Back kinematics of healthy trotting horses during treadmill versus over ground locomotion

Reasons for performing study: Treadmill locomotion is frequently used for training of sport horses, for diagnostic purposes and for research. Identification of the possible biomechanical differences and similarities between the back movement during treadmill (T) and over ground (O) locomotion is essential for the correct interpretation of research results. Objectives: To compare the kinematics of the thoracolumbar vertebral column in treadmill and over ground locomotion in healthy horses. Methods: Six sound Dutch Warmblood horses trotted on a T and O during 10 s at their own preferred velocity (mean ± s.d. 3.6 ± 0.3 m/s T and 3.6 ± 0.1 m/s O), which was the same in both conditions. Kinematics of the vertebral column was captured by infrared cameras using reflective skin markers attached over the spinous processes of selected vertebrae and other locations. Flexion‐extension and lateral bending range of motion (ROM), angular motion pattern (AMP) and intravertebral pattern symmetry (IVPS) of 5 vertebral angles (T6‐T10‐T13, T10‐T13‐T17, T13‐T17‐L1, T17‐L1‐L3 and L1‐L3‐l5) were calculated. Neck angle, linear and temporal stride parameters and protraction‐retraction angles of the limbs were also calculated. Results: The vertical ROM (flexion‐extension) was similar in both conditions, but the horizontal ROM (lateral bending) of the lumbar angles T17‐L1‐L3 and L1‐L3‐L5 was less during T locomotion (mean ± s.d. difference of 1.8 ± 0.6 and 1.7 ± 0.9°, respectively, P>0.05). During O locomotion, the symmetry pattern of the lumbar vertebral angles was diminished from 0.9 to 0.7 (1 = 100% symmetry) indicating increased irregularity of the movement (P>0.05). No differences were found in the basic linear and temporal stride parameters and neck angle. Potential relevance: Vertebral kinematics during treadmill locomotion is not identical to over ground locomotion, but the differences are minor. During treadmill locomotion lumbar motion is less, and caution should be therefore taken when interpreting lumbar kinematics.     

The difference in kinematics of horses walking, trotting and cantering on a flat and banked 10 m circle

Reasons for performing study: Locomotion adaptation mechanisms have been observed in horses, but little information is available in relation to banked and nonbanked curve locomotion, which might be important to optimise training environments. Objectives: To determine if adaptation mechanisms in horses existed when moving on a banked compared to a flat curve and whether adaptation was similar in different gaits. Methods: Eight infrared cameras were positioned on the outside of a 10 m lungeing circle and calibrated. Retroreflective markers were used to define left and right metacarpus (McIII) and proximal phalanges (P1), metatarsus (MtIII), head and sacrum. Data were recorded at 308 Hz from 6 horses lunged at walk, trot and canter on a flat and 10° banked circle in a crossover design. Measurements extracted were speed, stride length, McIII inclination, MtIII inclination, relative body inclination and duty factor. Data were smoothed with a fourth order Butterworth filter with 30 Hz cut‐off. ANOVA was used to determine differences between conditions and limbs. Results: Adaptation mechanisms were influenced by gait. At canter inside forelimb duty factor was significantly longer (P<0.05) on a flat curve compared to a banked curve; at walk this was reversed. McIII inclination, MtIII inclination and relative body inclination were significantly greater (P<0.05) at trot and canter on a flat curve, so more inward tilt was found relative to the bearing surface. Conclusion: Adaptation to curved motion is gait specific. At faster gaits it appears that horses negotiate a banked curve with limb posture closer to body posture and probably with demands on the musculoskeletal system more similar to straight canter.     

The effect of rising and sitting trot on back movements and head‐neck position of the horse

Reason for performing study: During trot, the rider can either rise from the saddle during every stride or remain seated. Rising trot is used frequently because it is widely assumed that it decreases the loading of the equine back. This has, however, not been demonstrated in an objective study. Objective: To determine the effects of rising and sitting trot on the movements of the horse. Hypothesis: Sitting trot has more extending effect on the horse's back than rising trot and also results in a higher head and neck position. Methods: Twelve horses and one rider were used. Kinematic data were captured at trot during over ground locomotion under 3 conditions: unloaded, rising trot and sitting trot. Back movements were calculated using a previously described method with a correction for trunk position. Head‐neck position was expressed as extension and flexion of C1, C3 and C6, and vertical displacement of C1 and the bit. Results: Sitting trot had an overall extending effect on the back of horses when compared to the unloaded situation. In rising trot: the maximal flexion of the back was similar to the unloaded situation, while the maximal extension was similar to sitting trot; lateral bending of the back was larger than during the unloaded situation and sitting trot; and the horses held their heads lower than in the other conditions. The angle of C6 was more flexed in rising than in sitting trot. Conclusions and clinical relevance: The back movement during rising trot showed characteristics of both sitting trot and the unloaded condition. As the same maximal extension of the back is reached during rising and sitting trot, there is no reason to believe that rising trot was less challenging for the back.     

The effects of chiropractic, massage and phenylbutazone on spinal mechanical nociceptive thresholds in horses without clinical signs

REASON FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Common methods used to treat back problems in horses need to be assessed objectively. OBJECTIVES: To measure spinal mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNTs) and evaluate the effects of chiropractic, massage and phenylbutazone, compared with active and inactive control groups. METHODS: Baseline MNTs at 7 sites within the thoracolumbar and sacral regions were measured in 38 healthy mature horses exhibiting no clinical signs of lumbar pain. Horses were assigned to one of 3 treatment groups: instrument-assisted chiropractic treatment, therapeutic massage and phenylbutazone; or 2 control groups: ridden exercise (active control) or routine paddock turnout with no ridden exercise (inactive control). MNT measurements were repeated at 1, 3 and 7 days post treatment. The percentage change from baseline MNT values was calculated within groups. RESULTS: On Day 7, the median MNT had increased by 27, 12 and 8% in the chiropractic, massage and phenylbutazone groups, respectively. MNT changes of <1% were seen within the active and inactive control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic treatment and massage therapy increased spinal MNTs within horses not exhibiting signs of lumbar pain. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Pressure algometry provides an objective tool to evaluate the effects of commonly used, but currently unproven treatment modalities on spinal MNTs. Future studies need to evaluate combined treatment effects and longer-term MNT changes in horses with documented back pain.     

The effect of different head and neck positions on the caudal back and hindlimb kinematics in the elite dressage horse at trot

Reasons for performing study: Dressage involves training of the horse with the head and neck placed in a position defined by the rider. The best position for dressage training is currently under debate among riders and trainers, but there are few scientific data available to confirm or disprove the different views. Objective: To evaluate the kinematic effects of different head and neck positions (HNPs) in elite dressage horses ridden at trot. Methods: Seven high‐level dressage horses were subjected to kinetic and kinematic measurements when ridden on a treadmill with the head and neck in 5 different positions. Results: Compared to free trot on loose reins the HNP desired for collected trot at dressage competitions increased T6 vertical excursion, increased sacral flexion and decreased limb retraction after lift‐off. Further increasing head or head and neck flexion caused few additional changes while an extremely elevated neck position increased hindlimb flexion and lumbar back extension during stance, increased hindlimb flexion during swing and further increased trunk vertical excursion. Conclusions: The movements of the horse are significantly different when ridden on loose reins compared to the position used in collected trot. The exact degree of neck flexion is, however, not consistently correlated to the movements of the horse's limbs and trunk at collected trot. An extremely elevated neck position can produce some effects commonly associated with increased degree of collection, but the increased back extension observed with this position may place the horse at risk of injury if ridden in this position for a prolonged period. Potential relevance: Head and neck positions influence significantly the kinematics of the ridden horse. It is important for riders and trainers to be aware of these effects in dressage training.     

Clinical progress in the diagnosis of thoracolumbar problems in horses

It is well known that a painful back can be responsible for loss of performance in horses. Veterinary examination of the sore back used to be limited to manual palpation with diagnosis confirmed empirically by response to treatment. Today, due to advances in imaging, there are multiple methods for evaluating the pathology of the horse's thoracolumbar (TL) spine. Radiography, ultrasonography, nuclear scintigraphy, thermography and algometry all play a part in developing a better understanding of equine TL problems. Despite this progress, definitive diagnosis can still be problematic. There is a lack of objectivity in understanding the implications of the pathology detected and its effect on the horse. It is difficult to determine the degree of pain experienced by individual horses and how that interferes with their performance and welfare. This paper emphasises the importance of a systematic clinical examination to identify the presence of pain that can be supported by recognition of pathology using a range of diagnostic aids. These will also be reviewed to assist the clinician in understanding the tools available to evaluate a horse with a sore back.     

Kinetics and kinematics of the passage

Reasons for performing study: The load acting on the limbs and the load distribution between fore‐ and hindlimbs while performing specific dressage exercises lack objective assessment. Hypothesis: The greater a horse's level of collection, the more load is shifted to the rear and that during the passage the vertical load on the limbs increases in relation to the accentuated vertical movement of the centre of mass. Methods: Back and limb kinematics, vertical ground reaction force and time parameters of each limb were measured in 6 Grand Prix dressage horses performing on an instrumented treadmill at the trot and the passage. Horses were ridden by their own professional rider. Results: At the passage, horses moved at a slower speed (?43.2%), with a lower stride frequency (?23.6%) and, therefore, higher stride impulses (+31.0%). Relative stance duration of fore‐ and hindlimbs and suspension duration remained unchanged. While at the trot the diagonal limbs impacted almost simultaneously, the hindlimbs always impacted first at the passage; the time dissociation between landing and lift‐off remained unchanged. Because of the prolonged stride duration, stride impulse and consequently limb impulses were higher at the passage in the fore‐ as well as in the hindlimbs (+24.8% and +39.9%, respectively). Within the diagonal limb pair, load was shifted from the forehand to the hindquarters (percentage stride impulse carried by the forehand ?4.8%). Despite the higher impulses, peak vertical forces in the fore‐ and hindlimbs remained unchanged because of the prolonged absolute stance durations in fore‐ and hindlimbs (+28.1% and +32.2%, respectively). Conclusions: Based on the intralimb timing, the passage closely resembles the trot. Compared to other head‐neck positions, the higher degree of collection resulted in a pronounced shift in impulse towards the hindquarters. Despite the higher limb impulses, peak forces acting on the limbs were similar to those observed at the trot. Potential clinical relevance: An understanding of load distribution between fore‐ and hindlimbs in relation to different riding techniques is crucial to prevent wear‐and‐tear on the locomotor apparatus.     

Ultrasound-guided periarticular injections of the sacroiliac region in horses: a cadaveric study

REASON FOR PERFORMING STUDY: The traditional techniques for injection of the sacroiliac (SI) region are based on external landmarks. Because of the depth of the SI joint and pathological modifications, SI injections are sometimes challenging in horses. HYPOTHESIS: An ultrasound-guided techniques would allow placement of the needle without depending on external landmarks. METHODS: Fourteen pelvic specimens were isolated from mature horses. A 20 cm bent spinal needle was positioned with ultrasonographic guidance under both iliac wings aiming for SI joints using 5 approaches: cranial, craniomedial, medial and 2 caudal approaches. The length of needle inserted was recorded and 2 ml of latex injected. The distance from latex to the closest sacral articular margin, the contact between latex and the SI interosseous ligament or the contact with the neurovascular structures emerging from the greater sciatic foramen were recorded at the time of dissection. RESULTS: Latex was identified under the iliac wing in all injections but one. The distance from the latex to the closest sacral articular margin was significantly shorter (P = 0.02) for the 2 caudal approaches compared to the cranial, craniomedial and medial approaches. Contact between latex and the SI interosseous ligament was significantly more frequent (P = 0.01) with the cranial, craniomedial and medial approaches (38/73) compared to the caudal approaches (1/24). Contact between latex and the neurovascular structures was significantly less frequent (P = 0.005) for the cranial and craniomedial approaches (0/47) compared to the medial and caudal approaches (8/60). Four erratic injections were encountered. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonographic guidance allowed the needle to engage under the iliac wing without being dependent on external landmarks. The caudal approaches allowed deposition of liquid extremely close to the SI joint although retroperitoneal injections occurred. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Each approach has advantages/drawbacks that could be favoured for selected purposes, but additional work is required to evaluate them on clinical cases.     

The relationship between range of motion of lumbosacral flexion‐extension and canter velocity of horses on a treadmill

Reasons for performing study: Research into kinematics of the healthy equine back, has been performed in the walk and trot. This study focuses on back kinematics during canter, over a range of velocities. Flexion extension (FE) movements in canter are greatest in the lumbosacral (LS) region. Previous research has focused on canter velocity of 7 m/s; therefore quantification of LS kinematics at varying velocities is required to understand LS functions in equine locomotion. Hypothesis: Range of flexion‐extension movement through the lumbosacral joint increases with increasing velocity. Methods: Six Thoroughbred horses (mean age 9.6 years) cantered on treadmill at 4 velocities (6.0, 6.5, 7.0 and 8.0 m/s, respectively). Reflective markers were placed over the 5th lumbar vertebra (L5), the lumbosacral junction (LS) and the 3rd sacral vertebra (S3). Lumbosacral angle (LS) was defined as the angle formed between L5, LS and S3. Flexion‐extension (FE) range of motion (ROM) was analysed using a 2 camera, 3D motion capture system ProReflex¹. Linear regression was used to determine strengths of relationships between speed of canter and lumbosacral FE movements. Results: Range of FE ROM seen at the lumbosacral joint increased linearly with speed. FE ROM ranged 6.1°± 1.9 at 6 m/s, 6.3°± 1.9 at 6.5 m/s, 6.6°± 1.9 at 7 m/s and 7.2°± 1.9 at 8 m/s. Linear regression showed positive associations between speed and LS FE range of motion (r²= 0.993; P = 0.003). Conclusions and potential relevance: Results show linear relationships between LS FE movements and submaximal canter velocities. These results provide information on the LS joint at canter. Understanding the effects of velocity on the back of healthy horses may aid our understanding of the demands placed on this joint in sport horses at this gait.     

Effect of topical 1% tropicamide on Schirmer tear test results in clinically normal horses

Objective  To observe the effect of topical 1% tropicamide on equine tear production as measured by Schirmer I tear test.
Materials and methods  Fourteen adult horses received one drop of 1% tropicamide ophthalmic solution in one eye and the opposite eye served as the control. The tear production in both eyes was tested at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 24 h after 1% tropicamide administration.
Results  Measurements made 1 h after treatment revealed a significant reduction in Schirmer tear test values in tropicamide treated eyes ( P  = 0.002). The observed decrease in tear production was maintained up to 4 h after treatment ( P  = 0.002). Although tropicamide-induced decrease in STT values was observed in the treated eyes, the contralateral eyes did not show significant changes in Schirmer tear test results.
Conclusion  Single dose of topical 1% tropicamide resulted in statistically significant reduction in Schirmer tear test values in clinically normal horses.     

Recognition and quantification of pain in horses: A tutorial review

Pain management is dependent on the quality of the pain evaluation. Ideally, pain evaluation is objective, pain‐specific and easily incorporated into a busy equine clinic. This paper reviews the existing knowledge base regarding the identification and quantification of pain in horses. Behavioural indicators of pain in horses in the context of normal equine behaviour, as well as various physiological parameters potentially useful for pain evaluation, are discussed. Areas where knowledge is sparse are identified and a new equine pain scale based on results from all reviewed papers is proposed. Finally, the most important considerations in relation to the implementation of a pain scale in a hospital setting are discussed.