Search

Clinical assessment of spinal motion in horses is part of many routine clinical exams but remains highly subjective. A prerequisite for the quantification of spinal motion is the assessment of the expected normal range of motion and variability of back kinematics. The aim of this study was to objectively quantify spinal kinematics and between -measurement, -surface and -day variation in owner-sound horses. In an observational study, twelve owner-sound horses were trotted 12 times on four different paths (hard/soft straight line, soft lunge left and right). Measurements were divided over three days, with five repetitions on day one and two, and two repetitions on day three (recheck) which occurred 28-55 days later. Optical motion capture was used to collect kinematic data. Elements of the outcome were: 1) Ranges of Motion (ROM) with confidence intervals per path and surface, 2) a variability model to calculate between-measurement variation and test the effect of time, surface and path, 3) intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to determine repeatability. ROM was lowest on the hard straight line. Cervical lateral bending was doubled on the left compared to the right lunge. Mean variation for the flexion-extension and lateral bending of the whole back were 0.8 and 1 degrees. Pelvic motion showed a variation of 1.0 (pitch), 0.7 (yaw) and 1.3 (roll) degrees. For these five parameters, a tendency for more variation on the hard surface and reduced variation with increased repetitions was observed. More variation was seen on the recheck (p<0.001). ICC values for pelvic rotations were between 0.76 and 0.93, for the whole back flexion-extension and lateral bending between 0.51 and 0.91. Between-horse variation was substantially higher than within-horse variation. In conclusion, ROM and variation in spinal biomechanics are horse-specific and small, necessitating individual analysis and making subjective and objective clinical assessment of spinal kinematics challengin

s of the 10th International Conference on Equine Exercise Physiology. Lorne, Australia, 12 - 16 November 2018.

BACKGROUND: The main criteria for lameness assessment in horses are head movement for forelimb lameness and pelvic movement for hindlimb lameness. However, compensatory head nod in horses with primary hindlimb lameness is a well-known phenomenon. This compensatory head nod movement can be easily misinterpreted as a sign of primary ipsilateral forelimb lameness. Therefore, discriminating compensatory asymmetries from primary directly pain-related movement asymmetries is a prerequisite for successful lameness assessment. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between head, withers and pelvis movement asymmetry in horses with induced forelimb and hindlimb lameness. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: In 10 clinically sound Warmblood riding horses, forelimb and hindlimb lameness were induced using a sole pressure model. The horses were then trotted on a treadmill. Three-dimensional optical motion capture was used to collect kinematic data from reflective markers attached to the poll, withers and tubera sacrale. The magnitude and side (left or right) of the following symmetry parameters, vertical difference in minimum position, maximum position and range-up were calculated for head, withers, and pelvis. Mixed models were used to analyse data from induced forelimb and hindlimb lameness. RESULTS: For each mm increase in pelvic asymmetry in response to hindlimb lameness induction, withers movement asymmetry increased by 0.35-0.55 mm, but towards the contralateral side. In induced forelimb lameness, for each mm increase in head movement asymmetry, withers movement asymmetry increased by 0.05-0.10 mm, in agreement with the head movement asymmetry direction, both indicating lameness in the induced forelimb. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Results must be confirmed in clinically lame horses trotting overground. CONCLUSIONS: The vertical asymmetry pattern of the withers discriminated a head nod associated with true forelimb lameness from the compensatory head movement asymmetry cau

Saddle slip, defined as a progressive lateral displacement of the saddle during ridden exercise, has recently been given attention in the scientific press as a potential sign of lameness. The aim of this study was to objectively quantify the normal lateral movement (oscillations) of the saddle relative to the horse in non-lame horses, and associate this movement to the movements of the horse and rider. Data from seven Warmblood dressage horses competing at Grand Prix (n = 6) or FEI Intermediate (n = 1) level, ridden by their usual riders, were used. Simultaneous kinetic, kinematic and saddle pressure measurements were conducted during sitting and rising trot on a force-measuring treadmill. The maximum lateral movement of the caudal part of the saddle relative to the horse's spine (MAX) was determined for each diagonal step. A mixed model was applied, with MAX as outcome, and T6 and S3 vertical position, rigid body rotation angles (roll, pitch, yaw) of the horse's and rider's pelvis, vertical ground reaction forces, saddle force, and rider position (rising in rising trot, sitting in rising trot or sitting in sitting trot) as explanatory variables. The least square means for MAX were 14.3 (SE 4.7) mm and 23.9 (SE 4.7) mm for rising and sitting in rising trot, and 20.3 (SE 4.7) mm for sitting trot. A 10 mm increase in maximum pelvic height at push off increased MAX by 1.4 mm (p<0.0001). One degree increase in rider pelvis roll decreased MAX 1.1 mm, and one degree increase in rider pelvis yaw increased MAX 0.7 mm (both p<0.0001). The linear relationships found between MAX and movements of both horse and rider implies that both horse and rider movement asymmetries are reflected in the lateral movements or oscillations of the saddle in non-lame horses.

The debate on proper head and neck positions (HNP) in horse training is lively, but little is known about the biomechanical effects of various HNPs in horses ridden at walk. The aim was to quantify the influence of different HNPs on the kinematics of horses ridden at walk. The standard competition position (HNP2) was compared to a free, unrestrained position (HNP1), more flexed positions (HNP3, HNP4), a raised extended position (HNP5) and a forward-downward extended position (HNP6). An experimental study in seven high-level dressage horses ridden at walk on a treadmill was designed. Kinetic and kinematic measurements were obtained with different HNPs. HNP2 was used as a speed-matched reference. Kinematics were measured from skin-fixed markers recorded by high-speed video cameras. The kinetics of the limbs were measured by the force-measuring instrumentation of the treadmill. In HNP1, compared to HNP2, the lumbar back and the pelvis were more horizontally positioned (more extended), and fore- and hindlimb pro- and retraction increased, with increased caudal rotation of the femur during the second half of hindlimb stance. HNP6 induced similar changes as HNP1, but caused larger increases in forelimb pro- and retraction. In HNP3, HNP4 and HNP5 the pelvis was more angled (less extended) compared to HNP2 at hindlimb midstance, and in HNP3 and HNP4 also in early hindlimb stance. All three HNPs caused increased maximum flexion of the tarsus, stifle and metatarsophalangeal joint during the swing phase. HNP3 and HNP5, but not HNP4, had a decreasing influence on fore- and hindlimb pro- and retraction, and decreased caudal rotation of the femur during the second half of hindlimb stance.The main limitation was that horses were not ridden overground and the number of horses was small. Our conclusion was that changes in head and neck position can markedly affect the horse’s movement pattern at walk.

Background The main criteria for lameness assessment in horses are head movement for forelimb lameness and pelvic movement for hindlimb lameness. However, compensatory head nod in horses with primary hindlimb lameness is a well‐known phenomenon. This compensatory head nod movement can be easily misinterpreted as a sign of primary ipsilateral forelimb lameness. Therefore, discriminating compensatory asymmetries from primary directly pain‐related movement asymmetries is a prerequisite for successful lameness assessment. Objectives To investigate the association between head, withers and pelvis movement asymmetry in horses with induced forelimb and hindlimb lameness. Study design Experimental study. Methods In 10 clinically sound Warmblood riding horses, forelimb and hindlimb lameness were induced using a sole pressure model. The horses were then trotted on a treadmill. Three‐dimensional optical motion capture was used to collect kinematic data from reflective markers attached to the poll, withers and tubera sacrale. The magnitude and side (left or right) of the following symmetry parameters, vertical difference in minimum position, maximum position and range‐up were calculated for head, withers, and pelvis. Mixed models were used to analyse data from induced forelimb and hindlimb lameness. Results For each mm increase in pelvic asymmetry in response to hindlimb lameness induction, withers movement asymmetry increased by 0.35–0.55 mm, but towards the contralateral side. In induced forelimb lameness, for each mm increase in head movement asymmetry, withers movement asymmetry increased by 0.05–0.10 mm, in agreement with the head movement asymmetry direction, both indicating lameness in the induced forelimb. Main limitations Results must be confirmed in clinically lame horses trotting overground. Conclusions The vertical asymmetry pattern of the withers discriminated a head nod associated wi

The objectives were to compare sagittal plane posture of the pelvis, trunk and head of elite dressage riders when they ride actively to train the horse versus sitting passively and following the horses’ movements at trot, and to evaluate the effects of these changes in rider posture on load distribution on the horse’s back. Synchronised motion capture and saddle mat data of seven elite dressage riders were used to measure minimal and maximal angles and range of motion (ROM) for the pelvic, trunk and head segments, the angle between pelvis and trunk segments, phase-shift between pitching motions of pelvis and trunk, and pelvic translation relative to the saddle. Non-parametric statistical tests compared variables between the two rider postures. In the passive rider posture the pelvis, trunk and head showed two pitching cycles per stride. Maximal posterior and anterior pelvic rotation occurred, respectively, early and late in the horse’s diagonal stance phase. Compared with pelvic movements, trunk movements were slightly delayed and head movements were out-of-phase. In the active rider posture the pelvis and trunk pitched further posteriorly throughout the stride. Most of the riders showed similar sagittal plane movements of the axial body segments but with some notable individual variations.