FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Equine Vet J / Robustness of five different visual assessment methods for t...
Equine veterinary journal2021; 54(6); 1103-1113; doi: 10.1111/evj.13531

Robustness of five different visual assessment methods for the evaluation of hindlimb lameness based on tubera coxarum movement in horses at the trot on a straight line.

Abstract: The 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. Objective: Determination of the robustness of five visual hindlimb lameness assessment methods based on the comparison of left and right tuber coxae movement. Methods: Validated mathematical hindlimb lameness model based on experimental data from the literature. Methods: Vertical 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. Results: Tubera 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. Conclusions: In 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. Conclusions: Using 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.
© 2021 The Authors. Equine Veterinary Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-12-13 PubMed ID: 34717008PubMed Central: PMC9787951DOI: 10.1111/evj.13531Google 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.

The research article focuses on evaluating the effectiveness of five visual hindlimb lameness assessment methods based on tubera coxarum movement in horses. The study highlights that none of the examined methods is completely reliable, urging the use of multiple assessment approaches for accurate clinical judgement.

Research Objective

The primary purpose of this study was to test the robustness of five visual methods used for assessing hindlimb lameness in horses. These methods revolve around observing the movement of the left and right hip bones, or tubera coxarum, of horses while trotting.

Methods

  • A validated mathematical model of hindlimb lameness, derived from literature, was utilized. This model simulated the vertical movement of the left (LTC) and right (RTC) tubera coxarum representative of hindlimb lameness patterns typically observed in horses.
  • In the model, lameness severity was set to range from sound (no lameness) to moderately lame, indicated by 0% to 60% motion asymmetry.
  • The study also considered possible changes in pelvic rotation and the scenarios of a pelvis held tilted and asymmetrical pelvic roll.
  • Consequently, the outcomes from five different visual assessment methods were measured and compared. These methods include hip hike, hip drop, and range of motion.
  • The reliability of each method was then established by comparing results with sacrum-based overall motion asymmetry – considered as the ground truth.

Results

The study found that none of the five visual lameness assessment methods was 100% reliable across all conditions tested. While assessing based on tubera coxarum movement was highly sensitive to unique lameness patterns and changes in pelvic rotation in horses, none of them proved to be completely accurate.

The research concluded that the “hip hike difference” method involving the comparison of upward movement amplitude of RTC before right hind foot contact and LTC before left hind foot contact was the most reliable single tubera coxarum-based visual assessment method.

Implications

The study recognizes the need to use multiple assessment methods to evaluate hindlimb lameness accurately. It emphasizes that relying on a single visual assessment method could lead to incorrect clinical judgement due to the variable movement patterns and hip rotation adaptations in horses and lack of any method’s complete accuracy. However, it also acknowledges the lack of published data regarding the occurrence frequency of different movement patterns and hip rotation adaptations in typical clinical practices.

Cite This Article

APA
Starke SD, May SA. (2021). Robustness of five different visual assessment methods for the evaluation of hindlimb lameness based on tubera coxarum movement in horses at the trot on a straight line. Equine Vet J, 54(6), 1103-1113. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.13531

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 54
Issue: 6
Pages: 1103-1113

Researcher Affiliations

Starke, Sandra D
  • The Royal Veterinary College, North Mymms, Hatfield, UK.
May, Stephen A
  • The Royal Veterinary College, North Mymms, Hatfield, UK.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Gait
  • Hindlimb
  • Horse Diseases
  • Horses
  • Lameness, Animal / diagnosis

References

This article includes 30 references
  1. Baxter GM. Adams and Stashak's lameness in horses, 7th edn. John Wiley & Sons; 2020.
  2. May SA, Wyn-Jones G. Identification of hindleg lameness.. Equine Vet J 1987 May;19(3):185-8.
    pubmed: 3608952doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1987.tb01371.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  3. Hewetson M, Christley RM, Hunt ID, Voute LC. Investigations of the reliability of observational gait analysis for the assessment of lameness in horses.. Vet Rec 2006 Jun 24;158(25):852-7.
    pubmed: 16798953doi: 10.1136/vr.158.25.852google scholar: lookup
  4. Ross M, Dyson S. Diagnosis and management of lameness in the horse, 2nd edn. Elsevier Saunders; 2011.
  5. Keegan KG. Evidence-based lameness detection and quantification.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2007 Aug;23(2):403-23.
    pubmed: 17616320doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2007.04.008google scholar: lookup
  6. Starke SD, Raistrick KJ, May SA, Pfau T. The effect of trotting speed on the evaluation of subtle lameness in horses.. Vet J 2013 Aug;197(2):245-52.
    pubmed: 23611486doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.03.006google scholar: lookup
  7. Keegan KG, Dent EV, Wilson DA, Janicek J, Kramer J, Lacarrubba A, Walsh DM, Cassells MW, Esther TM, Schiltz P, Frees KE, Wilhite CL, Clark JM, Pollitt CC, Shaw R, Norris T. Repeatability of subjective evaluation of lameness in horses.. Equine Vet J 2010 Mar;42(2):92-7.
    pubmed: 20156242doi: 10.2746/042516409x479568google scholar: lookup
  8. Starke SD, Oosterlinck M. Reliability of equine visual lameness classification as a function of expertise, lameness severity and rater confidence.. Vet Rec 2019 Jan 12;184(2):63.
    pubmed: 30242083doi: 10.1136/vr.105058google scholar: lookup
  9. Keegan KG. In: Diagnosis and management of lameness in horses. In: Ross MW, Dyson SJ, editors. Elsevier Saunders, 2011.
  10. Kramer J, Keegan KG. Equine sports medicine and surgery. 2nd edn. In: Hinchcliff KW, Kaneps AJ, Geor RJ, editors. WB Saunders. 2014; pp. 223–38.
  11. Buchner HH, Savelberg HH, Schamhardt HC, Barneveld A. Head and trunk movement adaptations in horses with experimentally induced fore- or hindlimb lameness.. Equine Vet J 1996 Jan;28(1):71-6.
    pubmed: 8565958doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1996.tb01592.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  12. Peham C, Licka T, Girtler D, Scheidl M. Hindlimb lameness: clinical judgement versus computerised symmetry measurement.. Vet Rec 2001 Jun 16;148(24):750-2.
    pubmed: 11442235doi: 10.1136/vr.148.24.750google scholar: lookup
  13. Starke SD, May SA, Pfau T. Understanding hind limb lameness signs in horses using simple rigid body mechanics.. J Biomech 2015 Sep 18;48(12):3323-31.
    pubmed: 26163753doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.06.019google scholar: lookup
  14. Bell RP, Reed SK, Schoonover MJ, Whitfield CT, Yonezawa Y, Maki H, Pai PF, Keegan KG. Associations of force plate and body-mounted inertial sensor measurements for identification of hind limb lameness in horses.. Am J Vet Res 2016 Apr;77(4):337-45.
    pubmed: 27027831doi: 10.2460/ajvr.77.4.337google scholar: lookup
  15. Audigié F, Pourcelot P, Degueurce C, Geiger D, Denoix JM. Fourier analysis of trunk displacements: a method to identify the lame limb in trotting horses.. J Biomech 2002 Sep;35(9):1173-82.
    pubmed: 12163307doi: 10.1016/s0021-9290(02)00089-1google scholar: lookup
  16. Peham C, Scheidl M, Licka T. A method of signal processing in motion analysis of the trotting horse.. J Biomech 1996 Aug;29(8):1111-4.
    pubmed: 8817379doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(95)00179-4google scholar: lookup
  17. Reed SK, Kramer J, Thombs L, Pitts JB, Wilson DA, Keegan KG. Comparison of results for body-mounted inertial sensor assessment with final lameness determination in 1,224 equids.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2020 Mar 1;256(5):590-599.
    pubmed: 32068513doi: 10.2460/javma.256.5.590google scholar: lookup
  18. 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.
    pubmed: 22483227doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.03.014google scholar: lookup
  19. Gomez Alvarez CB, Bobbert MF, Lamers L, Johnston C, Back W, van Weeren PR. The effect of induced hindlimb lameness on thoracolumbar kinematics during treadmill locomotion.. Equine Vet J 2008 Mar;40(2):147-52.
    pubmed: 18089465doi: 10.2746/042516408x250184google scholar: lookup
  20. Cardoso JR, Pereira LM, Iversen MD, Ramos AL. What is gold standard and what is ground truth?. Dental Press J Orthod 2014 Sep-Oct;19(5):27-30.
    pmc: PMC4296658pubmed: 25715714doi: 10.1590/2176-9451.19.5.027-030.ebogoogle scholar: lookup
  21. Church EE, Walker AM, Wilson AM, Pfau T. Evaluation of discriminant analysis based on dorsoventral symmetry indices to quantify hindlimb lameness during over ground locomotion in the horse.. Equine Vet J 2009 Mar;41(3):304-8.
    pubmed: 19469241doi: 10.2746/042516409x397352google scholar: lookup
  22. Pfau T, Spicer-Jenkins C, Smith RK, Bolt DM, Fiske-Jackson A, Witte TH. Identifying optimal parameters for quantification of changes in pelvic movement symmetry as a response to diagnostic analgesia in the hindlimbs of horses.. Equine Vet J 2014 Nov;46(6):759-63.
    pubmed: 24329685doi: 10.1111/evj.12220google scholar: lookup
  23. May S. Towards a scholarship of primary health care.. Vet Rec 2015 Jun 27;176(26):677-82.
    pubmed: 26113338doi: 10.1136/vr.h2521google scholar: lookup
  24. Greve L, Dyson SJ. An investigation of the relationship between hindlimb lameness and saddle slip.. Equine Vet J 2013 Sep;45(5):570-7.
    pubmed: 23360352doi: 10.1111/evj.12029google scholar: lookup
  25. Weishaupt MA. Adaptation strategies of horses with lameness.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2008 Apr;24(1):79-100.
    pubmed: 18314037doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2007.11.010google scholar: lookup
  26. Back W, Barneveld A, van Weeren PR, van den Bogert AJ. Kinematic gait analysis in equine carpal lameness.. Acta Anat (Basel) 1993;146(2-3):86-9.
    pubmed: 8470470doi: 10.1159/000147426google scholar: lookup
  27. Starke SD, Willems E, May SA, Pfau T. Vertical head and trunk movement adaptations of sound horses trotting in a circle on a hard surface.. Vet J 2012 Jul;193(1):73-80.
    pubmed: 22104508doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.10.019google scholar: lookup
  28. Rhodin M, Roepstorff L, French A, Keegan KG, Pfau T, Egenvall A. Head and pelvic movement asymmetry during lungeing in horses with symmetrical movement on the straight.. Equine Vet J 2016 May;48(3):315-20.
    pmc: PMC5032979pubmed: 25808700doi: 10.1111/evj.12446google scholar: lookup
  29. Pfau T, Stubbs NC, Kaiser LJ, Brown LE, Clayton HM. Effect of trotting speed and circle radius on movement symmetry in horses during lunging on a soft surface.. Am J Vet Res 2012 Dec;73(12):1890-9.
    pubmed: 23176414doi: 10.2460/ajvr.73.12.1890google scholar: lookup
  30. Pfau T, Sepulveda Caviedes MF, McCarthy R, Cheetham L, Forbes B, Rhodin M. Comparison of visual lameness scores to gait asymmetry in racing Thoroughbreds during trot in‐hand. Equine Vet Educ 2020;32(4):191–8.

Citations

This article has been cited 1 times.
  1. Leclercq A, Byström A, Söderlind M, Persson E, Rhodin M, Engell MT, Hernlund E. Evaluation of feedback methods for improved detection of hindlimb lameness in horses among riding instructors and trainers.. Front Vet Sci 2022;9:992954.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.992954pubmed: 36299634google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.