Occupational Health and Safety in the Care and Use of Research Animals (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND PROTOCOL-RELATED HAZARDS
PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND PROTOCOL-RELATED HAZARDS
Pages 32-50
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 32... ...
Chemicals are ubiquitous in the laboratory and animal room environments; chemicals are used to disinfect and clean surfaces, anesthetize animals, and process tissue samples. Research protocols can introduce toxic chemicals, human pathogens, or radioactive materials into animals, and these agents can enter the waste stream of the animal facility.
|
From page 33... ...
When it is compatible with the experimental conditions of animal use and the clinical condition of the particular animal, consideration should be given to chemical immobilization of nonhuman primates to facilitate the ease of handling them and to reduce the risk of injury of personnel. Personnel who work with nonhuman primates should wear face shields and other protective garments and equipment appropriate for the circumstances and species involved.
|
From page 34... ...
might be maintained in the laboratory or animal facility for research or instructional purposes. Institutions that host these uncommon research animals have a special obligation to perform a comprehensive review of safety precautions to ensure the security of animal housing and the appropriate training of personnel who are involved in their care and use.
|
From page 35... ...
Class B flammable solvents might be used in painting animal care rooms, cleaning floors and surfaces, sterilizing equipment, administering anesthesia, and performing laboratory analyses of tissues. Common Class C materials include lighting, wet vacuums, steam-cleaning units, automatic cage-washers, and many types of laboratory equipment.
|
From page 36... ...
Less obvious hazards are present on cage-changing tables, biological safety cabinets, and wet vacuum systems. The electric hazards associated with those and other kinds of equipment can be minimized or eliminated through such engineering controls as ground-fault interrupters, such operational procedures as the use of lockout and tagout procedures to control energy sources during repair and maintenance of equipment (CFR 1919.147)
|
From page 37... ...
Low-power lasers that do not have enough power to injure someone accidentally but do have enough power to cause injury if the beam is viewed for extended periods. • Class III.
|
From page 38... ...
Gamma rays arise from nuclear decay; x rays arise from electron dislocation. When a radionuclide decays, it might produce alpha particles, gamma rays, beta particles, neutrons, or combinations of these.
|
From page 39... ...
Poor housekeeping practices can increase the seriousness of other hazards associated with animal care. For example, sweeping bedding, hair, and dander from floors, rather than using a vacuum cleaner with a filtered exhaust, can result in high concentrations of airborne allergens that can be distributed throughout the animal facility.
|
From page 40... ...
Activities in animal care operations that contribute to back injuries include lifting heavy bags of feed, lifting heavy animals, lifting small weights incorrectly, moving or lifting cages, or clipping animals' fur manually. Adjusting control knobs, using a screwdriver, using pliers, opening and closing cage doors, moving small animals from cage to cage, operating video display terminals for extended periods, and mopping floors can also lead to repetitive-stress injuries.
|
From page 41... ...
. In an animal care facility, noise can result from animals, particularly pigs and dogs, and from equipment, such as cage washers, high pressure air cleaning equipment, and wet vacuum systems operated in a confined space.
|
From page 42... ...
Animal care activities can seriously influence the potential for employee exposure. Thus, animal care practices that might contribute to employee exposures need to be carefully assessed so that toxic hazards of chemicals associated with the care and use of research animals can be recognized and controlled.
|
From page 43... ...
A collaborative assessment is strongly encouraged if the animal experimentation involves either the testing of chemicals for their toxic properties or research with experimentally or naturally infected animals. Whether or not a collaborative initiative is pursued, investigators have an obligation to identify hazards associated with their research and to select the safeguards that are necessary to protect employees involved in the care and use of their research animals.
|
From page 44... ...
Protocols Involving Infectious Agents Experiments involving experimentally or naturally infected research animals present recognized risks of occupationally acquired infections. In the largest survey of laboratory-acquired infections conducted to date, research animals or their ectoparasites were associated with about 17% of the reported infections (Pike 1976)
|
From page 45... ...
The four levels of control, referred to as animal biosafety levels 1-4, each have appropriate microbiological practices, safety equipment, and features of animal facilities. The selection of an animal biosafety level is influenced by several characteristics of the infectious agent, the most important of which are the severity of the disease, the documented mode of transmission of the infectious agent, the availability of protective immunization or effective therapy, and the relative risk of exposure created by manipulation in handling the agent and caring for infected animals.
|
From page 46... ...
animals Hepatitis A virus Nonhuman Contact with Pike 1979 primates experimentally and naturally infected animals Lymphocytic Mice, hamsters, Contact with Bowen and others choriomeningitis virus guinea pigs experimentally and 1975, Jahrling and naturally infected Peters 1992, Pike animals 1976 Marburg virus African Green Contact with Martini & Siegert monkeys naturally infected 1971 animals Martini 1973 Simian Macaques Handling of blood CDC 1992a, immunodeficiency virus from experimentally Khabbaz and others infected animals 1992 Vesicular stomatitis virus Livestock Contact with naturally Hanson and others infected animals 1950, Patterson and others 1958 Rickettsial Agents Coxiella burnetii Sheep Contact with naturally CDC 1979, Spinelli infected animals and others 1981 Bacterial Agents Brucella (B. abortus, Cattle, dogs, Contact with Pike 1976 B
|
From page 47... ...
Guinea pigs, rats, Contact with Pike 1976 mice, nonhuman experimentally primates infected animals Streptobacillus Rats Contact with Pike 1976 moniliformis experimentally and naturally infected animals Fungal Agents Sporothrix schenckii Rats Bite from an Jeanselme and experimentally Chevallier 1910, infected animal 1911 Microsporum, Mice, rabbits, Contact with Hanel and Kruse Trichophyton guinea pigs experimentally and 1967, McAleer naturally infected 1980; Pike 1976 animals Source: CDC-NIH 1993.
|
From page 48... ...
Most research involving experimentally and naturally infected vertebrate animals will be conducted at animal biosafety level 2 or 3. A summary of hazard control elements for these two animal biosafety levels is presented in Table 3-3.
|
From page 49... ...
TABLE 3-3 Summary of Recommended Animal Biosafety Levels 2 and 3 for Research Programs that Involve Experimentally or Naturally Infected Vertebrate Animals Animal Biosafety Agents Practices Safety Equipment Facilities Level 2 Cause human disease of • Good personal hygiene • Primary barriers: • No recirculation of varied severity; indigenous • Limited access containment equipment exhaust air • Biohazard warning signs used for necropsy and • Autoclave available Hazard: percutaneous exposure, • Sharps precautions procedures with high • Hand washing sink in mucous membrane exposure, • Biosafety manual potential for creating animal rooms ingestion (enteric pathogens) • Personal protective aerosols • Decontamination of cages equipment: laboratory Examples: HBV, HIV, Shigella before washing coats, gloves, face and flexneri, Salmonella typhimurium, • Decontamination of respiratory protection as Toxoplasma gondii infectious waste required 3 Cause human disease with • Good personal hygiene • Primary barriers: • Physical separation from serious or lethal consequences; • Controlled access containment equipment access corridors indigenous or exotic • Biohazard warning signs used for all activities • Self-closing double-door PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND PROTOCOL-RELATED HAZARDS • Sharps precautions involving infectious passage way Hazard: aerosol transmission • Biosafety manual materials or infected • No recirculation of • Decontamination of clothing animals exhaust air Examples: Mycobacterium before laundering • Personal protective • Directional airflow tuberculosis, Brucella canis, • Decontamination of cages equipment: laboratory • Hand washing sink in Coxiella Burnetii before bedding is removed gowns, gloves, face and animal rooms • Decontamination of all wastes respiratory protection as • Autoclave available required, protective in facility footwear as required Source: CDC-NIH 1993.
|
From page 50... ...
• Use mechanical pipetting devices. • Never eat, drink, smoke, handle contact lenses, apply cosmetics, or take or apply medicine in areas where research animals are kept.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.