Dataset Information

Differences in equine spinal kinematics between straight line and circle in trot.

ABSTRACT: Work on curved tracks, e.g. on circles, is commonplace within all forms of horse training. Horse movements in circles are naturally asymmetric, including the load distribution between inner and outer limbs. Within equestrian dressage the horse is expected to bend the back laterally to follow the circle, but this has never been studied scientifically. In the current study 12 horses were measured (optical motion capture, 100 Hz) trotting on left and right circles and on the straight without rider (soft surface). Data from markers placed along the spine indicated increased lateral bending to the inside (e.g. left bending on the left circle) of the thoracolumbar back (difference left circle vs. straight - 3.75°; right circle + 3.61°) and the neck (left - 5.23°; right + 4.80° vs. straight). Lateral bending ROM increased on the circle (+ 0.87° and + 0.62°). Individual variation in straight-circle differences was evident, but each horse was generally consistent over multiple trials. Differences in back movements between circle and straight were generally small and may or may not be visible, but accompanying changes in muscle activity and limb movements may add to the visual impression.

SUBMITTER: Bystrom A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8213771 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Differences in equine spinal kinematics between straight line and circle in trot.

Byström A A Hardeman A M AM Serra Bragança F M FM Roepstorff L L Swagemakers J H JH van Weeren P R PR Egenvall A A

Scientific reports 20210618 1

Work on curved tracks, e.g. on circles, is commonplace within all forms of horse training. Horse movements in circles are naturally asymmetric, including the load distribution between inner and outer limbs. Within equestrian dressage the horse is expected to bend the back laterally to follow the circle, but this has never been studied scientifically. In the current study 12 horses were measured (optical motion capture, 100 Hz) trotting on left and right circles and on the straight without rider ...[more]

PMID: 34145339

Similar Datasets

Project description:Clinical assessment of spinal motion in horses is part of many routine clinical exams but remains highly subjective. A prerequisite for the quantification of spinal motion is the assessment of the expected normal range of motion and variability of back kinematics. The aim of this study was to objectively quantify spinal kinematics and between -measurement, -surface and -day variation in owner-sound horses. In an observational study, twelve owner-sound horses were trotted 12 times on four different paths (hard/soft straight line, soft lunge left and right). Measurements were divided over three days, with five repetitions on day one and two, and two repetitions on day three (recheck) which occurred 28-55 days later. Optical motion capture was used to collect kinematic data. Elements of the outcome were: 1) Ranges of Motion (ROM) with confidence intervals per path and surface, 2) a variability model to calculate between-measurement variation and test the effect of time, surface and path, 3) intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to determine repeatability. ROM was lowest on the hard straight line. Cervical lateral bending was doubled on the left compared to the right lunge. Mean variation for the flexion-extension and lateral bending of the whole back were 0.8 and 1 degrees. Pelvic motion showed a variation of 1.0 (pitch), 0.7 (yaw) and 1.3 (roll) degrees. For these five parameters, a tendency for more variation on the hard surface and reduced variation with increased repetitions was observed. More variation was seen on the recheck (p<0.001). ICC values for pelvic rotations were between 0.76 and 0.93, for the whole back flexion-extension and lateral bending between 0.51 and 0.91. Between-horse variation was substantially higher than within-horse variation. In conclusion, ROM and variation in spinal biomechanics are horse-specific and small, necessitating individual analysis and making subjective and objective clinical assessment of spinal kinematics challenging.

Project description:BackgroundObjective lameness assessment is gaining more importance in a clinical setting, necessitating availability of reference values.ObjectivesTo investigate the between -path, -trial and -day variation, between and within horses, in the locomotion symmetry of horses in regular use that are perceived sound.Study designObservational study with replicated measurement sessions.MethodsTwelve owner-sound horses were trotted on the straight line and on the lunge. Kinematic data were collected from these horses using 3D optical motion capture. Examinations were repeated on 12 occasions over the study which lasted 42 days in total. For each horse, measurements were grouped as five replicates on the first and second measurement days and two replicates on the third measurement day. Between measurement days 2 and 3, every horse had a break from examination of at least 28 days. Previously described symmetry parameters were calculated: RUD and RDD (Range Up/Down Difference; difference in upward/downward movement between right and left halves of a stride); MinDiff and MaxDiff (difference between the two minima/maxima of the movement); HHDswing and HHDstance (Hip Hike Difference-swing/-stance; difference between the upward movement of the tuber coxae during swingphase/stancephase). Data are described by the between-measurement variation for each parameter. A linear mixed model was used to test for the effect of time, surface and path. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to access repeatability.ResultsMean between-measurement variation was (MinDiff, MaxDiff, RUD, RDD): 13, 12, 20, 16 mm (head); 4, 3, 6, 4 mm (withers) and 5, 4, 6, 6 mm (pelvis); (HHDswing, HHDstance): 7 and 7 mm. More between-measurement variation is seen on the first measurement day compared to the second and third measurement days. In general, less variation is seen with increasing number of repetitions. Less between-measurement variation is seen on hard surface compared to soft surface. More between-measurement variation is seen on the circle compared to the straight line. Between-horse variation was clearly larger than within-horse variation. ICC values for the head, withers and pelvis symmetry parameters were 0.68 (head), 0.76 (withers), 0.85 (pelvis).Main limitationsLunge measurements on a hard surface were not performed.ConclusionsBetween-measurement variation may be substantial, especially in head motion. This should be considered when interpreting clinical data after repeated measurements, as in routine lameness assessments.

Project description:BackgroundThe evaluation of hindlimb lameness remains a major challenge in everyday clinical practice. In the absence of clear guidelines, veterinarians use different visual assessment methods for this task whose robustness is unknown.ObjectivesDetermination of the robustness of five visual hindlimb lameness assessment methods based on the comparison of left and right tuber coxae movement.Study designValidated mathematical hindlimb lameness model based on experimental data from the literature.MethodsVertical movement of left (LTC) and right (RTC) tuber coxae was simulated for the range of common hindlimb lameness movement patterns that horses present within practice. Lameness severity ranged from sound to moderately lame (0% to 60% motion asymmetry). The scenarios of a pelvis held tilted and asymmetrical pelvic roll were included to reflect possible adaptations in pelvic rotation. Across all conditions, the outcomes for five different visual assessment methods based on comparative tubera coxarum movement were quantified, including hip hike, -drop and range of motion. The robustness of each assessment method was established through comparison to sacrum-based overall motion asymmetry as the ground truth.ResultsTubera coxarum-based lameness assessment was highly sensitive to all the unique lameness patterns and changes in pelvic rotation which a lame horse may adopt. None of the five visual lameness assessment methods was 100% robust across all conditions tested. For everyday clinical practice, comparing the upward movement amplitude of the RTC before right hind foot contact and of the LTC before left hind foot contact (Hip_hike_diff) would be the most robust single tubera coxarum-based visual assessment method.Main limitationsIn the absence of published data regarding the frequency of different movement patterns and hip rotation adaptations in clinical practice, this study cannot indicate the proportion of assessments that would be incorrect for a given visual assessment method.ConclusionsUsing a single tubera coxarum-based visual hindlimb lameness assessment method may lead to incorrect clinical judgement. Therefore, using multiple assessment methods would be beneficial to substantiate impressions.

Project description:IntroductionMore knowledge of the relationships between kinematic measures and clinical assessments is required to guide clinical decision making and future research.ObjectivesTo determine which kinematic variables obtained during a drinking task were associated with clinical assessments of upper extremity functioning in people with spinal cord injury (SCI).MethodsIn total, 25 individuals with chronic cervical (n = 17) or thoracic (n = 8) complete (n = 14) or motor incomplete (n = 11) SCI (mean age 58.4, SD 13.8) were included. Kinematic data, including movement time, smoothness and joint angles was captured with a 5-camera optoelectronic system during a unimanual drinking task. Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Sollerman Hand Function Test (SHFT) and basic hand classification of the Upper Extremity Data Set (ISCI-Hand) were used as clinical assessments. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify kinematic variables associated with clinical assessments after controlling for potential confounding factors, such as, age, severity of SCI, sensory function, and hand surgery.ResultsMovement time, smoothness and movement pattern kinematics including trunk displacement, elbow and wrist joint angles were correlated (p < 0.05) with all three clinical scales while the velocity-related kinematics and inter-joint coordination showed low correlations. Multiple regression analysis revealed that wrist angle combined with movement time or smoothness explained 82% and 77% of the total variance in ARAT and SHFT, respectively. Wrist angle alone explained 59% of the variance in ISCI-Hand. The proprioception of the hand increased the explanatory power in the models of ARAT and SHFT. Associations between kinematics and clinical assessments in the subgroup with cervical SCI were equivalent to the whole group analyses. The number of participants in the subgroup with thoracic SCI was small and only allowed limited analysis.ConclusionsWrist angle, movement time, movement smoothness are the most important kinematic variables associated with upper extremity clinical assessments in people with SCI. The results are most valid for individuals with cervical SCI. All three assessments are appropriate for SCI. Further research with larger representative sample of thoracic SCI needed.

Dataset Information

Differences in equine spinal kinematics between straight line and circle in trot.

Publications

Differences in equine spinal kinematics between straight line and circle in trot.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets