Consistency in Reporting of Loss of Righting Reflex for Assessment of General Anesthesia in Rats and Mice: A Systematic Review

Author:

Teng Michael Z1,Merenick Dexter1,Jessel Anisha1,Ganshorn Heather2,Pang Daniel S J3

Affiliation:

1. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

2. Libraries and Cultural Resources, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

3. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada;, Email: dsjpang@ucalgary.ca

Abstract

General anesthesia induces a reversible loss of consciousness (LOC), a state that is characterized by the inability to feel pain. Identifying LOC in animals poses unique challenges, because the method most commonly used in humans, responding to questions, cannot be used in animals. For over a century, loss of righting reflex (LORR) has been used to assess LOC in animals. This is the only animal method that correlates directly with LOC in humans and has become the standard proxy measure used in research. However, the reporting of how LORR is assessed varies extensively. This systematic literature review examined the consistency and completeness of LORR methods used in rats and mice. The terms 'righting reflex,' 'anesthesia,' 'conscious,' 'rats,' 'mice,' and their derivatives were used to search 5 electronic databases. The abstracts of the 985 articles identified were screened for indications that the study assessed LORR in mice or rats. Full texts of selected articles were reviewed for LORR methodological completeness, with reported methods categorized by 1) animal placement method, 2) behavioral presence of righting reflex, 3) duration of LORR testing, 4) behavioral LORR, and 5) animal position for testing LORR. Only 22 papers reported on all 5 methodological categories. Of the 22 papers, 21 used unique LORR methodologies, with descriptions of LORR methods differing in at least one category as compared with all other studies. This variability indicates that even papers that included all 5 categories still had substantial differences in their methodological descriptions. These findings reveal substantial inconsistencies in LORR methodology and reporting in the biomedical literature likely compromising study replicability and data interpretation.

Publisher

American Association for Laboratory Animal Science

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3