Literature DB >> 25378137

Using the mouse grimace scale to assess pain associated with routine ear notching and the effect of analgesia in laboratory mice.

A L Miller1, M C Leach2.   

Abstract

Social housing is recommended where possible for laboratory mice. In order to achieve this, mice must be individually identifiable. Although, various methods are available, permanent identification is often required, such as ear notching. This method is likely to be painful and to date there is limited literature on pain assessment and alleviation for this routine husbandry practice. Here we aimed to determine if the mouse grimace scale (MGS) could be used to assess pain in C57BL/6 mice following routine ear notching. Langford et al. found that very acute noxious stimuli (i.e. < 10 min in duration) did not produce a change in MGS score in comparison to baseline. Here, no significant difference was found between MGS scores at baseline and immediately post ear notching, potentially indicating that the pain associated with ear notching is either too acute to assess using the MGS tool or the practice is not painful. Studies in other species indicate that ear notching is painful, therefore, unless we can confidently conclude that the process of ear notching is not painful, we should err on the side of caution and assume it is painful due to the large number of mice ear-notched and potential welfare consequences. Alternative methods of assessing pain following this routine practice should be used in order to assess both the potential pain in mice, and the effectiveness of analgesics or local anaesthetics to relieve any associated pain.
© The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ear notch; mouse; mouse grimace scale; pain

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25378137     DOI: 10.1177/0023677214559084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lab Anim        ISSN: 0023-6772            Impact factor:   2.471


  13 in total

1.  Welfare and Scientific Considerations of Tattooing and Ear Tagging for Mouse Identification.

Authors:  Johnny V Roughan; Tatum Sevenoaks
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2019-02-27       Impact factor: 1.232

2.  Physiologic Stress of Ear Punch Identification Compared with Restraint Only in Mice.

Authors:  Kyle T Taitt; Lon V Kendall
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2019-05-10       Impact factor: 1.232

3.  Quantification of pain in sickle mice using facial expressions and body measurements.

Authors:  Aditya Mittal; Mihir Gupta; Yann Lamarre; Balkrishna Jahagirdar; Kalpna Gupta
Journal:  Blood Cells Mol Dis       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  The Study of Pain in Rats and Mice.

Authors:  Christina M Larson; George L Wilcox; Carolyn A Fairbanks
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2019-12-10       Impact factor: 0.982

Review 5.  Using touchscreen-delivered cognitive assessments to address the principles of the 3Rs in behavioral sciences.

Authors:  Timothy J Bussey; Lisa M Saksida; Christopher J Heath; Laura Lopez-Cruz
Journal:  Lab Anim (NY)       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 12.625

6.  The Assessment of Facial Expressions in Piglets Undergoing Tail Docking and Castration: Toward the Development of the Piglet Grimace Scale.

Authors:  Pierpaolo Di Giminiani; Victoria L M H Brierley; Annalisa Scollo; Flaviana Gottardo; Emma M Malcolm; Sandra A Edwards; Matthew C Leach
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2016-11-14

Review 7.  A systematic review of discomfort due to toe or ear clipping in laboratory rodents.

Authors:  Kimberley E Wever; Florentine J Geessink; Michelle A E Brouwer; Alice Tillema; Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 2.471

8.  Methods Used to Evaluate Pain Behaviors in Rodents.

Authors:  Jennifer R Deuis; Lucie S Dvorakova; Irina Vetter
Journal:  Front Mol Neurosci       Date:  2017-09-06       Impact factor: 5.639

Review 9.  The IMPROVE Guidelines (Ischaemia Models: Procedural Refinements Of in Vivo Experiments).

Authors:  Nathalie Percie du Sert; Alessio Alfieri; Stuart M Allan; Hilary Vo Carswell; Graeme A Deuchar; Tracy D Farr; Paul Flecknell; Lindsay Gallagher; Claire L Gibson; Michael J Haley; Malcolm R Macleod; Barry W McColl; Christopher McCabe; Anna Morancho; Lawrence Df Moon; Michael J O'Neill; Isabel Pérez de Puig; Anna Planas; C Ian Ragan; Anna Rosell; Lisa A Roy; Kathryn O Ryder; Alba Simats; Emily S Sena; Brad A Sutherland; Mark D Tricklebank; Rebecca C Trueman; Lucy Whitfield; Raymond Wong; I Mhairi Macrae
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 6.200

Review 10.  Assessing Affective State in Laboratory Rodents to Promote Animal Welfare-What Is the Progress in Applied Refinement Research?

Authors:  Paulin Jirkof; Juliane Rudeck; Lars Lewejohann
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 2.752

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.