Challenges and expectations on the use of automated home cage monitoring for advancing laboratory animal care and welfare

TL;DR

This paper discusses how automated home cage monitoring can improve lab animal welfare by tracking behavior and health in real time.

Contribution

It highlights the potential of HCM systems to provide continuous, unbiased welfare assessments and identifies challenges for their implementation.

Findings

Home Cage Monitoring systems enable non-invasive tracking of animal behavior and health in real time.

HCM can detect early signs of distress and disease, allowing timely interventions and refined humane endpoints.

Challenges include data integration, standardization, and the need for interdisciplinary collaboration.

Abstract

COST Action TEATIME unites experts to advance automated monitoring technologies for laboratory animals, with a focus on Home Cage Monitoring (HCM) systems. The use of HCM has great potential to revolutionise welfare monitoring by enabling continuous, non-invasive tracking of physiological and behavioural patterns in group-housed animals within their undisturbed housing environment. These systems capture spontaneous behaviours – such as feeding, grooming, social interactions and sleep cycles – across day and night phases, offering objective data for welfare and scientific assessments. This real-time monitoring might allow for early detection of distress, disease progression and subtle welfare changes, supporting timely interventions and refined humane endpoints. Unlike traditional clinical scoring, which relies on brief daily observations, HCM provides longitudinal, individualised insights and reduces observer bias. It might also facilitate better characterisation of positive affective states, contributing to more holistic welfare evaluations. Despite technological progress, challenges remain in data integration, sensitivity and standardisation across facilities. Effective implementation requires real-time alert capabilities, robust data management, and interdisciplinary collaboration among scientists, veterinarians and data experts. HCM systems should complement – not replace – human expertise, enriching welfare monitoring and scientific reproducibility. Their integration can improve husbandry, refine severity assessments, advancing both animal welfare and scientific replicability.

Figures