FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Frontiers in veterinary science2021; 8; 681213; doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.681213

Accelerometry-Based Step Count Validation for Horse Movement Analysis During Stall Confinement.

Abstract: Quantitative tracking of equine movement during stall confinement has the potential to detect subtle changes in mobility due to injury. These changes may warn of potential complications, providing vital information to direct rehabilitation protocols. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are readily available and easily attached to a limb or surcingle to objectively record step count in horses. The objectives of this study were: (1) to compare IMU-based step counts to a visually-based criterion measure (video) for three different types of movements in a stall environment, and (2) to compare three different sensor positions to determine the ideal location on the horse to assess movement. An IMU was attached at the withers, right forelimb and hindlimb of six horses to assess free-movement, circles, and figure-eights recorded in 5 min intervals and to determine the best location, through analysis of all three axes of the triaxial accelerometer, for step count during stall confinement. Mean step count difference, absolute error (%) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were determined to assess the sensor's ability to track steps compared to the criterion measure. When comparing sensor location for all movement conditions, the right-forelimb vertical-axis produced the best results (ICC = 1.0, % error = 6.8, mean step count difference = 1.3) followed closely by the right-hindlimb (ICC = 0.999, % error = 15.2, mean step count difference = 1.8). Limitations included the small number of horse participants and the lack of random selection due to limited availability and accessibility. Overall, the findings demonstrate excellent levels of agreement between the IMU's vertical axis and the video-based criterion at the forelimb and hindlimb locations for all movement conditions.
Copyright © 2021 Steinke, Montgomery and Barden.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-06-22 PubMed ID: 34239913PubMed Central: PMC8259880DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.681213Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research article focuses on the validation of accelerometry-based step count in horses during stall confinement using inertial measurement units (IMUs). The researchers found that the IMU’s vertical axis placed at the forelimb and hindlimb accurately captures the horse’s step counts.

Objective of the Study

  • The study sought to quantify equine movement during stall confinement, helping veterinary professionals detect early signs of reduced mobility due to injuries.
  • The researchers had a dual objective: (1) to compare IMU-based step counts against a visually-based method (video recording) for various types of movements in stall confinement (2) to determine the optimal sensor position on the horse for assessing movement.

Methodology

  • The researchers used an inertial measurement unit (IMU) attached at three different positions on six horses: the withers (the highest part of the horse’s back), right forelimb, and hindlimb.
  • These horses were involved in free movement, circles, and figure-eight movements, recorded in 5-minute increments, to identify the best sensor placement for counting steps during stall confinement.
  • The researchers analyzed data from all three axes of the triaxial accelerometer in the IMU to derive the step counts.

Findings

  • The results showed that the right-forelimb vertical-axis delivered the best results (ICC = 1.0, % error = 6.8, mean step count difference = 1.3 steps).
  • This was closely followed by the right-hindlimb (ICC = 0.999, % error = 15.2, mean step count difference = 1.8 steps).
  • The study, therefore, suggests that the IMU’s vertical axis at the forelimb and hindlimb delivers excellent agreement with the video-based criterion in all movement conditions.

Limitations

  • The researchers admit that the study had several limitations such as a restricted number of horse participants.
  • They were unable to randomly select test subjects, thus potentially introducing selection bias, which can affect the overall validity of the research.

Cite This Article

APA
Steinke SL, Montgomery JB, Barden JM. (2021). Accelerometry-Based Step Count Validation for Horse Movement Analysis During Stall Confinement. Front Vet Sci, 8, 681213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.681213

Publication

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
NlmUniqueID: 101666658
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 8
Pages: 681213
PII: 681213

Researcher Affiliations

Steinke, Samantha L
  • Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
  • Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Montgomery, Julia B
  • Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
  • Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Barden, John M
  • Faculty of Kinesiology and Health Studies, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 25 references
  1. Hurkmans HL, Bussmann JB, Benda E, Verhaar JA, Stam HJ. Techniques for measuring weight bearing during standing and walking.. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2003 Aug;18(7):576-89.
    doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(03)00116-5pubmed: 12880705google scholar: lookup
  2. Serra Bragança FM, Rhodin M, van Weeren PR. On the brink of daily clinical application of objective gait analysis: What evidence do we have so far from studies using an induced lameness model?. Vet J 2018 Apr;234:11-23.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2018.01.006pubmed: 29680381google scholar: lookup
  3. Hardeman AM, Serra Bragança FM, Swagemakers JH, van Weeren PR, Roepstorff L. Variation in gait parameters used for objective lameness assessment in sound horses at the trot on the straight line and the lunge.. Equine Vet J 2019 Nov;51(6):831-839.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13075pmc: PMC6850282pubmed: 30648286google scholar: lookup
  4. Nocera I, Sgorbini M, Gracia–Calvo LA, Cacini M, Vitale V, Citi S. A novel dynamometer for the standardisation of the force applied during distal forelimb flexion tests in horses. Equine Vet Educ (2020) 1–5.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13355google scholar: lookup
  5. Leelamankong P, Estrada R, Mählmann K, Rungsri P, Lischer C. Agreement among equine veterinarians and between equine veterinarians and inertial sensor system during clinical examination of hindlimb lameness in horses.. Equine Vet J 2020 Mar;52(2):326-331.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13144pubmed: 31233625google scholar: lookup
  6. Starke SD, Witte TH, May SA, Pfau T. Accuracy and precision of hind limb foot contact timings of horses determined using a pelvis-mounted inertial measurement unit.. J Biomech 2012 May 11;45(8):1522-8.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.03.014pubmed: 22483227google scholar: lookup
  7. Sapone M, Martin P, Ben Mansour K, Château H, Marin F. Comparison of Trotting Stance Detection Methods from an Inertial Measurement Unit Mounted on the Horse's Limb.. Sensors (Basel) 2020 May 25;20(10).
    doi: 10.3390/s20102983pmc: PMC7288211pubmed: 32466104google scholar: lookup
  8. Schmutz A, Chèze L, Jacques J, Martin P. A Method to Estimate Horse Speed per Stride from One IMU with a Machine Learning Method.. Sensors (Basel) 2020 Jan 17;20(2).
    doi: 10.3390/s20020518pmc: PMC7014525pubmed: 31963422google scholar: lookup
  9. Pfau T, Boultbee H, Davis H, Walker A, Rhodin M. Agreement between two inertial sensor gait analysis systems for lameness examinations in horses. Equine Vet Educ (2016) 28:203–8.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.12400google scholar: lookup
  10. Keegan KG, Wilson DA, Kramer J, Reed SK, Yonezawa Y, Maki H, Pai PF, Lopes MA. Comparison of a body-mounted inertial sensor system-based method with subjective evaluation for detection of lameness in horses.. Am J Vet Res 2013 Jan;74(1):17-24.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.74.1.17pubmed: 23270341google scholar: lookup
  11. Fries M, Montavon S, Spadavecchia C, Levionnois OL. Evaluation of a wireless activity monitoring system to quantify locomotor activity in horses in experimental settings.. Equine Vet J 2017 Mar;49(2):225-231.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12568pubmed: 26888557google scholar: lookup
  12. Maisonpierre IN, Sutton MA, Harris P, Menzies-Gow N, Weller R, Pfau T. Accelerometer activity tracking in horses and the effect of pasture management on time budget.. Equine Vet J 2019 Nov;51(6):840-845.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13130pubmed: 31009100google scholar: lookup
  13. Keegan KG, Kramer J, Yonezawa Y, Maki H, Pai PF, Dent EV, Kellerman TE, Wilson DA, Reed SK. Assessment of repeatability of a wireless, inertial sensor-based lameness evaluation system for horses.. Am J Vet Res 2011 Sep;72(9):1156-63.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.72.9.1156pubmed: 21879972google scholar: lookup
  14. Montgomery JB, Steinke SL, Williams AC, Belgrave LJ. Initial testing of a computer–integrated weight compensation system for rehabilitation of horses. Comp Exerc Physiol (2019) 15:379–84.
    doi: 10.3920/CEP180060google scholar: lookup
  15. Bragança FM, Bosch S, Voskamp JP, Marin-Perianu M, Van der Zwaag BJ, Vernooij JCM, van Weeren PR, Back W. Validation of distal limb mounted inertial measurement unit sensors for stride detection in Warmblood horses at walk and trot.. Equine Vet J 2017 Jul;49(4):545-551.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12651pmc: PMC5484301pubmed: 27862238google scholar: lookup
  16. McCracken MJ, Kramer J, Keegan KG, Lopes M, Wilson DA, Reed SK, LaCarrubba A, Rasch M. Comparison of an inertial sensor system of lameness quantification with subjective lameness evaluation.. Equine Vet J 2012 Nov;44(6):652-6.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2012.00571.xpubmed: 22563674google scholar: lookup
  17. Barden JM, Clermont CA, Kobsar D, Beauchet O. Accelerometer-Based Step Regularity Is Lower in Older Adults with Bilateral Knee Osteoarthritis.. Front Hum Neurosci 2016;10:625.
    doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00625pmc: PMC5143349pubmed: 28008312google scholar: lookup
  18. Kobsar D, Olson C, Paranjape R, Hadjistavropoulos T, Barden JM. Evaluation of age-related differences in the stride-to-stride fluctuations, regularity and symmetry of gait using a waist-mounted tri-axial accelerometer.. Gait Posture 2014;39(1):553-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.09.008pubmed: 24139685google scholar: lookup
  19. Brahms CM, Zhao Y, Gerhard D, Barden JM. Stride length determination during overground running using a single foot-mounted inertial measurement unit.. J Biomech 2018 Apr 11;71:302-305.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.02.003pubmed: 29459072google scholar: lookup
  20. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability.. Psychol Bull 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8.
    pubmed: 18839484doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420google scholar: lookup
  21. Dow SM, Leendertz JA, Silver IA, Goodship AE. Identification of subclinical tendon injury from ground reaction force analysis.. Equine Vet J 1991 Jul;23(4):266-72.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1991.tb03715.xpubmed: 1915225google scholar: lookup
  22. Maliye S, Voute L, Lund D, Marshall JF. An inertial sensor-based system can objectively assess diagnostic anaesthesia of the equine foot.. Equine Vet J Suppl 2013 Dec;(45):26-30.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12158pubmed: 24304400google scholar: lookup
  23. Maliye S, Voute LC, Marshall JF. Naturally-occurring forelimb lameness in the horse results in significant compensatory load redistribution during trotting.. Vet J 2015 May;204(2):208-13.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.03.005pubmed: 25862395google scholar: lookup
  24. Egan S, Brama PAJ, Goulding C, McKeown D, Kearney CM, McGrath D. The Feasibility of Equine Field-Based Postural Sway Analysis Using a Single Inertial Sensor.. Sensors (Basel) 2021 Feb 11;21(4).
    doi: 10.3390/s21041286pmc: PMC7916957pubmed: 33670238google scholar: lookup
  25. O'Brien C, Marr N, Thorpe C. Microdamage in the equine superficial digital flexor tendon.. Equine Vet J 2021 May;53(3):417-430.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13331pubmed: 32772396google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Crecan CM, Peștean CP. Inertial Sensor Technologies-Their Role in Equine Gait Analysis, a Review. Sensors (Basel) 2023 Jul 11;23(14).
    doi: 10.3390/s23146301pubmed: 37514599google scholar: lookup
  2. Sterkenburgh TR, Villalba-Diez J, Ordieres-Meré J. Socio-Technical Analysis of the Benefits and Barriers to Using a Digital Representation of the Global Horse Population in Equine Veterinary Medicine. Animals (Basel) 2023 Nov 17;13(22).
    doi: 10.3390/ani13223557pubmed: 38003173google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,658 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.