, or gavage in dogs. Training may also be required for specialized equipment such as anesthesia machines or pulse oximeters.

Nonanimal Methods of Training

The initial phase of the hands-on training portion of the program should be conducted using nonanimal alternatives. Cultural or family attitudes and fear of some animals may predispose students to anxiety before they work with certain species (Walshaw 2004). In all cases, training is critical both for the humane treatment of the animals and for personnel safety. An effective first step may be to introduce the material via computer-based instruction to biomethodology. For example, the National Human Genome Research Institute Office of Laboratory Animal Medicine has developed a training CD titled "Basic Methodology for Laboratory Mice." The CD, which illustrates the most common practices used in the National Institutes of Health (NIH¹) intramural research program, was developed to promote proficiency in performing common techniques in the mouse.

Using relatively inexpensive models, the trainer can teach humane handling techniques and methods of holding and using instrumentation/equipment (Walshaw 2004). For example, nonanimal methods for restraint of rodents can be performed easily using a sock filled with a soft material such as cotton. For a novice to practice injection techniques, a piece of fruit such as an orange can be used for learning how to carefully manipulate a needle and syringe and to develop hand-eye coordination skills (Walshaw 2004). The training session that involves animal alternatives will also provide an opportunity to discuss safe handling of sharps. To practice oral gavage and other techniques in rodents, the Koken® rat model may be used. Using this model, the students can learn oral dosing, tail vein injection, blood collection, and endotracheal intubation. Oral dosage into the stomach can be readily confirmed and visualized through the translucent window on the abdomen.

Surgical models are available for multiple species. Practice kits for developing techniques in suturing and knot tying are available commercially. For training in rodent microsurgery, the PVC-Rat® permits training in 25 different microsurgical techniques (i.e., anastomoses, cannulations, and transplantations of vessels and organs). The Daisie® model is a nonanimal method for teaching abdominal surgery. A subcommittee of the NIH Animal Research Advisory Committee developed a CD titled "Guidelines for Survival Rodent Surgery," which illustrates proper surgical skills when performing survival surgery on rodents. Topics covered on this CD include aseptic technique, suture patterns (a practice model is enclosed to assist in mastering suture techniques), and surgical training. Overall, training models are excellent alternatives for live animals in the initial training period with various research techniques (Walshaw 2004).

Financial Support

The current financial climate at many institutions may make it a challenge to obtain approval to spend money on training programs unless there is a clear demonstration of benefits. For this reason, it is important for training specialists to develop a working knowledge of financial terms and concepts. This knowledge will help to explain ideas in terms of return on investment (ROI¹). The ROI model is one tool that a trainer can use to support the case for training. A well-developed ROI should demonstrate to management the amount of money that would be saved if the program is implemented and funded.

To increase the likelihood of success in obtaining the financial commitment of the institution, we recommend the following approach:

Be clear in the discussion with management to define the training program as an investment, rather than an expense.
Document all of the expected costs and benefits of the training program.
Show the cost savings over a defined period (e.g., 3-5 yr). This financially specific information will create a more dramatic and effective presentation.
Provide an outline of the time period from development to program rollout.
Translate "soft benefits" into hard numbers. The soft benefits of a training program are
1. enhancement of a culture of respect for the animals;
2. promotion of humane animal care and use;
3. improvement in skill levels (thereby decreasing stress to scientists and animals); and
4. support of good science.
Carefully monitor the following examples of the measurable benefits expected from the training program:
1. reduction in compliance breaches;
2. increase in efficiency by establishing "standardized" methodologies; and
3. elimination of the need for scientists to train staff on general procedures, thereby saving time and money.

Another option to propose for the financial support of the program is that of charging the costs of training back to the researcher's department. The charge-back concept, however, must be considered carefully because it may represent an obstacle to training. Whenever possible, it is useful to make a concerted effort to remove all perceived obstacles for an institution to endorse the support of a proposed training program.

Once training programs are instituted, it is important to collect training metrics. A useful approach includes the following steps:

Tabulate the number of programs given over a specified period of time.
Include all training sessions administered (e.g., facility tour orientations, contractor programs, customized training sessions).
Develop an analytical database program or spreadsheet to compare data from month to month and year to year.

Ultimately, these metrics will demonstrate trends and drive the budget that is allotted to the training program. Careful collection and analysis of the data will allow for the granting of additional support.

We recommend considering creative methods to reduce costs associated with a training program. To begin, the trainer must understand the benefit of building "social capital." Social capital can be built by investing in collegial relationships. This investment will engender support from external sources and may lead to worthwhile opportunities such as sharing or acquiring unused and/or no longer needed supplies. In addition, collegial relationships may permit a mutually beneficial arrangement whereby surplus animals may be funneled into the training program from "experimental overflow." This type of arrangement has a two-fold benefit: reduction in the number of animals used, and cost savings for the training budget.

Clearly there are many tangible costs involved in establishing and maintaining a high-quality training program. Nevertheless, in contrast, a deficit in training can be just as or even more costly when problems associated with inadequately trained staff arise (Kennedy 2002). It is essential for institutional officials to perceive training as a worthwhile investment and to make available the required resources to support the training effort (Kennedy 2002).

Documentation

Although there is no specific requirement for documenting individual training activities according to US Public Health Service (PHS¹) policy and Animal Welfare Act (AWA¹) regulations, it is generally accepted that training records are an important part of a successful training program. Despite the lack of a formal statement regarding training documentation, federal and accrediting authorities expect to have access to training records during an inspection or site visit of a research institution (Duffee et al. 2003). The USDA has affirmed this expectation in articles on the subject of training for compliance with the AWA (Slauter 1999, 2000). As mentioned above, it is the responsibility of the institution and the IACUC to ensure that personnel are trained and qualified. For this reason, it is essential to develop a method to track the training and experience of individuals engaged in animal research (ARENA/OLAW 2002; Rush 2000). It is also commonly believed that record keeping of training activities is a necessity for compliance with federal animal welfare mandates (Duffee et al. 2003).

No specific format is required for training records, and there are no restrictions on who should maintain the records, or where or how the records should be stored. Documentation methods include maintaining hard copy sign-in sheets from training classes and/or electronic databases. Commercial learning management systems (e.g., WebCT, Blackboard, and Plateau) are available and may be customized to serve this purpose. We also direct the reader to the website addresses in the References below. Electronic spreadsheets may be stored locally on the trainer's computer, on the intranet, or on a host server. An important consideration is the accessibility of the records to the IACUC and administrative personnel (Duffee et al. 2003).

The records may contain the following information: student name, student department, names of classes taken, dates of classes, catalog of prior experience, results of tests (if applicable), names and qualifications of trainers, certificate of completion sent to attendees, and return of completed course evaluation forms (Rush 2000). Such records should also capture training received in informal settings such as one-on-one instruction, equipment training, and facility tours (ARENA/OLAW 2002). In summary, the documentation system should reflect the following:

A complete profile of the training program;
An accurate description of the training activities;
Comprehensive information about the program; and
Confirmation that all documentation is readily accessible (Duffee et al. 2003).

Feedback and Program Evolution

Training session attendees can provide helpful feedback and input for use in assessing a program and in helping it to evolve to meet the ongoing needs of personnel. Evaluation forms are a simple method for obtaining feedback from attendees. The forms should be relatively simple because long or more complex forms may deter completion. An example of one form is shown in Figure 1, and a follow-up form appears in Figure 2. The inclusion of certificates of completion can afford the training more credibility, and personnel may be able to use the certificate to authenticate training for continuing education requirements and performance reviews. The certificates are also beneficial in serving as a means of advertisement for the training program when they are displayed in the recipient's office area. An example of a certificate of completion is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 1 Training session evaluation form.

Figure 2 Interdepartmental memorandum.

Figure 3 Certificate of investigator training program completion.

Feedback from participants may also help to improve the program. Suggestions can provide ideas for additional and/or improved sessions. Quoting positive feedback in presentations to the research community or the IACUC will help increase the credibility of the program and will stimulate more participation. Follow-up evaluation forms often contain useful feedback as well. A trainee may comment that he or she feels more confident carrying out a certain in vivo technique as a result of participating in the training class.

Refresher Training and Assessment of Proficiency

The USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (9 CFR Ch. 1 APHIS; USDA 2001) state that the qualifications of personnel should be reviewed frequently enough to fulfill the requirements of the law. There are no regulatory requirements for retraining (Rush 2000). Institutions may choose to encourage or require refresher training at appropriate intervals.

Some IACUCs may place stipulations on protocol approval pending completion of necessary training. Additionally, some committees may require the techniques to be observed by a veterinarian or other member of the veterinary staff before approval is given for the individual to conduct the procedures (Rush 2000). This is an excellent method of ensuring appropriately conducted procedures. IACUC members may also observe procedures being conducted during semiannual inspections. Such observation could prompt the committee to require additional training. More institutions, especially large facilities, are utilizing compliance monitoring personnel to ensure post-IACUC approval compliance. These personnel may conduct unscheduled visits to laboratories and observe procedures being performed. The IACUC may also require visits by compliance staff or may require additional or refresher training to follow up on problem areas. Experienced compliance personnel should recommend further training for research personnel if they deem it necessary. Their observations may also prompt the veterinary staff to assess or reassess techniques.

Summary

Training research investigators and technicians and assuring proficiency can be a challenge for a research institution. It is important to understand institutional culture, which can influence the success of training programs for the research community. The IACUC, upper-level administration, and veterinary staff must be united in their support for a training program. These core groups can help to create a culture that promotes learning and technical expertise through a variety of training initiatives. Well-developed training programs help to maintain high performance standards, humane animal use, and quality research, all of which contribute to the 3Rs. In this way, the programs achieve the goal of regulatory requirements and address the critically important ethical responsibilities of an institutional training program.

Abbreviations used in this article: 3Rs, refinement, reduction, and replacement; AWA, Animal Welfare Act; CD, compact disc; DVD, digital video disc; IACUC, institutional animal care and use committee; LAWTE, Laboratory Animal Welfare Training Exchange; NIH, National Institutes of Health; PHS, Public Health Service; ROI, return on investment; USDA, US Department of Agriculture.

References

ARENA [Applied Research Ethics National Association]/OLAW [Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare] 2002. Personnel training and education. In: Pitts M, ed. Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Guidebook. Bethesda: ARENA/OLAW. p 65-70.

AVMA [American Veterinary Medical Association]. 2000. Report of the AVMA Panel on Euthanasia. JAVMA 218:669-696.

Benoit JN, Bayne, K. 2005. Training the trainee: The institution's responsibility to the often forgotten. Lab Anim 34:46-50.

Brown MJ, Pearson PT, Tomson FN. 1993. Guidelines for animal surgery in research and teaching. Am J Vet Res 54:1544-1559.

Cody CA, Braun M, LaMorte WW. 2000. The Boston IACUC consortium: A collaborative effort responds to training needs. Lab Anim 29:39-42.

Duffee N, Nevalainen T, Hau J. 2003. Education and training. In: Greensmith ML, Hau J, Van Hoosier GL, eds. Handbook of Laboratory Animal Science. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press. p 66-73.

Medina LV, Hrapkiewicz K, Tear M, Anderson LC. 2007. Fundamental training for individuals involved in the care and use of laboratory animals: A review and update of the 1991 NRC Core Training Module. ILAR J 48:96-108.

NRC [National Research Council]. 1991. Education and Training in the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. A Guide for Developing Institutional Programs. Washington DC: National Academy Press. p 109-117.

Jennings M, Smith J. 2004. Developing ethics training for laboratory animal users. Alt Lab Anim 32:545-548.

Karas AZ. 2006. Barriers to assessment and treatment of pain in laboratory animals. Lab Anim 35:38-45.

Kennedy BW. 2002. Creating a training coordinator position. Lab Anim 31:34-28.

Lee C. 1998. The adult learner: Neglected no more. Training Mag 35:47-52.

Mason JR, Silverman J. 2001. Master of laboratory animal science program: Teaching the science of laboratory animal science. Lab Anim 30:36-39.

Overhulse KA. 2002. Coping with lab animal morbidity and mortality: A trainer's role. Lab Anim 31:39-42.

Peterson NC. 2005. Improving animal research with an institutional electronic discussion group. Contemp Topics 44:47-50.

Rush HG. 2000. Personnel training. In: Silverman J, Suckow MA, Murthy S, ed. The IACUC Handbook. Boca Raton: CRC Press. p 345-364.

Russell WMS, Burch RL 1959. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. London: Methuen & Co. LTD. [Reissued: 1992, Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, Herts, England.] Available online (http://altweb.jhsph.edu/publications/humane_exp/het-toc.htm).

Slauter E. 1999. When the USDA veterinary medical officer looks at your training program. Anim Welf Info Cent Bull Vol 10 No. 1-2.

Slauter E. 2000. Evaluation of a training program: A USDA perspective. Lab Anim 29:25-26.

USDA [US Department of Agriculture]. 2001. Animal Welfare Final Rules: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 9, Subchapter A—Animal Welfare, Part 2. Washington DC: Office of the Federal Register.

van der Valk J, van Zutphen BFM. 2004. Reduction through education: The insight of a trainer. Alt Lab Anim 32(Suppl 2):1-4.

van Zutphen BFM, van der Valk J. 1995. Education and training: A basis for the introduction of the three Rs alternatives into animal research. Alt Lab Anim 23:123-127.

Walshaw S. 2004. Incorporating animal alternatives in a training programme in laboratory animal care and use. ATLA 32 (4th World Congress on Alternatives) Supplement 1:549-551.

Web Site References

Isogenic.info—http://www.isogenic.info/html/design.html

LAWTE—http://www.lawte.org/

WebCT—http://webct.com

Blackboard—http://blackboard.com/us/index.aspx

Plateau—http://plateau.com