Mechanical nociceptive thresholds using four probe configurations in horses.
Abstract: To examine the relationship between probe tip size and force readings of mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MTs) to identify appropriate probes for horses. Methods: Randomized, crossover study. Methods: Eight adult, mixed-breed horses aged 5-10 years, weighing 268-460 kg. Methods: Four probe configurations (PCs) were used in random sequence: 1.0 mm diameter (SHARP); 3.2 mm (BLUNT); spring-mounted 1.0 mm (SPRING), and 3 × 2.5 mm (3PIN). A remote-controlled unit on the horse increased force (1.2 N second(-1)) in a pneumatic actuator on the metacarpus. Mean MT for each PC was calculated from 10 readings for each horse. Data were log-transformed for analysis using mixed-effects anova/linear regression (p < 0.05). Variability of data for each PC was assessed using the coefficient of variation (CV). Results: Mean ± standard deviation MTs were: SHARP, 5.6 ± 2.3 N; BLUNT, 11.4 ± 3.4 N; 3PIN, 9.6 ± 4.6 N, and SPRING 6.4 ± 1.8 N. Mean MT for SHARP was significantly lower than for BLUNT (p < 0.001) and 3PIN (p 0.05). Mean MT was significantly higher for BLUNT than for 3PIN (p < 0.05) and SPRING (p < 0.001). Mean MT for 3PIN was significantly higher than for SPRING (p < 0.001). Larger contact area PCs produced higher MTs than smaller PCs, but the relationship was not linear. BLUNT (area: 10-fold greater) gave a MT two-fold higher than SHARP. 3PIN (area: 20-fold greater) produced more variable MTs, less than two-fold higher than SHARP. SPRING was similar to SHARP. CVs were: SHARP, 22.9%; BLUNT, 72.3%; 3PIN, 44.2%, and SPRING, 28.7%. Conclusions: The PC has nonlinear effects on MT. Therefore, it is important to define PC when measuring MT. Smaller probe tips may be preferable as MT data are less variable.
© 2015 Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists and the American College of Veterinary Anesthesia and Analgesia.
Publication Date: 2015-05-21 PubMed ID: 25997162DOI: 10.1111/vaa.12274Google 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.
- Journal Article
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Research Support
- Non-U.S. Gov't
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.
The study explores the effects of different methods of force application on mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MTs) in horses. It concludes that the size and type of the probe used can greatly influence MT readings, highlighting the necessity for standardized procedures and smaller probe tips to minimize data variation.
Methodology
- The study involved eight adult, mixed-breed horses aged between 5 to 10 years, with weights ranging from 268 to 460 kg.
- Four different types of probe configurations (PCs) were utilized: a 1.0 mm diameter, referred to as SHARP; a 3.2 mm, termed BLUNT; a spring-mounted 1.0 mm, called SPRING; and 3 x 2.5 mm, named 3PIN.
- These PCs were applied in a randomized sequence using a remote-controlled unit. The force was increased at a constant rate (1.2 N second(-1)) on the horse’s metacarpus.
- The average MT for each PC was calculated from ten independent readings for each horse.
- The collected data were transformed logarithmically and analyzed using mixed-effects ANOVA and linear regression. The variation in data for each PC was evaluated with the coefficient of variation (CV).
Results
- The mean MT levels varied significantly across the different PCs. The readings were lowest for the SHARP probe (5.6 ± 2.3 N) and highest for the BLUNT probe (11.4 ± 3.4 N).
- Comparatively, MT for the SHARP probe was significantly lower than for the BLUNT and 3PIN probes but showed no significant difference when compared with the SPRING probe.
- Larger contact area PCs, such as BLUNT and 3PIN, gave higher MTs than the smaller ones (SHARP and SPRING). However, this relationship wasn’t linear.
- Despite its ten-fold greater contact area, the BLUNT probe only provided an MT reading twice as high as the SHARP probe. The 3PIN probe, with a contact area 20-times larger than the SHARP probe, produced more variable yet less than two-fold higher MTs.
- Probes with larger contact areas generally resulted in more variable data, as indicated by higher CVs.
Conclusions
- The type of PC has a nonlinear effect on MT readings, which emphasizes the importance of defining the PC when measuring MT.
- Smaller probes may be more effective due to their tendency to provide less variable data.
Cite This Article
APA
Taylor PM, Crosignani N, Lopes C, Rosa AC, Luna SP, Puoli Filho JN.
(2015).
Mechanical nociceptive thresholds using four probe configurations in horses.
Vet Anaesth Analg, 43(1), 99-108.
https://doi.org/10.1111/vaa.12274 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Topcat Metrology Ltd, Ely, UK.
- Department of Veterinary Surgery and Anesthesiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
- Department of Veterinary Surgery and Anesthesiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
- Department of Veterinary Surgery and Anesthesiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
- Department of Veterinary Surgery and Anesthesiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
- Department of Veterinary Surgery and Anesthesiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Biomechanical Phenomena
- Cross-Over Studies
- Horses / physiology
- Horses / surgery
- Male
- Nociception
- Pain Measurement / veterinary
- Pain, Postoperative / veterinary
Citations
This article has been cited 6 times.- Haussler KK. Pressure Algometry for the Detection of Mechanical Nociceptive Thresholds in Horses.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Nov 24;10(12).
- Tong L, Stewart M, Johnson I, Appleyard R, Wilson B, James O, Johnson C, McGreevy P. A Comparative Neuro-Histological Assessment of Gluteal Skin Thickness and Cutaneous Nociceptor Distribution in Horses and Humans.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Nov 11;10(11).
- Malacarne BD, Cota LO, Neto ACP, Paz CFR, Dias LA, Corrêa MG, Carvalho AM, Faleiros RR, Xavier ABS. Mechanical nociceptive assessment of the equine hoof following distal interphalangeal joint intra-articular anesthesia.. PeerJ 2020;8:e9469.
- Wilson B, Jones B, McGreevy P. Longitudinal trends in the frequency of medium and fast race winning times in Australian harness racing: Relationships with rules moderating whip use.. PLoS One 2018;13(3):e0184091.
- Hood J, McDonald C, Wilson B, McManus P, McGreevy P. Whip Rule Breaches in a Major Australian Racing Jurisdiction: Welfare and Regulatory Implications.. Animals (Basel) 2017 Jan 16;7(1).
- Di Giminiani P, Sandercock DA, Malcolm EM, Leach MC, Herskin MS, Edwards SA. Application of a handheld Pressure Application Measurement device for the characterisation of mechanical nociceptive thresholds in intact pig tails.. Physiol Behav 2016 Oct 15;165:119-26.
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
