FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / Player-Reported Perceptions of Lameness Risks and Contributi...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2025; 15(21); 3136; doi: 10.3390/ani15213136

Player-Reported Perceptions of Lameness Risks and Contributing Factors for Polo Horses: Results from a Survey.

Abstract: Polo is an equestrian sport with a long tradition, but to date there is little scientific data on health risks, particularly lameness. In an international online survey, 145 polo players (47.6% female, 52.4% male) with an average of 13.4 years of playing experience were questioned about lameness risks and influencing factors. The respondents reported a median of six horses, most frequently mares as their best-performing and healthiest animals. Horse age was significantly associated with the risk of lameness, increasing by approximately 19.5% per year (OR = 1.195; = 0.030) and differed depending on the breed of horse. Player-related variables such as age, sex, level of experience and type of husbandry had no significant influence. Risk perception was only associated with the handicap: players with a higher handicap rated the risk of injury as lower. Sex, age and horse ownership were not relevant. Unfavourable ground conditions were cited as the most common cause of injury (58.6%). The results show that players believe key predictors of lameness, in particular the age and breed of the horses, are objective factors, while subjective risk assessments are primarily influenced by the players' level of experience. Further studies are necessary to improve horse health in polo and to enable preventive measures.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-10-29 PubMed ID: 41227466PubMed Central: PMC12606728DOI: 10.3390/ani15213136Google 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.

Overview

  • This study surveyed polo players internationally to understand their perceptions of lameness risks and factors contributing to lameness in polo horses.
  • It identified key objective factors related to lameness, such as horse age and breed, and examined subjective risk perceptions influenced by player experience and handicap.

Background and Purpose

  • Polo is a traditional equestrian sport involving high physical demands on horses, but there is limited scientific information about health risks, notably lameness.
  • The study aimed to fill this gap by collecting data directly from polo players regarding what they perceive as risks and causes of lameness in their horses.
  • Understanding these perceptions can help guide future research and interventions to improve horse welfare in polo.

Methodology

  • An international online survey was conducted with 145 polo players.
  • Participants included both female (47.6%) and male (52.4%) players with an average of 13.4 years of playing experience.
  • The survey asked about:
    • Number and demographics of the horses (e.g., age, breed, sex)
    • Player characteristics (age, sex, experience, handicap)
    • Perceived lameness risks and contributing factors
    • Risk assessments and beliefs about causes of injury
  • Statistical analyses evaluated associations between variables such as horse age/breed and lameness risk.

Key Findings

  • Players typically owned a median of six horses.
  • Mares were commonly identified as the best-performing and healthiest horses.
  • Horse age was a significant predictor of lameness risk, increasing the risk by about 19.5% for each additional year of age (Odds Ratio = 1.195; p = 0.030).
  • Lameness risk varied depending on the horse’s breed.
  • Player-related factors such as age, sex, playing experience, and management type (husbandry) did not significantly influence the risk of lameness.
  • Players with higher handicaps perceived the risk of injury as lower, indicating experience or skill level influences subjective risk assessment.
  • Other player demographics like sex, age, and horse ownership status did not impact risk perception.
  • Unfavourable ground conditions were most frequently cited (58.6%) as the common cause of horse injuries leading to lameness.

Interpretation and Implications

  • Players distinguish between objective predictors of lameness (horse age and breed) and subjective risk assessments that depend more on the player’s experience level and handicap.
  • The belief that older horses have a higher risk matches biological expectations due to cumulative wear and potential injury over time.
  • The identification of ground conditions as a primary cause suggests environmental factors are crucial contributors to injury risks in polo.
  • The lack of influence from player demographics on lameness risk may indicate that horse-related factors predominate in injury risk assessment.
  • These insights provide a foundation for targeted preventive measures, such as managing ground conditions or careful monitoring of older horses.

Conclusions and Future Directions

  • The study highlights areas where scientific data on polo horse lameness can be expanded, bridging subjective experiences and objective risk factors.
  • Further research is needed to validate these findings with clinical data and to develop evidence-based interventions to protect horse health.
  • Understanding how player experience influences injury risk perception may also improve educational strategies for injury prevention in polo.

Cite This Article

APA
Schumacher A, Merle R, Stöckle S, Gehlen H. (2025). Player-Reported Perceptions of Lameness Risks and Contributing Factors for Polo Horses: Results from a Survey. Animals (Basel), 15(21), 3136. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15213136

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 15
Issue: 21
PII: 3136

Researcher Affiliations

Schumacher, Anton
  • Equine Clinic, Freie Universität Berlin, Oertzenweg 19b, 14193 Berlin, Germany.
Merle, Roswitha
  • Institute of Veterinary Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Veterinary Centre for Resistance Research, Freie Universität Berlin, 14163 Berlin, Germany.
Stöckle, Sabita
  • Equine Clinic, Freie Universität Berlin, Oertzenweg 19b, 14193 Berlin, Germany.
Gehlen, Heidrun
  • Equine Clinic, Freie Universität Berlin, Oertzenweg 19b, 14193 Berlin, Germany.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

This article includes 39 references
  1. Inness CM, Morgan KL. Falls and injuries to polo players: Risk perception, mitigation and risk factors.. Sports Med. 2015;1:2.
    pmc: PMC4532710pubmed: 27747839
  2. Federation of International Polo General Assembly. [(accessed on 2 December 2022)]. Available online: https://fippolo.com/minutes-general-assembly-december-2022/
  3. Marlin DJ, Allen JC. Cardiovascular demands of competition on low-goal (non-elite) polo ponies.. Equine Vet. J. 1999;31:378–382.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03836.xpubmed: 10505952google scholar: lookup
  4. Inness CM, Morgan KL. Polo pony injuries: Player-owner reported risk, perception, mitigation and risk factors.. Equine Vet. J. 2015;47:422–427.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12298pubmed: 24819255google scholar: lookup
  5. Knubben JM, Gygax L, Auer J, Fürst A, Stauffacher M. Häufigkeiten von Erkrankungen und Verletzungen in der Schweizer Pferdepopulation.. Schweiz. Arch. Tierheilkd. 2008;150:399–408.
    doi: 10.1024/0036-7281.150.8.399pubmed: 18777726google scholar: lookup
  6. Museum of Polo and Hall of Fame History of Polo. [(accessed on 1 January 2023)]. Available online: https://www.polomuseum.org/sport-polo/history-polo.
  7. Best R, Standing R. External loading characteristics of polo ponies and corresponding player heart rate responses in 16-goal polo.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2021;98:103368.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2020.103368pubmed: 33663720google scholar: lookup
  8. Noleto PGC, Cubas JPC, Barbosa FC, Guimarães EC, Mundim AV. Biochemical profile of polo horses in training phase and those players of official competition.. Comp. Clin. Pathol. 2016;25:911–915.
    doi: 10.1007/s00580-016-2281-6google scholar: lookup
  9. Ferraz GC, Soares OA, Foz NS, Pereira MC, Queiroz-Neto A. The workload and plasma ion concentration in a training match session of high-goal (elite) polo ponies.. Equine Vet. J. Suppl. 2010;42:191–195.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00278.xpubmed: 21059005google scholar: lookup
  10. Best R, Standing R. The spatiotemporal characteristics of 0–24-goal polo.. Animals 2019;9:446.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9070446pmc: PMC6680633pubmed: 31315210google scholar: lookup
  11. Giraudet A. Veterinary aspects of competing and training polo horses.. In: Hinchcliff KW, Kaneps AJ, Geor RJ, editors. Equine Sports Medicine and Surgery. 2nd ed. Elsevier; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 2014. pp. 1107–1112.
  12. Pritchard A, Barthel S, Ferguson D. Cardiorespiratory responses reach vigorous-intensity levels during simulated gameplay of arena polo.. Transl. Sports Med. 2020;3:250–255.
    doi: 10.1002/tsm2.128google scholar: lookup
  13. Hurlingham Polo Association Year Book 2023. [(accessed on 10 January 2023)]. Available online: https://hpa-polo.co.uk/download/HPA-Year-Book-2023-1.pdf.
  14. Camargo GG, Desconsi MF, Lima MIR, Maldonado GE, Salgueiro DSG, Moreira CAL, Acosta DC. Risk Factors for the Occurrence of Desmopathy of the Collateral Ligaments of the Distal Interphalangeal Joint in Equines—A Cross-Sectional Study.. Acta Vet. 2020;70:423–434.
    doi: 10.2478/acve-2020-0032google scholar: lookup
  15. Baccarin RY, Rasera L, Machado TS, Michelacci YM. Relevance of Synovial Fluid Chondroitin Sulphate as a Biomarker to Monitor Polo Pony Joints.. Can. J. Vet. Res. 2014;78:50–60.
    pmc: PMC3878009pubmed: 24396181
  16. Visser E, Van Wijk-Jansen E. Diversity in horse enthusiasts with respect to horse welfare: An explorative study. J. Vet. Behav. Clin. Appl. Res. 2012;7:295–304.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2011.10.007google scholar: lookup
  17. Deutscher Polo Verband e.V. Verbindliche Cogginstests. [(accessed on 3 January 2023)]. Available online: https://www.dpv-poloverband.de/de/polo/tierschutz.
  18. Dyson S. Pain and poor performance in the sport horse: Dressage, show jumping and horse trials. Equine Vet. Educ. 2011;23:104–109.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2010.00145.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  19. Williams J.M, Berg L.C, Clayton H.M, Kirsch K, Marlin D, Randle H, Roepstroff L, Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan M.S.V, Weishaupt M.A, Munsters C. A Delphi Study to Determine International and National Equestrian Expert Opinions on Domains and Sub-Domains Essential to Managing Sporthorse Health and Welfare in the Olympic Disciplines. Animals 2023;13:3404.
    doi: 10.3390/ani13213404pmc: PMC10650931pubmed: 37958159google scholar: lookup
  20. . Strategy on Health Policy and Systems Research. WHO 2012.
  21. Meara J.G, Leather A.J.M, Hagander L, Alkire B.C, Alonso N, Ameh E.A, Bickler S.W, Conteh L, Dare A.J, Davies J. Global surgery 2030: Evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. Lancet 2015;386:569–624.
    doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60160-Xpubmed: 25924834google scholar: lookup
  22. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science 1987;236:280–285.
    doi: 10.1126/science.3563507pubmed: 3563507google scholar: lookup
  23. Gaissmaier W. A cognitive-ecological perspective on risk perception and medical decision making. Med. Decis. Mak. 2019;39:570–573.
    doi: 10.1177/0272989X19876267pubmed: 31556783google scholar: lookup
  24. Savadori L, Savio S, Nicotra E, Rumiati R, Finucane M, Slovic P. Expert and public perception of risk from biotechnology. Risk Anal. 2004;24:1289–1299.
    doi: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00526.xpubmed: 15563295google scholar: lookup
  25. Sacitharan P.K, Vincent T.L. Cellular ageing mechanisms in osteoarthritis. Mamm. Genome. 2016;27:421–429.
    doi: 10.1007/s00335-016-9641-zpmc: PMC4935747pubmed: 27215642google scholar: lookup
  26. Slater J. Findings from the National Equine Health Survey, 2013. Vet. Rec. 2014;175:271–272.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.g4982pubmed: 25234456google scholar: lookup
  27. Owen K.R, Singer E.R, Clegg P.D, Ireland J.L, Pinchbeck G.L. Identification of risk factors for traumatic injury in the general horse population of NW England, Midlands and North Wales. Equine Vet. J. 2012;44:143–148.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00387.xpubmed: 21696429google scholar: lookup
  28. McGreevy P, French C, Nicol C. The prevalence of abnormal behaviours in sport horses in relation to stabling. Vet. Rec. 1995;137:36–37.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.137.2.36pubmed: 8525580google scholar: lookup
  29. Ross W.A, Kaneene J.B, Gardiner J.C. Survival analysis of risk factors associated with lameness in a Michigan horse population. Am. J. Vet. Res. 1998;59:23–29.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.1998.59.01.23pubmed: 9442238google scholar: lookup
  30. Shin S, Kim S, Lioyd S, Cho G. Prevalence of Hoof Disorders in Horses in South Korea. Open Agric. J. 2020;14:25–29.
  31. Hanousek K, Salavati M, Dunkel B. The impact of horse age, sex, and number of riders on horse performance in British eventing horse trials. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2020;94:103250.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2020.103250pubmed: 33077097google scholar: lookup
  32. Fenner K, Caspar G, Hyde M, Henshall C, Dhand N, Probyn-Rapsey F, Dashper K, McLean A, McGreevy P. It’s all about the sex, or is it? Humans, horses and temperament. PLoS ONE 2019;14:e0216699.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216699pmc: PMC6516668pubmed: 31086385google scholar: lookup
  33. Peterson M, McIlwraith C.W. Monitoring racing surfaces. Proceedings of the Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit III; Lexington, KY, USA. 28–29 June 2010.
  34. Parkes R.S.V., Witte T.H. Foot–surface interaction and its impact on musculoskeletal adaptation and injury risk in the horse. Equine Vet. J. 2015;47:519–525.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12420pubmed: 25640598google scholar: lookup
  35. Smith R, Pinchbeck G, McGowan C, Ireland J, Perkins E. Becoming a matter of veterinary concern. Front. Vet. Sci. 2024;11:1355996.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1355996pmc: PMC11169876pubmed: 38872799google scholar: lookup
  36. Savoini B, Bertolaccini J, Montavon S, Deriaz M. Convolutional Neural Network for Early Detection of Lameness and Irregularity in Horses Using an IMU Sensor. arXiv 2025.
    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.13578google scholar: lookup
  37. Serra Bragança F.M., Broomé S, Rhodin M, Björnsdóttir S, Gunnarsson V, Voskamp J.P., Persson-Sjodin E, Back W, Lindgren G, Novoa-Bravo M. Improving gait classification in horses by using inertial measurement unit (IMU) generated data and machine learning. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:17785.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-73215-9pmc: PMC7576586pubmed: 33082367google scholar: lookup
  38. Campbell M.L.H. An ethical framework for the use of horses in competitive sport: Theory and function. Animals 2021;11:1725.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11061725pmc: PMC8230307pubmed: 34207809google scholar: lookup
  39. Douglas J, Owers R, Campbell M.L.H. Social licence to operate: What can equestrian sports learn from other industries?. Animals 2022;12:1987.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12151987pmc: PMC9367437pubmed: 35953977google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,030 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.