The Biosafety Research Road Map: The Search for Evidence to Support Practices in Human and Veterinary Laboratories

Abstract

Introduction: Lack of evidence-based information regarding potential biological risks can result in inappropriate or excessive biosafety and biosecurity risk-reduction strategies. This can cause unnecessary damage and loss to the physical facilities, physical and psychological well-being of laboratory staff, and community trust. A technical working group from the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH, formerly OIE), World Health Organization (WHO), and Chatham House collaborated on the Biosafety Research Roadmap (BRM) project. The goal of the BRM is the sustainable implementation of evidence-based biorisk management of laboratory activities, particularly in low-resource settings, and the identification of gaps in the current biosafety and biosecurity knowledge base. Methods: A literature search was conducted for the basis of laboratory design and practices for four selected high-priority subgroups of pathogenic agents. Potential gaps in biosafety were focused on five main sections, including the route of inoculation/modes of transmission, infectious dose, laboratory-acquired infections, containment releases, and disinfection and decontamination strategies. Categories representing miscellaneous, respiratory, bioterrorism/zoonotic, and viral hemorrhagic fever pathogens were created within each group were selected for review. Results: Information sheets on the pathogens were developed. Critical gaps in the evidence base for safe sustainable biorisk management were identified. Conclusion: The gap analysis identified areas of applied biosafety research required to support the safety, and the sustainability, of global research programs. Improving the data available for biorisk management decisions for research with high-priority pathogens will contribute significantly to the improvement and development of appropriate and necessary biosafety, biocontainment and biosecurity strategies for each agent.

Bio-Risk Management Systems: Biosafety Assessment in COVID-19 Referral Hospitals in Indonesia

“…During these awareness campaigns, it is crucial to emphasize that routine inspections or audits can significantly improve laboratory design, construction, operational processes, and management systems [21]. Additionally, routine inspections or audits help top management identify deficiencies in the laboratory, providing a basis for gradual improvements [22]. If a laboratory conducts internal audits, it will have specific records, such as monitoring results, measurements, and audit findings, to serve as the basis for improvement [4,18].…”

The Biosafety Research Road Map: The Search for Evidence to Support Practices in the Laboratory—Crimean Congo Haemorrhagic Fever Virus and Lassa Virus

“…Blacksell et al provide a detailed description of the materials and methods and an introduction to why the gap analysis was conducted. 1 …”

The Biosafety Research Road Map: The Search for Evidence to Support Practices in the Laboratory—Zoonotic Avian Influenza and Mycobacterium tuberculosis

“…The summary of evidence and potential gaps in biosafety was divided into five main sections: route of inoculation/modes of transmission, infectious dose, laboratory-acquired infections, containment releases, and disinfection and decontamination strategies. Blacksell et al 1 describe the materials and methods and explain why the gap analysis was performed. Here, we present the general characteristics of Zoonotic avian influenza and Mycobacterium tuberculosis , the current biosafety evidence, and available laboratory-acquired infections and laboratory releases.…”