|
Cassiat, G., Pourcelot, P., Tavernier, L., Geiger, D., Denoix, J. M., & Degueurce, D. (2004). Influence of individual competition level on back kinematics of horses jumping a vertical fence. Equine Vet J, 36(8), 748–753.
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.
|
|
|
Fruehwirth, B., Peham, C., Scheidl, M., & Schobesberger, H. (2004). Evaluation of pressure distribution under an English saddle at walk, trot and canter. Equine Vet J, 36(8), 754–757.
Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Basic information about the influence of a rider on the equine back is currently lacking. HYPOTHESIS: That pressure distribution under a saddle is different between the walk, trot and canter. METHODS: Twelve horses without clinical signs of back pain were ridden. At least 6 motion cycles at walk, trot and canter were measured kinematically. Using a saddle pad, the pressure distribution was recorded. The maximum overall force (MOF) and centre of pressure (COP) were calculated. The range of back movement was determined from a marker placed on the withers. RESULTS: MOF and COP showed a consistent time pattern in each gait. MOF was 12.1 +/- 1.2 and 243 +/- 4.6 N/kg at walk and trot, respectively, in the ridden horse. In the unridden horse MOF was 172.7 +/- 11.8 N (walk) and 302.4 +/- 33.9 N (trot). At ridden canter, MOF was 27.2 +/- 4.4 N/kg. The range of motion of the back of the ridden horse was significantly lower compared to the unridden, saddled horse. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Analyses may help quantitative and objective evaluation of the interaction between rider and horse as mediated through the saddle. The information presented is therefore of importance to riders, saddlers and equine clinicians. With the technique used in this study, style, skill and training level of different riders can be quantified, which would give the opportunity to detect potentially harmful influences and create opportunities for improvement.
|
|
|
Johnston, C., Holm, K. R., Erichsen, C., Eksell, P., & Drevemo, S. (2004). Kinematic evaluation of the back in fully functioning riding horses. Equine Vet J, 36(6), 495–498.
Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Clinical history and examination are important features in diagnosis of equine back dysfunction. However, interpretation is subjective and therefore may vary substantially. OBJECTIVES: To establish a clinical tool to objectively evaluate the function of the equine back, in the form of a database on the kinematics of the back at the walk and trot in fully functioning riding horses. METHODS: Thirty-three fully functioning riding horses walked and trotted on a treadmill. Morphometrics and kinematics were tested for correlations to age, height, weight and stride length, and differences between gender (geldings and mares) and use (dressage and showjumping). RESULTS: A database for range of movement and symmetry of movement for extension and flexion, lateral bending, lateral excursion and axial rotation was presented. Symmetry values were very high for all variables. Significant differences were observed in use and gender. Age was negatively correlated to extension and flexion of the thoracolumbar junction. CONCLUSIONS: Interrelationships between use, gender and age to conformation and movement were established. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: The database provides a basis for objective reference for diagnosis, therapy and rehabilitation of clinical cases of back dysfunction.
|
|
|
Rhodin, M., Johnston, C., Holm, K. R., Wennerstrand, J., & Drevemo, S. (2005). The influence of head and neck position on kinematics of the back in riding horses at the walk and trot. Equine Vet J, 37(1), 7–11.
Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: A common opinion among riders and in the literature is that the positioning of the head and neck influences the back of the horse, but this has not yet been measured objectively. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of head and neck position on the kinematics of the back in riding horses. METHODS: Eight Warmblood riding horses in regular work were studied on a treadmill at walk and trot with the head and neck in 3 different predetermined positions achieved by side reins attached to the bit and to an anticast roller. The 3-dimensional movement of the thoracolumbar spine was measured from the position of skin-fixed markers recorded by infrared videocameras. RESULTS: Head and neck position influenced the movements of the back, especially at the walk. When the head was fixed in a high position at the walk, the flexion-extension movement and lateral bending of the lumbar back, as well as the axial rotation, were significantly reduced when compared to movements with the head free or in a low position. At walk, head and neck position also significantly influenced stride length, which was shortest with the head in a high position. At trot, the stride length was independent of head position. CONCLUSIONS: Restricting and restraining the position and movement of the head and neck alters the movement of the back and stride characteristics. With the head and neck in a high position stride length and flexion and extension of the caudal back were significantly reduced. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Use of side reins in training and rehabilitation programmes should be used with an understanding of the possible effects on the horse's back.
|
|
|
Wennerstrand, J., Johnston, C., Roethlisberger-Holm, K., Erichsen, C., Eksell, P., & Drevemo, S. (2004). Kinematic evaluation of the back in the sport horse with back pain. Equine Vet J, 36(8), 707–711.
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.
|
|
|
Winkelmayr, B., Peham, C., Fruhwirth, B., Licka, T., & Scheidl, M. (2006). Evaluation of the force acting on the back of the horse with an English saddle and a side saddle at walk, trot and canter. Equine Vet J Suppl, (36), 406–410.
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.
|
|