Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To quantify variation in the jumping technique within and among young horses with little jumping experience, establish relationships between kinetic and kinematic variables, and identify a limited set of variables characteristic for detecting differences in jumping performance among horses. ANIMALS: Fifteen 4-year-old Dutch Warmblood horses. PROCEDURE: The horses were raised under standardized conditions and trained in accordance with a fixed protocol for a short period. Subsequently, horses were analyzed kinematically during free jumping over a fence with a height of 1.05 m. RESULTS: Within-horse variation in all variables that quantified jumping technique was smaller than variation among horses. However, some horses had less variation than others. Height of the center of gravity (CG) at the apex of the jump ranged from 1.80 to 2.01 m among horses; this variation could be explained by the variation in vertical velocity of the CG at takeoff (r, 0.78). Horses that had higher vertical velocity at takeoff left the ground and landed again farther from the fence, had shorter push-off phases for the forelimbs and hind limbs, and generated greater vertical acceleration of the CG primarily during the hind limb push-off. However, all horses cleared the fence successfully, independent of jumping technique. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Each horse had its own jumping technique. Differences among techniques were characterized by variations in the vertical velocity of the CG at takeoff. It must be determined whether jumping performance later in life can be predicted from observing free jumps of young horses.

Abstract: Reasons for performing study: Assessing back movement is an important part of clinical examination in the horse and objective assessment tools allow for evaluating success of treatment. Objectives: Accuracy and consistency of inertial sensor measurements for quantification of back movement and movement symmetry during over ground locomotion were assessed; sensor measurements were compared to optical motion capture (mocap) and consistency of measurements focusing on movement symmetry was measured. Methods: Six nonlame horses were trotted in hand with synchronised mocap and inertial sensor data collection (landmarks: T6, T10, T13, L1 and S3). Inertial sensor data were processed using published methods and symmetry of dorsoventral displacement was assessed based on energy ratio, a Fourier based symmetry measure. Limits of agreement were calculated and visualised to compare mocap and sensor data. Consistency of sensor measurements was assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients and linear regression to investigate the effect of speed on movement symmetry. Results: Dorsoventral and mediolateral sensor displacement was observed to lie within ± 4–5 mm (± 2 s.d., 9–28% of movement amplitude) and energy ratio to lie within ± 0.03 of mocap data. High levels of correlation were found between strides and trials (0.86–1.0) for each horse and each sensor and variability of symmetry was lowest for T13 followed by T10, T6, L1 and S3 with no significant effect of speed at T6, T10 and T13. Conclusions: Inertial sensor displacement and symmetry data showed acceptable accuracy and good levels of consistency for back movement. The small mediolateral movement amplitude means that changes of <25% in mediolateral amplitude (also unlikely to be detected by visual assessment) may go undetected. New sensor generations with improved sensor sensitivity and ease of use of equipment indicate good potential for use in a field situation.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Earlier studies have developed a clinical tool to evaluate objectively the function of the equine back. The ability to differentiate horses with back pain from asymptomatic, fully functioning horses using kinematic measures from this tool has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To compare the kinematics of the back at walk and trot in riding horses with back dysfunction to the same parameters in asymptomatic sport horses. METHODS: The kinematics of the back in 12 horses with impaired performance and back pain were studied at walk and trot on a treadmill. Data were captured for 10 sees at 240 Hz. Range of movement (ROM) and intravertebral pattern symmetry of movement for flexion and extension (FE), lateral bending (LB) and axial rotation (AR) were derived from angular motion pattern data and the results compared to an earlier established database on asymptomatic riding horses. RESULTS: At walk, horses with back dysfunction had a ROM smaller for dorsoventral FE in the caudal thoracic region (T13 = 7.50 degrees, T17 = 7.71 degrees; P<0.05), greater for LB at T13 (8.13 degrees; P<0.001) and smaller for AR of the pelvis (10.97 degrees; P<0.05) compared to asymptomatic horses (FE-T13 = 8.28 degrees, FE-T17 = 8.49 degrees, LB-T13 = 6.34 degrees, AR-pelvis = 12.77 degrees). At trot, dysfunctional horses had a smaller (P<0.05) ROM for FE at the thoracic lumbar junction (T17 = 2.46 degrees, L1 = 2.60 degrees) compared to asymptomatic horses (FE-T17 = 3.07 degrees, FE-L1 = 3.12 degrees). CONCLUSIONS: The objective measurement technique can detect differences between back kinematics in riding horses with signs of back dysfunction and asymptomatic horses. The clinical manifestation of back pain results in diminished flexion/extension movement at or near the thoracic lumbar junction. However, before applying the method more extensively in practice it is necessary to evaluate it further, including measurements of patients whose diagnoses can be confirmed and long-term follow-ups of back patients after treatment. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Since the objective measurement technique can detect small movement differences in back kinematics, it should help to clinically describe and, importantly, objectively detect horses with back pain and dysfunction.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Little is known in quantitative terms about the influence of different head-neck positions (HNPs) on the loading pattern of the locomotor apparatus. Therefore it is difficult to predict whether a specific riding technique is beneficial for the horse or if it may increase the risk for injury. OBJECTIVE: To improve the understanding of forelimb-hindlimb balance and its underlying temporal changes in relation to different head and neck positions. METHODS: Vertical ground reaction force and time parameters of each limb were measured in 7 high level dressage horses while being ridden at walk and trot on an instrumented treadmill in 6 predetermined HNPs: HNP1 – free, unrestrained with loose reins; HNP2 – neck raised, bridge of the nose in front of the vertical; HNP3 – neck raised, bridge of the nose behind the vertical; HNP4 – neck lowered and flexed, bridge of the nose considerably behind the vertical; HNP5 – neck extremely elevated and bridge of the nose considerably in front of the vertical; HNP6 – neck and head extended forward and downward. Positions were judged by a qualified dressage judge. HNPs were assessed by comparing the data to a velocity-matched reference HNP (HNP2). Differences were tested using paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test (P<0.05). RESULTS: At the walk, stride duration and overreach distance increased in HNP1, but decreased in HNP3 and HNP5. Stride impulse was shifted to the forehand in HNP1 and HNP6, but shifted to the hindquarters in HNP5. At the trot, stride duration increased in HNP4 and HNP5. Overreach distance was shorter in HNP4. Stride impulse shifted to the hindquarters in HNP5. In HNP1 peak forces decreased in the forelimbs; in HNP5 peak forces increased in fore- and hindlimbs. CONCLUSIONS: HNP5 had the biggest impact on limb timing and load distribution and behaved inversely to HNP1 and HNP6. Shortening of forelimb stance duration in HNP5 increased peak forces although the percentage of stride impulse carried by the forelimbs decreased. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: An extremely high HNP affects functionality much more than an extremely low neck.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: The costs and investments required for the purchase and training of showjumpers justify the need to find selection means for jumping horses. Use of objective kinematic criteria correlated to jumping ability could be helpful for this assessment. OBJECTIVES: To compare back kinematics between 2 groups of horses of different competition levels (Group 1, competing at high level; Group 2 competing at low level) while free jumping over a 1 m vertical fence. METHODS: Three-dimensional recordings were performed using 2 panning cameras. Kinematic parameters of the withers and tuber sacrale (vertical displacement, vertical and horizontal velocities), backline inclination and flexion-extension motion of the 3 main dorsal segments (thoracic, thoracolumbar and lumbosacral) were analysed. RESULTS: Group 2 horses had a lower displacement of their withers and tuber sacrale from the end of the last approach stride until the first departure stride (P<0.05). As a result, they increased the flexion of their thoracolumbar and lumbosacral junctions during the hindlimb swing phase before take-off (P<0.05). However, withers and tuber sacrale velocities were slightly modified. Group 1 horses pitched their backline less forward during the forelimb stance phase before take-off and straightened it more after landing (P<0.05), probably indicating a more efficient strutting action of their forelimbs. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Because significant differences in back motion were found between good and poor jumpers when jumping a 1 m high fence, criteria based on certain back kinematics can be developed that may help in the selection of talented showjumpers.