Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Serious injuries to horses and riders in horse trials (HT) and three-day events (3DE) are usually associated with falls of horses, which invariably involve falls of the riders. Many potential causes for these falls have been discussed. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this case-control study was to investigate the risk factors for horse falls on the cross-country phase of horse trials and three-day events. METHODS: Using retrospective data, significant risk factors identified with unvariable analysis (P value <0.2) were entered into a multivariable logistic regression model. Significant risk factors (P value <0.05) were included in the final model. RESULTS: It was revealed that a number of course, obstacle and rider variables were significantly and independently associated with the risk of falling. Falling was associated with obstacles sited downhill (Odds ratio [OR] 8.41) and with obstacles with ditches in front (OR = 5.77). CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between course variables and the risk of falling was characterised and showed a significantly increased risk with increasing numbers of jumps on the course and for jumping efforts later in the course. In contrast, after allowing for the total number of obstacles on the course, an increase in the total number of jumping efforts appeared to have a protective effect. A later cross-country start time was associated with a decreased risk of a horse fall. Amateur event riders were approximately 20 times more likely to fall than professional riders. POTENTIAL CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study has identified a number of risk factors associated with horse falls and highlights areas that can be altered to improve safety in cross-country competitions.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Fatalities resulting from horse falls occurring during the cross-country phase of eventing competitions initiated epidemiological investigation of the risk factors associated with horse falls. OBJECTIVES: To identify variables that increased or decreased the risk of a horse fall during the cross-country phase of an eventing competition. METHODS: Data were collected from randomly selected British Eventing competitions held in Great Britain during 2001 and 2002. Data were obtained for 173 cases (jumping efforts resulting in a fall of the horse-and-rider partnership) and 503 matched controls (jumping efforts not resulting in a fall). The risk of falling was modelled using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: An increased risk of a horse fall was associated with jumping into or out of water; taking off from good-to-soft, soft or heavy ground; fences with a drop landing; nonangled fences with a spread > or =2 m; and angled fences. Other risk factors included riders who knew that they were in the lead within the competition before the cross-country phase; an inappropriate speed of approach to the fence (too fast or too slow); horse-and-rider partnerships that had not incurred refusals at earlier fences; and riders who received cross-country tuition. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified modifiable course- and fence-level risk factors for horse falls during the cross-country phase of eventing competitions. The risk of horse and rider injury at eventing competitions should be reduced by 3 simple measures; maintaining good to firm take-off surfaces at fences, reducing the base spread of fences to <2 m and reducing the use of fences at which horses are required to jump into or out of water. Risk reduction arising from course and fence modification needs to be confirmed by intervention studies. Potential relevance: Knowledge of factors that increase or decrease the risk of a horse fall can be used by UK governing bodies of the sport to reduce the risk of horse falls on the cross-country phase of eventing competitions, and reduce the risk of horse and rider injuries and fatalities. As one in 3 horses that fall injure themselves and one in 100 horse falls results in fatality to the horse, we suggest that immediate consideration is given to these recommendations.

Abstract: Human relationships or interactions with horses have varied throughout history depending on human needs, but it is horses' ability to carry a human individual that has had perhaps the greatest impact on their relationship with man. Despite our long association with the horse, there have been few studies on human-horse relationships. There is little historical evidence on individual relationships with horses but indications of strong human-horse relationships have been noted in mounted societies, such as North American Plains Indians. Riding a horse has traditionally been associated with power, and was reserved for the ruling elite in many areas. Demographic data suggest that human relationships with horses may have changed in recent times. Although the lack of land and the relatively high cost of horse care may reduce the possibility of ownership for many people, the availability of riding establishments and increases in leisure time mean that riding is no longer restricted to the upper classes. There is a wide range in type and intensity of potential interactions with horses, indicating that human-horse relationships are likely to vary considerably. Some people appear to sacrifice a great deal in order to own a horse. However, the motivation behind these activities and the process by which an individual assesses personal costs of ownership versus their perceived benefits remains to be studied. Future research should focus on characterising the human-horse relationship, and the degree of individual and cultural variation. A greater understanding of horse owner perceptions of 'costs' versus 'benefits' may also increase our understanding of the relationship and the economic importance of horses in society.

Abstract: Criteria used to measure performance, environmental factors that influence performance and estimates of heritability are needed to estimate genetic differences. Published heritability estimates of various measures of performance in the horse are summarized. The average heritability estimates of pulling ability and cutting ability are .25 and .04, respectively. Heritability estimates are .18, .19 and .17 for log of earnings from jumping, 3-day event and dressage performance, respectively. Heritability estimates of performance rates, log of earnings, earnings, handicap weight, best handicap weight, time and best time for the Thoroughbred are .55, .49, .09, .49, .33, .15 and .23, respectively. Heritability estimates of log of earnings, earnings, time and best time for the trotter are .41, .20, .32, and .25, respectively. The heritability estimate of best time for the pacer is .23. The effectiveness of selection will depend on which performance trait is to be improved.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: In many equestrian activities a specific position of head and/or neck is required that is dissimilar to the natural position. There is controversy about the effects of these positions on locomotion pattern, but few quantitative data are available. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the effects of 5 different head and neck positions on thoracolumbar kinematics of the horse. METHODS: Kinematics of 7 high level dressage horses were measured walking and trotting on an instrumented treadmill with the head and neck in the following positions: HNP2 = neck raised, bridge of the nose in front of the vertical; HNP3 = as HNP2 with bridge of the nose behind the vertical; HNP4 = head and neck lowered, nose behind the vertical; HNP5 = head and neck in extreme high position; HNP6 = head and neck forward and downward. HNP1 was a speed-matched control (head and neck unrestrained). RESULTS: The head and neck positions affected only the flexion-extension motion. The positions in which the neck was extended (HNP2, 3, 5) increased extension in the anterior thoracic region, but increased flexion in the posterior thoracic and lumbar region. For HNP4 the pattern was the opposite. Positions 2, 3 and 5 reduced the flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) while HNP4 increased it. HNP5 was the only position that negatively affected intravertebral pattern symmetry and reduced hindlimb protraction. The stride length was significantly reduced at walk in positions 2, 3, 4 and 5. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant influence of head/neck position on back kinematics. Elevated head and neck induce extension in the thoracic region and flexion in the lumbar region; besides reducing the sagittal range of motion. Lowered head and neck produces the opposite. A very high position of the head and neck seems to disturb normal kinematics. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: This study provides quantitative data on the effect of head/neck positions on thoracolumbar motion and may help in discussions on the ethical acceptability of some training methods.