bioRxivBioengineering
Range of motion and between-measurement variation of spinal kinematics in sound horses at trot on the straight line and on the lunge.
A. Hardeman, A. Byström, L. Roepstorff, J. H. Swagemakers, R. van Weeren, F. Serra Braganca
Abstract
Clinical assessment of spinal motion in horses is part of many routine clinical exams but remains highly subjective. A prerequisite for the quantification 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 the pelvis 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. Concluding, ROM and variation in spinal biomechanics are horse-specific and small, necessitating individual analysis and making subjective clinical assessment of spinal kinematics challenging.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- A longer stance is more stable for a standing horse
K. Gellman, A. Ruina·bioRxiv·Oct 15, 2021
- Effects of practice on a mechanical horse with an online feedback on performing a sitting postural coordination
Héloïse Baillet, D Leroy, … Régis Thouvarecq·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Oct 23, 2020
- Surface electromyography (sEMG) of equine core muscles and kinematics of lumbosacral joint during core strengthening exercises
J. A. Coll, S. BLAKE, R. Ferro de Godoy·bioRxiv·Aug 11, 2023
- Comparison of different head and neck positions and behaviour in ridden elite dressage horses between warm-up and competition
K. Kienapfel, I. Bachmann, … A. Gmel·bioRxiv·Dec 17, 2021
- Difference in hoof conformation between shod and barefoot-managed hooves
J. N. de Klerk·bioRxiv·Feb 23, 2021
- Development of the Highly Sensitive Horse questionnaire to assess horses' sensory processing sensitivity
Melissa Peignier, Maya Bräm, … Sabrina Briefer Freymond·bioRxiv·Nov 2, 2026