Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Behavioural tests as well as observers' ratings have been used to study horses' temperament. However, the relationship between the ratings and the responses in behavioural tests has not yet been studied in detail. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to examine this relationship between ratings and responses. METHODS: Eighteen mature Swedish Warmblood horses were subjected to 2 behavioural tests, one relating to novelty (novel object test) and one to handling (handling test). Subsequently, 16 of these horses were ridden by 16 equally experienced students, having no former experience with the horses. Immediately after each ride, the students scored the horse for 10 temperamental traits using a line rating method. RESULTS: It was shown that for each temperamental trait all 16 riders agreed on the ranking of the horses (0.212<W<0.505, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Correlations between behavioural and heart rate variables in the behavioural tests revealed that horses with a high level of locomotion or much restlessness behaviour exhibited high mean heart rate and low heart rate variability. In particular, heart rate variables in the behavioural tests were found to correlate with riders' rating scores. Furthermore, the underlying components of the handling test, retrieved with a principal component analysis (PCA) correlated with riders' rating scores while the underlying components of the novel object test did not. POTENTIAL CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It is concluded that it is possible for a large panel of assessors to agree upon a horse's temperament and that objective measures from behavioural tests correlate significantly with temperamental traits assessed by a panel of assessors.

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: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: No data exist on the GRF-kinematics relation due to changes caused by equestrian interventions. HYPOTHESIS: Through the judicious use of draw reins the rider can influence the kinematics of the horse to meet stated goals of dressage training. Relating the results to previously published kinetic data of the same experiment implies a possible relationship between kinetics and kinematics. METHODS: The kinematics of 8 sound Swedish Warmblood horses were measured whilst the horses were being ridden with and without draw reins. Three conditions were evaluated: 1) draw reins only (DR), 2) combination of draw reins and normal reins (NR+DR) and 3) normal reins only (NR). RESULTS: Head and neck angles were significantly decreased by the draw rein but 4-5 times more so for DR when with NR+DR. The forelimb position at hoof lift-off was significantly more caudal with DR. In the hind limb the hip joint extended more quickly and the hock joint flexed more with NR+DR than with NR. Compared to DR the hip joint angular pattern was not significantly different, but the pelvis was more horizontal. CONCLUSION: Riding with a draw rein can have significant influence on the kinematics of the horse. Some of the observed changes can be coupled to changes in kinetics. The hock joint angle seems to be a fairly reliable indicator of load on the hind limb and the angle of femur appears important for hind limb propulsion, when considered in conjunction with the orientation of the pelvis. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: These findings are important for riders and trainers, as kinematic changes are what trainers observe. It is thereby important to ascertain which kinematic changes are consistently coupled to changes in kinetics in order for trainers to be able to judge correctly the success of intended goals. Further studies are warranted to validate and confirm suggested relationships between kinetics and kinematics.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Force transmission under an English saddle (ES) at walk, trot and canter is commonly evaluated, but the influence of a side saddle (SS) on the equine back has not been documented. HYPOTHESIS: Force transmission under a SS, with its asymmetric construction, is different from an ES in walk, trot and canter, expressed in maximum overall force (MOF), force in the quarters of the saddle mat, and centre of pressure (COP). The biomechanics of the equine back are different under a SS compared to ES. METHODS: Thirteen horses without clinical signs of back pain ridden in an indoor riding school with both saddles were measured using an electronic saddle sensor pad. Synchronous kinematic measurements were carried out with tracing markers placed along the back in front of (withers, W) and behind the saddle (4th lumbar vertebra, L4). At least 6 motion cycles at walk, trot and canter with both saddles (ES, SS) were measured. Out of the pressure distribution the maximum overall force (MOF) and the location of the centre of pressure (COP) were calculated. RESULTS: Under the SS the centre of pressure was located to the right of the median and slightly caudal compared to the COP under the ES in all gaits. The MOF was significantly different (P<0.01) between saddles. At walk, L4 showed significantly larger (P<0.01) vertical excursions under the ES. Under the SS relative horizontal movement of W was significantly reduced (P<0.01) at trot, and at canter the transversal movement was significantly reduced (P<0.01) . In both trot and canter, no significant differences in the movement of L4 were documented. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: The results demonstrate that the load under a SS creates asymmetric force transmission under the saddle, and also influences back movement. To change the load distribution on the back of horses with potential back pain and as a training variation, a combination of both riding styles is suitable.