ArticleJournal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS2019
Assessment of Mouse Handling Techniques During Cage Changing.
Article in Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Rodent Welfare, Cost Savings, and Efficiency: Implementation and Review of Data-Driven Improvements.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026Review
- Lack of evidence for a consistent differential impact of tail and tunnel handling on markers of welfare in laboratory mice.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The implementation of tunnel handling in a mouse breeding facility revealed strain-specific behavioural responses.Laboratory animals · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Disinfectants in Reducing Contamination of Bacterial and Viral Murine Pathogens on Gloved Hands.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2024Article
- American Society of Laboratory Animal Practitioners Position Statement: Handling and Physical Restraint of Research Animals.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2024Article
- Effects of non-aversive versus tail-lift handling on breeding productivity in a C57BL/6J mouse colony.PloS one · 2022Article
- Use of nonaversive handling and training procedures for laboratory mice and rats: Attitudes of American and Canadian laboratory animal professionals.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Various IVC Systems According to Mouse Reproductive Performance and Husbandry and Environmental Parameters.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022Article
- The Effectiveness of Hot Bead Sterilization in Maintaining Sterile Surgical Instrument Tips across Sequential Mouse Surgeries.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2021Article
- Assessing Accumulation of Organic Material on Rodent Cage Accessories.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mouse handling during cage changing and health evaluation has traditionally been performed by using forceps. This method was adopted as a biosecurity measure but can adversely affect employee ergonomics and rodent behavior. In this study, we evaluated alternative methods of rodent handling and their potential implications for efficiency, biosecurity, and animal welfare. Study groups included plastic cups, gloved hands, 2 methods of tunnel handling, and forceps. Evaluations included speed of cage change, ATP-based assessment of sanitization, and retrospective analysis of colony health and breeding data. The time to change 14 cages was significantly faster at each time point for the gloved hands and forceps groups as compared with the other methods. Overall speed did not increase significantly with each subsequent study week for any group. ATP levels after sanitization with hydrogen peroxide-peracetic acid mixture differed significantly between gloves and forceps. When ATP level was evaluated on a per-cm² basis, no significant difference between gloves and forceps was detected. Although tunnel and cup handling both increased the time for cage-changing, the tunnel served as both an indirect handling method and a shelter when left within the cage. Retrospective analysis revealed that breeding performance and colony health were similar among groups. Although efficiency is a concern for large-scale implementation of novel handling methods, the tunnel method may prove beneficial for sensitive strains or studies requiring indirect handling. In addition, using gloved hands to directly handle mice during cage changing is efficient and avoids the ergonomic strain associated with forceps. Precautions should be taken when handling mice with gloves, given that the increased contact area carries an increased load of organic debris. Changing gloves between rack sides or before proceeding to the animals belonging to a different investigator minimizes the potential for cross-contamination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.