Technique
An improved method for lifting and transporting anesthetized pigs within an animal facility Camilla Schumacher-Petersen, DVM1,2, Karsten Pharao Hammelev, DVM1,2 & Jens Erik Flescher1,2
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
Transporting anesthetized pigs in a laboratory setting often requires strenuous manual lifting, posing a hazard to the safety of animal care personnel and to the welfare of the pigs. The authors developed an improved approach to lifting and transporting anesthetized pigs weighing up to 350 kg using mechanical lifts. Different equipment was used to accommodate pigs of different sizes as well as the building designs of three animal facilities. Using the lifts, anesthetized pigs are carried on sheets to maintain their comfort while being transported. The approach refines previous methods for handling and transporting anesthetized pigs and reduces the risk of injury to personnel.
npg
In the Department of Experimental Medicine at the University of Copenhagen, we handle more than 500 pigs a year, ranging in size from newborn piglets to 350-kg pregnant sows, that are used in various experimental procedures at three different facilities. Most experimental procedures require that anesthetized or heavily sedated pigs be moved between procedure rooms and the housing area. Transporting the pigs is more challenging at some of the facilities than at others: at one facility, pigs are moved within the same floor; at the second facility, pigs are moved between different floors; and at the third facility, pigs are moved between different buildings. For each facility, therefore, very different procedures for transporting the pigs have been implemented. In all three facilities, however, our original methods of transporting pigs required personnel to manually pull and lift the pigs from floor to carrier and from carrier to table before a procedure, and vice versa after a procedure. Manually transporting pigs within the facility in this way can be strenuous work and requires animal care personnel to assume uncomfortable or even unsafe postures or positions, often resulting in shoulder and back pain. Improved ergonomic techniques for lifting and transporting the pigs were therefore necessary in order to protect personnel from work-related injuries. Our procedures have also required that great care be taken in order to minimize the potential for
handling-induced injuries. In particular, sedating and moving pregnant sows required animal care personnel to come in close contact with the fully awake sows, guiding them backwards into a carrier before anesthetizing them. The sows were stressed by this process and were therefore more likely to injure the personnel. In order to overcome these challenges, we endeavored to improve as well as standardize our procedures for lifting and transporting pigs within the facilities. Our first goal was for all animal care personnel, regardless of physique, to be able to move pigs of any size using an ergonomically optimized method. Our second goal was to minimize the stress associated with handling and sedation of the pigs by providing anesthesia to the pigs in their home pens, rather than confining them to a carrier prior to inducing anesthesia. Our third goal was to develop as simple a procedure as possible to ensure the compliance of animal care personnel. By adapting commercially available equipment used for elderly and patient care, we developed a lifting technique to meet all three of our stated goals. Our simple approach can be used by any animal care facility to enable the transport of pigs. TECHNIQUE Equipment We selected different equipment to accommodate the size of the pigs being transported as well as the
1Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. Correspondence should be addressed to C.S.-P. ([email protected]).
LAB ANIMAL
Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014 237
Technique
npg
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
FIGURE 1 | Mobile lift with a handling arm and the small lifting sheet.
FIGURE 2 | Ceiling-mounted lift with a handling arm and the small lifting sheet. A one-directional rail runs across the ceiling alongside the fluorescent lamp.
designs of the buildings in our three animal facilities. To lift and transport pigs weighing 200 kg, we Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden), together with a handling used an electric forklift (model E10, Linde AG, arm (Octostretch, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) and a sheet Aschaffenburg, Germany). We chose this particular (Solo Octo LiftSheet, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) that has model because it has a relatively compact design, a narrow end and eight straps, distributed symmetri- allowing it to be moved easily inside the housing area. cally around the midline, that can be attached to the It quickly became clear to us that it was not feasible handling arm with hooks. The sheet is made of low- to use a one-point suspension system with the forkfriction nylon or plasticized mesh material, allowing it lift to lift pigs weighing >200 kg, because the margin to slide easily underneath an anesthetized pig. for displacement of the balance point was too narThe mobile lift (Fig. 1) is more practical for mov- row. We still needed the flexibility of a 360° rotation, ing pigs over longer distances (e.g., between rooms however, so we constructed a two-point suspension and buildings), and it has greater flexibility because device, mountable on the fork of the forklift, with it can access almost any area in the facility includ- a moveable axis that allows the device to turn 360°. ing individual pens. The mobile lift is also suitable Attached to this device is a modified handling arm for use in rooms with low clearance where ceiling- (FlexoStetch, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) and a sheet mounted lifts cannot be used. A disadvantage of the (LiftSheet XL, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) with 10 straps, mobile lift is that it must be stored in a designated distributed symmetrically along the edges of the sheet, space when not in use. The ceiling-mounted lift is that can be attached to the handling arm with hooks ideal in rooms with narrow floor spaces that can- (Fig. 4). The forklift device is strong enough to transnot fit the mobile lift. We have used two different port the larger pigs from the pen to the preparation approaches to installing the ceiling rails: our prepa- room and then to an operating table. A disadvantage of ration room adjacent to the operating theater has only one rail (Fig. 2), a b whereas the pigs’ housing area has two rails running perpendicular to one another (Fig. 3). In rooms where there is only one ceiling rail, the lift can be moved in only one direction, but in rooms where there are two rails, the lift can be moved in two directions. Thus the two-rail setup allows coverage of a larger area and makes it possible to reach a larger number of the individual pens. A great advantage FIGURE 3 | Ceiling-mounted lift attached to a two-directional rail system. of the ceiling-mounted lift versus the This system allows the lift to move throughout the housing area (a) as well as mobile lift is that it saves floor space. into individual pens (b). Red arrows indicate the directions of movement. 238 Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014
www.labanimal.com
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
Technique
FIGURE 4 | The electric forklift mounted with a novel two-point rotatable suspension device, a modified handling arm and the large lifting sheet.
the forklift is that it cannot be driven on uneven surfaces (e.g., over curbs and doorsteps) owing to its low ground clearance of 56 mm.
as a precaution against injury from involuntary movements such as a sudden kick from a hind leg. If the pig was in ventral recumbency, we gently moved the pig into lateral recumbency. If the pig remained in this position, it was ready to be lifted. First, we placed the sheet alongside the pig. When using the smaller sheets, it is important to place the narrow end of the sheet next to the head of the pig. Next, we tucked about one-third of the sheet underneath the pig’s body (Fig. 5a). For smaller pigs, only one person is needed to do this; for larger pigs, however, one or more additional personnel are needed to slightly lift the side of the pig’s body so that the sheet can be sufficiently tucked underneath. Finally, we gently rolled the pig onto the sheet. Both edges of the sheet were now exposed on either side of the pig, and we pulled the sheet so that it stretched out flat underneath the pig (Fig. 5b). The pig was positioned on the sheet in either dorsal recumbency (Fig. 6a) or lateral recumbency (Fig. 6b) so that the pig was aligned with the mid-plane of the sheet. Although the exact placement of each pig on the sheet varies depending on its size, it is important to place the pigs on the sheet as uniformly as possible. This is especially important when using the smaller sheets because the handling arm has only one-point suspension and needs to be in balance. We placed the pigs on the smaller sheet so that four straps laid at the head end, two straps laid at the middle sides and two straps laid at the hind end (Fig. 7); by arranging the straps at fixed points with respect to the pig’s body, we could ensure that the weight of the animal was distributed evenly and that each pig was placed on the sheet uniformly. On the larger sheet, it is more important to place the heaviest part of the pig well inside the hind end of the sheet to prevent the pig
npg
Handling procedure Regardless of the equipment used to lift the pigs, we used the same handling procedure with all pigs. Prior to lifting, we anesthetized the pigs using the standard anesthetic approach used in our department. Anesthesia was induced with a b an intramuscular injection to the neck of 1 ml per 10–15 kg body weight Zoletil pig mixture, consisting of 250 mg dry powder tiletamine and zolazepam (Zoletil 50 Vet, Virbac Animal Health, Fort Worth, TX) dissolved in 6.25 ml xylazin (20 mg/ml; Rompun Vet, Bayer, Monheim, Germany), 1.25 ml ketamine (100 mg/ml; Ketaminol Vet, MSD Animal Health, Wellington, New Zealand), 2.0 ml butorphanol (10 mg/ml; Torbugesic Vet, Pfizer, Surrey, UK) and 2.0 ml methadone (10 mg/ml; Metadon DAK, Nycomed, Roskilde, Denmark). To minimize stress, we administered the injection to the pig while in its FIGURE 5 | Placement of an anesthetized pig on a sheet. (a) Approximately home pen. We then left the pig in its pen one-third of the sheet is tucked underneath the pig. (b) After the pig has until we observed that it was unconscious. been rolled, the sheet tucked under the pig is exposed and can be stretched Then, we approached the pig from behind out flat underneath the pig. LAB ANIMAL
Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014 239
Technique
a
npg
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
b
FIGURE 7 | Correct placement of a pig weighing 200 kg on the large sheet. Sows are placed in dorsal recumbency (a) or lateral recumbency (b) with hind quarters positioned in front of the last strap. The head may stick out of the sheet at the other end.
from sliding out. This placement sometimes results in the pig’s head lying past the edge of the sheet at the head end (Fig. 6). Once the pig was properly placed on the sheet, we hooked each of the straps into the corresponding hooks of the handling arm. We then lifted the pig, either by using a hand control for the mobile lift or ceiling lift or by operating the forklift. We lifted the pig slowly and transported the pig in the lift at the lowest possible elevation from the ground. If the pig suddenly slid within the sheet or the weight of the pig was not in balance, we could easily stop, lower the pig back to the ground and adjust the positioning of the pig on the sheet before continuing. We either placed the pig directly on the operating table while still on the sheet or placed the pig on a preparation table and slid or rolled it off the sheet and onto the operating table after preparation was completed. The preparation table and the operating table are both mounted on wheels with a brake function and can be elevated or lowered to the same height to enable the transfer of the pig from one table to the other. 240 Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014
For survival studies, the lifts can also be used to return pigs to their pens for recovery. However, this is only suitable if the pig is in lateral recumbency. Additionally, a pig should never be returned to its pen before it is breathing stably without the need of supplemental oxygen supply. After we transported the pig to its home pen, we lowered the pig onto the pen floor and then gently rolled it off of the sheet and onto a layer of soft bedding material (e.g., straw) by lifting the sheet on one side. This procedure prevents the need to pull or drag the pig by the legs. DISCUSSION We have developed an ergonomic method for lifting and transporting anesthetized pigs using mechanical equipment. Pigs are placed on sheets in order to stabilize and uniformly support the entire length of their bodies, ensuring a more refined, gentler approach to handling of the pig during anesthesia than manual lifting. Our lifting procedure is easy to manage and can be learned by animal care personnel within one day of training. Although the new approach slightly prolonged handling times, the lower risk of work-related injuries and better animal welfare clearly outweighs this disadvantage. The key element for successfully using our lifting method is the proper placement of the pig on the sheet. If the pig’s weight is not well distributed, there is an imminent risk of the pig sliding off the sheet. The few cases we experienced in which a pig began to slide off of a sheet during transport were all during the trial phase of using the method, when we had not yet recognized the importance of correctly placing the pig on the sheet. Luckily, in these few cases, neither pigs nor personnel were injured. Although our new method has clearly improved the safety and ease of transporting pigs within our www.labanimal.com
Technique
Although a uniform solution for all sites perhaps would have been cheaper, it would not have provided the flexibility of our customized solutions and would have still required some manual lifting in facilities where the suitability of the chosen solution was limited. Although we have only used our mechanical lifts with pigs, similar equipment could potentially be used to transport other large animal species within an animal facility. We suggest seeking veterinary advice regarding species-specific anatomy and other physio logical considerations before using such an approach with other species. Acknowledgments We thank our staff at our animal facilities for enthusiastically working with the new equipment and making it a success. We also thank Uffe Vest Schneider, MD, PhD, and Anne Charlotte Teilmann, DVM, for reading and commenting on the manuscript. COMPETING FINANCIAL INTERESTS The authors declare no competing financial interests. Received 15 January 2014; accepted 27 March 2014 Published online at http://www.labanimal.com/
npg
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
facilities, we have faced a few challenges with implementing the method. First, we found that personnel tend to regress towards the old approach of manually lifting the pigs when in a rush, even though this approach is far more strenuous. Second, we observed a clear relationship between the willingness of personnel to use the lifts and their age and size: older and physically smaller personnel were more likely to embrace the mechanical lifts, whereas younger and physically larger personnel were more likely to rely on their physical strength to lift the pigs manually. We overcame these barriers to compliance by creating among the staff a positive attitude towards the mechanical lifts and having managers actively encourage their staff to use the new methods. We developed different solutions for our three facilities to accommodate a number of factors: the size of pigs normally used at that particular site, the distance between the housing area and operating facilities, the design of the buildings with respect to the availability of free space for maneuvering, the amount of space available to store the lifting devices and the possibility of ceiling-mounting equipment.
LAB ANIMAL
Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014 241
An improved method for lifting and transporting anesthetized pigs within an animal facility Camilla Schumacher-Petersen, DVM1,2, Karsten Pharao Hammelev, DVM1,2 & Jens Erik Flescher1,2
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
Transporting anesthetized pigs in a laboratory setting often requires strenuous manual lifting, posing a hazard to the safety of animal care personnel and to the welfare of the pigs. The authors developed an improved approach to lifting and transporting anesthetized pigs weighing up to 350 kg using mechanical lifts. Different equipment was used to accommodate pigs of different sizes as well as the building designs of three animal facilities. Using the lifts, anesthetized pigs are carried on sheets to maintain their comfort while being transported. The approach refines previous methods for handling and transporting anesthetized pigs and reduces the risk of injury to personnel.
npg
In the Department of Experimental Medicine at the University of Copenhagen, we handle more than 500 pigs a year, ranging in size from newborn piglets to 350-kg pregnant sows, that are used in various experimental procedures at three different facilities. Most experimental procedures require that anesthetized or heavily sedated pigs be moved between procedure rooms and the housing area. Transporting the pigs is more challenging at some of the facilities than at others: at one facility, pigs are moved within the same floor; at the second facility, pigs are moved between different floors; and at the third facility, pigs are moved between different buildings. For each facility, therefore, very different procedures for transporting the pigs have been implemented. In all three facilities, however, our original methods of transporting pigs required personnel to manually pull and lift the pigs from floor to carrier and from carrier to table before a procedure, and vice versa after a procedure. Manually transporting pigs within the facility in this way can be strenuous work and requires animal care personnel to assume uncomfortable or even unsafe postures or positions, often resulting in shoulder and back pain. Improved ergonomic techniques for lifting and transporting the pigs were therefore necessary in order to protect personnel from work-related injuries. Our procedures have also required that great care be taken in order to minimize the potential for
handling-induced injuries. In particular, sedating and moving pregnant sows required animal care personnel to come in close contact with the fully awake sows, guiding them backwards into a carrier before anesthetizing them. The sows were stressed by this process and were therefore more likely to injure the personnel. In order to overcome these challenges, we endeavored to improve as well as standardize our procedures for lifting and transporting pigs within the facilities. Our first goal was for all animal care personnel, regardless of physique, to be able to move pigs of any size using an ergonomically optimized method. Our second goal was to minimize the stress associated with handling and sedation of the pigs by providing anesthesia to the pigs in their home pens, rather than confining them to a carrier prior to inducing anesthesia. Our third goal was to develop as simple a procedure as possible to ensure the compliance of animal care personnel. By adapting commercially available equipment used for elderly and patient care, we developed a lifting technique to meet all three of our stated goals. Our simple approach can be used by any animal care facility to enable the transport of pigs. TECHNIQUE Equipment We selected different equipment to accommodate the size of the pigs being transported as well as the
1Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. Correspondence should be addressed to C.S.-P. ([email protected]).
LAB ANIMAL
Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014 237
Technique
npg
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
FIGURE 1 | Mobile lift with a handling arm and the small lifting sheet.
FIGURE 2 | Ceiling-mounted lift with a handling arm and the small lifting sheet. A one-directional rail runs across the ceiling alongside the fluorescent lamp.
designs of the buildings in our three animal facilities. To lift and transport pigs weighing 200 kg, we Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden), together with a handling used an electric forklift (model E10, Linde AG, arm (Octostretch, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) and a sheet Aschaffenburg, Germany). We chose this particular (Solo Octo LiftSheet, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) that has model because it has a relatively compact design, a narrow end and eight straps, distributed symmetri- allowing it to be moved easily inside the housing area. cally around the midline, that can be attached to the It quickly became clear to us that it was not feasible handling arm with hooks. The sheet is made of low- to use a one-point suspension system with the forkfriction nylon or plasticized mesh material, allowing it lift to lift pigs weighing >200 kg, because the margin to slide easily underneath an anesthetized pig. for displacement of the balance point was too narThe mobile lift (Fig. 1) is more practical for mov- row. We still needed the flexibility of a 360° rotation, ing pigs over longer distances (e.g., between rooms however, so we constructed a two-point suspension and buildings), and it has greater flexibility because device, mountable on the fork of the forklift, with it can access almost any area in the facility includ- a moveable axis that allows the device to turn 360°. ing individual pens. The mobile lift is also suitable Attached to this device is a modified handling arm for use in rooms with low clearance where ceiling- (FlexoStetch, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) and a sheet mounted lifts cannot be used. A disadvantage of the (LiftSheet XL, Liko AB, Lulea, Sweden) with 10 straps, mobile lift is that it must be stored in a designated distributed symmetrically along the edges of the sheet, space when not in use. The ceiling-mounted lift is that can be attached to the handling arm with hooks ideal in rooms with narrow floor spaces that can- (Fig. 4). The forklift device is strong enough to transnot fit the mobile lift. We have used two different port the larger pigs from the pen to the preparation approaches to installing the ceiling rails: our prepa- room and then to an operating table. A disadvantage of ration room adjacent to the operating theater has only one rail (Fig. 2), a b whereas the pigs’ housing area has two rails running perpendicular to one another (Fig. 3). In rooms where there is only one ceiling rail, the lift can be moved in only one direction, but in rooms where there are two rails, the lift can be moved in two directions. Thus the two-rail setup allows coverage of a larger area and makes it possible to reach a larger number of the individual pens. A great advantage FIGURE 3 | Ceiling-mounted lift attached to a two-directional rail system. of the ceiling-mounted lift versus the This system allows the lift to move throughout the housing area (a) as well as mobile lift is that it saves floor space. into individual pens (b). Red arrows indicate the directions of movement. 238 Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014
www.labanimal.com
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
Technique
FIGURE 4 | The electric forklift mounted with a novel two-point rotatable suspension device, a modified handling arm and the large lifting sheet.
the forklift is that it cannot be driven on uneven surfaces (e.g., over curbs and doorsteps) owing to its low ground clearance of 56 mm.
as a precaution against injury from involuntary movements such as a sudden kick from a hind leg. If the pig was in ventral recumbency, we gently moved the pig into lateral recumbency. If the pig remained in this position, it was ready to be lifted. First, we placed the sheet alongside the pig. When using the smaller sheets, it is important to place the narrow end of the sheet next to the head of the pig. Next, we tucked about one-third of the sheet underneath the pig’s body (Fig. 5a). For smaller pigs, only one person is needed to do this; for larger pigs, however, one or more additional personnel are needed to slightly lift the side of the pig’s body so that the sheet can be sufficiently tucked underneath. Finally, we gently rolled the pig onto the sheet. Both edges of the sheet were now exposed on either side of the pig, and we pulled the sheet so that it stretched out flat underneath the pig (Fig. 5b). The pig was positioned on the sheet in either dorsal recumbency (Fig. 6a) or lateral recumbency (Fig. 6b) so that the pig was aligned with the mid-plane of the sheet. Although the exact placement of each pig on the sheet varies depending on its size, it is important to place the pigs on the sheet as uniformly as possible. This is especially important when using the smaller sheets because the handling arm has only one-point suspension and needs to be in balance. We placed the pigs on the smaller sheet so that four straps laid at the head end, two straps laid at the middle sides and two straps laid at the hind end (Fig. 7); by arranging the straps at fixed points with respect to the pig’s body, we could ensure that the weight of the animal was distributed evenly and that each pig was placed on the sheet uniformly. On the larger sheet, it is more important to place the heaviest part of the pig well inside the hind end of the sheet to prevent the pig
npg
Handling procedure Regardless of the equipment used to lift the pigs, we used the same handling procedure with all pigs. Prior to lifting, we anesthetized the pigs using the standard anesthetic approach used in our department. Anesthesia was induced with a b an intramuscular injection to the neck of 1 ml per 10–15 kg body weight Zoletil pig mixture, consisting of 250 mg dry powder tiletamine and zolazepam (Zoletil 50 Vet, Virbac Animal Health, Fort Worth, TX) dissolved in 6.25 ml xylazin (20 mg/ml; Rompun Vet, Bayer, Monheim, Germany), 1.25 ml ketamine (100 mg/ml; Ketaminol Vet, MSD Animal Health, Wellington, New Zealand), 2.0 ml butorphanol (10 mg/ml; Torbugesic Vet, Pfizer, Surrey, UK) and 2.0 ml methadone (10 mg/ml; Metadon DAK, Nycomed, Roskilde, Denmark). To minimize stress, we administered the injection to the pig while in its FIGURE 5 | Placement of an anesthetized pig on a sheet. (a) Approximately home pen. We then left the pig in its pen one-third of the sheet is tucked underneath the pig. (b) After the pig has until we observed that it was unconscious. been rolled, the sheet tucked under the pig is exposed and can be stretched Then, we approached the pig from behind out flat underneath the pig. LAB ANIMAL
Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014 239
Technique
a
npg
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
b
FIGURE 7 | Correct placement of a pig weighing 200 kg on the large sheet. Sows are placed in dorsal recumbency (a) or lateral recumbency (b) with hind quarters positioned in front of the last strap. The head may stick out of the sheet at the other end.
from sliding out. This placement sometimes results in the pig’s head lying past the edge of the sheet at the head end (Fig. 6). Once the pig was properly placed on the sheet, we hooked each of the straps into the corresponding hooks of the handling arm. We then lifted the pig, either by using a hand control for the mobile lift or ceiling lift or by operating the forklift. We lifted the pig slowly and transported the pig in the lift at the lowest possible elevation from the ground. If the pig suddenly slid within the sheet or the weight of the pig was not in balance, we could easily stop, lower the pig back to the ground and adjust the positioning of the pig on the sheet before continuing. We either placed the pig directly on the operating table while still on the sheet or placed the pig on a preparation table and slid or rolled it off the sheet and onto the operating table after preparation was completed. The preparation table and the operating table are both mounted on wheels with a brake function and can be elevated or lowered to the same height to enable the transfer of the pig from one table to the other. 240 Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014
For survival studies, the lifts can also be used to return pigs to their pens for recovery. However, this is only suitable if the pig is in lateral recumbency. Additionally, a pig should never be returned to its pen before it is breathing stably without the need of supplemental oxygen supply. After we transported the pig to its home pen, we lowered the pig onto the pen floor and then gently rolled it off of the sheet and onto a layer of soft bedding material (e.g., straw) by lifting the sheet on one side. This procedure prevents the need to pull or drag the pig by the legs. DISCUSSION We have developed an ergonomic method for lifting and transporting anesthetized pigs using mechanical equipment. Pigs are placed on sheets in order to stabilize and uniformly support the entire length of their bodies, ensuring a more refined, gentler approach to handling of the pig during anesthesia than manual lifting. Our lifting procedure is easy to manage and can be learned by animal care personnel within one day of training. Although the new approach slightly prolonged handling times, the lower risk of work-related injuries and better animal welfare clearly outweighs this disadvantage. The key element for successfully using our lifting method is the proper placement of the pig on the sheet. If the pig’s weight is not well distributed, there is an imminent risk of the pig sliding off the sheet. The few cases we experienced in which a pig began to slide off of a sheet during transport were all during the trial phase of using the method, when we had not yet recognized the importance of correctly placing the pig on the sheet. Luckily, in these few cases, neither pigs nor personnel were injured. Although our new method has clearly improved the safety and ease of transporting pigs within our www.labanimal.com
Technique
Although a uniform solution for all sites perhaps would have been cheaper, it would not have provided the flexibility of our customized solutions and would have still required some manual lifting in facilities where the suitability of the chosen solution was limited. Although we have only used our mechanical lifts with pigs, similar equipment could potentially be used to transport other large animal species within an animal facility. We suggest seeking veterinary advice regarding species-specific anatomy and other physio logical considerations before using such an approach with other species. Acknowledgments We thank our staff at our animal facilities for enthusiastically working with the new equipment and making it a success. We also thank Uffe Vest Schneider, MD, PhD, and Anne Charlotte Teilmann, DVM, for reading and commenting on the manuscript. COMPETING FINANCIAL INTERESTS The authors declare no competing financial interests. Received 15 January 2014; accepted 27 March 2014 Published online at http://www.labanimal.com/
npg
© 2014 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved.
facilities, we have faced a few challenges with implementing the method. First, we found that personnel tend to regress towards the old approach of manually lifting the pigs when in a rush, even though this approach is far more strenuous. Second, we observed a clear relationship between the willingness of personnel to use the lifts and their age and size: older and physically smaller personnel were more likely to embrace the mechanical lifts, whereas younger and physically larger personnel were more likely to rely on their physical strength to lift the pigs manually. We overcame these barriers to compliance by creating among the staff a positive attitude towards the mechanical lifts and having managers actively encourage their staff to use the new methods. We developed different solutions for our three facilities to accommodate a number of factors: the size of pigs normally used at that particular site, the distance between the housing area and operating facilities, the design of the buildings with respect to the availability of free space for maneuvering, the amount of space available to store the lifting devices and the possibility of ceiling-mounting equipment.
LAB ANIMAL
Volume 43, No. 7 | JULY 2014 241
