ABSTRACT
Maximizing operational efficiency while maintaining appropriate animal housing conditions is a continuous focus of research animal care programs. Our institution's longstanding approach to cage-change management included scheduled cage changes every 2 wk, with spot changes if cages met established visual criteria during the intervening period. This 2-wk plus spot changing (2WS) practice for mice housed in IVC was problematic during the COVID-19 pandemic when the need arose to minimize workload to reduce on-site staffing out of concern for employee health and possible absenteeism. With the approval of the IACUC, a spot-change-only (SCO) process was adopted, with the requirement to evaluate microenvironmental parameters under both practices to confirm acceptable equivalence. These parameters (humidity, temperature, and ammonia) were evaluated in a controlled study that found no significant difference between the 2 groups. Ammonia levels did not exceed 10 ppm in any group throughout the study. To assess operational differences between these 2 approaches, we collected cage-change data and employee feedback from facilities operating under these schemes. The SCO method required fewer cage changes than did the 2WS method (10.3% per day with 2WS and 8.4% per day with SCO). Despite this benefit, through a Plan-Do-Check-Act process that has been regularly employed at our institution, employee feedback identified important operational challenges associated with the SCO practice. The SCO approach was thus refined into a scheduled spot change (SSC) practice that builds on the SCO model by incorporating a scheduled focused cage evaluation period. Based on subsequent feedback, the SSC was found to retain the efficiency benefits afforded by the SCO model and simultaneously alleviated staff and operational concerns. This result underscores the importance of integrating staff feedback with a performance standard-based approach when assessing cage-change management.