Postoperative Severity Assessment in Sheep.

INTRODUCTION: Sheep are frequently used in translational surgical orthopedic studies. Naturally, a good pain management is mandatory for animal welfare, although it is also important with regard to data quality. However, methods for adequate severity assessment, especially considering pain, are rather rare regarding large animal models. Therefore, in the present study, accompanying a surgical pilot study, telemetry and the Sheep Grimace Scale (SGS) were used in addition to clinical scoring for severity assessment after surgical interventions in sheep. METHODS: Telemetric devices were implanted in a first surgery subcutaneously into four German black-headed mutton ewes (4-5 years, 77-115 kg). After 3-4 weeks of recovery, sheep underwent tendon ablation of the left M. infraspinatus. Clinical scoring and video recordings for SGS analysis were performed after both surgeries, and the heart rate (HR) and general activity were monitored by telemetry. RESULTS: Immediately after surgery, clinical score and HR were slightly increased, and activity was decreased in individual sheep after both surgeries. The SGS mildly elevated directly after transmitter implantation but increased to higher levels after tendon ablation immediately after surgery and on the following day. CONCLUSION: In summary, SGS- and telemetry-derived data were suitable to detect postoperative pain in sheep with the potential to improve individual pain recognition and postoperative management, which consequently contributes to refinement.

A safe bet? Inter-laboratory variability in behaviour-based severity assessment.

Evidence-based severity assessment is essential as a basis for ethical evaluation in animal experimentation to ensure animal welfare, legal compliance and scientific quality. To fulfil these tasks scientists, animal care and veterinary personnel need assessment tools that provide species-relevant measurements of the animals' physical and affective state. In a three-centre study inter-laboratory robustness of body weight monitoring, mouse grimace scale (MGS) and burrowing test were evaluated. The parameters were assessed in naïve and tramadol treated female C57BL/6J mice. During tramadol treatment a body weight loss followed by an increase, when treatment was terminated, was observed in all laboratories. Tramadol treatment did not affect the MGS or burrowing performance. Results were qualitatively comparable between the laboratories, but quantitatively significantly different (inter-laboratory analysis). Burrowing behaviour seems to be highly sensitive to inter-laboratory differences in testing protocol. All locations obtained comparable information regarding the qualitative effect of tramadol treatment in C57BL/6J mice, however, datasets differed as a result of differences in test and housing conditions. In conclusion, our study confirms that results of behavioural testing can be affected by many factors and may differ between laboratories. Nevertheless, the evaluated parameters appeared relatively robust even when conditions were not harmonized extensively and present useful tools for severity assessment. However, analgesia-related side effects on parameters have to be considered carefully.

Where are we heading? Challenges in evidence-based severity assessment.

Evidence-based severity assessment in laboratory animals is, apart from the ethical responsibility, imperative to generate reproducible, standardized and valid data. However, the path towards a valid study design determining the degree of pain, distress and suffering experienced by the animal is lined with pitfalls and obstacles as we will elucidate in this review. Furthermore, we will ponder on the genesis of a holistic concept relying on multifactorial composite scales. These have to combine robust and reliable parameters to measure the multidimensional aspects that define the severity of animal experiments, generating a basis for the substantiation of the refinement principle.