Laboratory Animal Professionals experience many positive and rewarding interactions when caring for and working with research animals. However, these professionals also may experience conflicting feelings and exhaustion when the work is stressful due to factors such as limited resources, making end of life decisions, dealing with conflicting priorities, and negotiating animal care priorities with colleagues. These stresses may be further complicated by each individual's self-understanding and emotional investment in the human-animal bond. The term used for this type of complex emotional conflict and exhaustion is Compassion Fatigue. Compassion Fatigue in the Laboratory Animal Science setting is a combination of physical, emotional and psychological depletion associated with working with and caring for animals and their well-being in a research environment. The University of Washington has developed a Compassion in Science Program called Dare2Care which emphasizes self-care and helps Laboratory Animal Professionals identify stress factors and work toward a personal solution to relieve stress. The first step in developing a resiliency program is to assess the current culture and needs of the organization. At an institutional level we identified that we needed increased communication concerning study endpoints, as well as identified individuals with whom affected personnel can talk about personal concerns. We also implemented community events to reflect on the positive aspects of this field of work. We improved the physical work environment, and provided outlets established for personnel to express feelings via written word or artistically. Lastly, we started working with our Center for One Health to encompass a holisitic approach to the occupational health of our animal caregivers. One health is the relationship and interplay between people, animals and the environment and we needed to include emotional well-being in our assessment of the health of our personnel. A question was added to our occupational health screening form to include additional health or workplace concerns (e.g., Compassion Fatigue) not covered by the questionnaire, and we added a component of Compassion Fatigue awareness in our training program. Here we review the importance of identifying Compassion Fatigue in the animal research setting, focus on developing a compassion resiliency culture and provide tools and coping strategies to validate and strengthen the human-animal bond with research animals and to sustain the care that is necessary for both people and research animals.

Background: Working with research animals can be both rewarding and challenging. The rewarding part of the work is associated with understanding the necessity for animal research to improve the health of humans and animals and the knowledge that one can provide care and compassion for the animals. Challenges with animal research include witnessing stress/pain in animals necessitated by scientific requirements, end of study euthanasia, and societal stigmatization about animal research. These challenges could be compounded with more general workplace stresses, in turn, impacting job retention and satisfaction. However, these factors have yet to be formally evaluated. Therefore, the purpose of this survey was to comprehensively evaluate professional quality of life’s correlation with key workplace metrics. Methods: Six institutions were recruited to participate in a longitudinal intervention trial on compassion fatigue resiliency. This manuscript reports key baseline metrics from this survey. A cross-sectional mixed methods survey was developed to evaluate professional quality of life, job satisfaction, retention, and factors influencing compassion fatigue resiliency. Quantitative data were analyzed via general linear models and qualitative data were analyzed by theme. Results: Baseline data was collected from 198 participants. Personnel who reported higher compassion satisfaction also reported higher retention and job satisfaction. Conversely, personnel who reported higher burnout also reported lower job satisfaction. In response to open-ended questions, participants said their compassion fatigue was impacted by institutional culture (70% of participants), animal research (58%), general mental health (41%), and specific compassion fatigue support (24%). Conclusions: In conclusion, these results show that professional quality of life is related to important operational metrics of job satisfaction and retention. Furthermore, compassion fatigue is impacted by factors beyond working with research animals, including institutional culture and general mental health support. Overall, this project provides rationale and insight for institutional support of compassion fatigue resiliency.

Refined handling improves laboratory mouse welfare and research outcomes when compared to traditional tail handling, yet implementation does not seem to be widespread. Refined handling includes picking up a mouse using a tunnel or cupped hands. The aim of this study was to determine the current prevalence of and beliefs towards refined handling using the theory of planned behavior. It was predicted that refined handling prevalence is low compared to traditional handling methods, and its implementation is determined by individual and institutional beliefs. Research personnel were recruited via online convenience sampling through email listservs and social media. A total of 261 participants in diverse roles (e.g. veterinarians, managers, caretakers, researchers, etc.) responded primarily from the USA (79%) and academic institutions (61%) Participants were surveyed about their current use, knowledge, and beliefs about refined handling. Quantitative data were analyzed via descriptive statistics and generalised regression. Qualitative data were analyzed by theme. Research personnel reported low levels of refined handling implementation, with only 10% of participants using it exclusively and a median estimate of only 10% of institutional mice being handled with refined methods. Individually, participants had positive attitudes, neutral norms, and positive control beliefs about refined handling. Participants’ intention to provide refined handling in the future was strongly associated with their attitudes, norms, and control beliefs (p<0.01). Participants believed barriers included jumpy mice, perceived incompatibility with restraint, lack of time, and other personnel. However, participants also believed refined handling was advantageous to mouse welfare, handling ease, personnel, and research. Although results from this survey indicate that current refined handling prevalence is low in this sample, personnel believe it has important benefits, and future use is associated with their beliefs about the practice. People who believed refined handling was good, felt pressure to use it, and were confident in their use reported higher implementation. Increased refined handling could be encouraged through education on misconceptions, highlighting advantages, and addressing important barriers.

Research involving animals is pivotal to advancing biomedical and veterinary sciences, contributing to discoveries that have saved countless lives and improved global health. However, the field faces increasing scrutiny from ethical, scientific, and societal perspectives. This paper applies a strategic Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) analysis, adapted from traditional business planning, to critically evaluate the current landscape of animal research, offering a balanced perspective on its contributions and challenges. While typically used to assess organizational performance, here the framework is reinterpreted to provide a structured, holistic view of the internal and external factors shaping ethical, scientific, and societal aspects of animal research. Strengths include its foundational role in Nobel Prize-winning discoveries, medical advancements, and therapeutic safety. Key weaknesses, such as public mistrust, ethical concerns, resource limitations, and rigor and reproducibility, are examined. Opportunities lie in the advancement of study refinements, improved methodologies, and fostering stakeholder communication. Threats such as misunderstanding, regulatory complexities, and resource constraints are addressed through strategic recommendations, including investment in Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement (3Rs), effective public engagement, and global harmonization of standards. This paper concludes by presenting an actionable roadmap to ensure the continued ethical and impactful use of animals in research while embracing innovation and maintaining public trust.