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: 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.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Sandy soil is often mentioned as a risk factor in the development of sand-related gastrointestinal disease (SGID) in the horse. There are other variables, but few studies confirm any of these. OBJECTIVE: To investigate soil type, pasture quality, feeding practice in the paddock, age, sex and body condition score as risk factors for sand intake in the horse. METHODS: Faeces were collected from 211 Icelandic horses on 19 different studs in Denmark together with soil samples and other potential risk factors. Sand content in faeces determined by a sand sedimentation test was interpreted as evidence of sand intake. Soil types were identified by soil analysis and significance of the data was tested using logistic analysis. RESULTS: Of horses included in the study, 56.4% showed sand in the faeces and 5.7% had more than 5 mm sand as quantified by the rectal sleeve sedimentation test. Soil type had no significant effect when tested as main effect, but there was interaction between soil type and pasture quality. Significant interactions were also found between paddock feeding practice and pasture quality. CONCLUSION: To evaluate the risk of sand intake it is important to consider 3 variables: soil type, pasture quality and feeding practice. Pasture quality was identified as a risk factor of both short and long grass in combination with sandy soil, while clay soil had the lowest risk in these combinations. Feeding practice in the paddock revealed feeding directly on the ground to be a risk factor when there was short (1-5 cm) or no grass. Also, no feeding outdoors increased the risk on pastures with short grass, while this had no effect in paddocks with no grass. More than 50% of all horses investigated in this study had sand in the faeces. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: The identification of risk factors is an important step towards prevention of SGID. Further research is necessary to determine why some horses exhibit more than 5 mm sand in the sedimentation test and whether this is correlated with geophagic behaviour.

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: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: The ability to shorten the duration of sedation would potentially improve safety and utility of detomidine. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of tolazoline and atipamezole after detomidine sedation. HYPOTHESIS: Administration of tolazoline or atipamezole would not affect detomidine sedation. METHODS: In a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, descriptive study, detomidine (0.02 mg/kg bwt i.v.) was administered to 6 mature horses on 4 separate occasions. Twenty-five mins later, each horse received one of 4 treatments: Group 1 saline (0.9% i.v.) as a placebo control; Group 2 atipamezole (0.05 mg/kg bwt i.v.); Group 3 atipamezole (0.1 mg/kg bwt i.v.); and Group 4 tolazoline (4.0 mg/kg bwt i.v.). Sedation, muscle relaxation and ataxia were scored by 3 independent observers at 9 time points. Horses were led through an obstacle course at 7 time points. Course completion time was recorded and the ability of the horse to traverse the course was scored by 3 independent observers. Horses were videotaped before, during and after each trip through the obstacle course. RESULTS: Atipamezole and tolazoline administration incompletely antagonised the effects of detomidine, but the time course to recovery was shortened. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Single bolus administration of atipamezole or tolazoline produced partial reversal of detomidine sedation and may be useful for minimising detomidine sedation.