Equine veterinary journal2026; doi: 10.1002/evj.70332

Validation of a novel instrumented hoof boot with pressure sensors using force plate gait kinetics in horses at walk and trot.

Keller, J
·
Hassenstein, MJ
·
Jung, K
·
Geburek, F

Abstract: Force plates (FP) are considered the gold standard for quantitative equine gait evaluation but are limited to experimental use. An instrumented hoof boot (IHB) with pressure sensors and an inertial measurement unit would allow clinicians to objectively assess kinetic parameters and gait symmetry. Objective: To validate the IHB by comparing kinetic parameters with obtained FP data. Methods: In vivo experiments. Methods: Twenty-seven horses were measured with IHBs on FPs at walk and trot. Mean value kinetic parameters recorded were: (1) peak vertical force (PVF) [N/kg]/peak vertical pressure (PVP) [N/kg]; (2) vertical impulse (AUC) [Nms/kg]; (3) peak loading rate (PLR) [N/ms]; (4) stance duration (StD) [ms] and (5) time of peak vertical force (TPVF) [%stance]/time of peak vertical pressure (TPVP) [%stance]. Agreement and correlation were assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and Kendall's correlation coefficient τ. Significance level was set at α = 5%. Results: Bland-Altman plots showed an overall moderate to good agreement with following mean difference (bias) and 95% limits of agreement (95%LoA) for IHB and FP: PVF/PVP [N/kg] walk: bias -0.197 (95%LoA: -0.786 to 0.392), trot: bias 0.0516 (95%LoA: -1.01 to 1.11), AUC [Nms/kg] walk: bias -80 (95%LoA: -420 to 260), trot: bias -44.4 (95%LoA: -291 to 202), PLR [N/ms] walk: bias 0.467 (95%LoA: -0.582 to 1.52), trot: bias 6.24 (95%LoA: -0.675 to 13.2), StD [ms] walk: bias 60.4 (95%LoA: -6.36 to 127), trot: bias 28.7 (95%LoA: -1.47 to 58.8), TPVF/TPVP [%stance] walk: bias -1.72 (95%LoA: -8.28 to 4.83), trot: bias -2.8 (95%LoA: -6.43 to 0.832). Correlations were very strong to fair positive. Conclusions: Small, mixed-breed population, pending repeatability study, ex vivo calibration on manufacturers' behalf. Conclusions: The IHB is a portable, quick method for kinetic gait analysis that approximates the gold standard FP, offering a promising tool for future clinical use.

Get Full Text

Publication Date: 2026-09-30 PubMed ID: 42817594DOI: 10.1002/evj.70332Google 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.

Facebook X LinkedIn Email Copy

Summary
Cite This
Publication
Affiliations
Grants
References
Citations

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 research validated a new instrumented hoof boot (IHB) equipped with pressure sensors by comparing its measurements to those from conventional force plates (FP), the gold standard for assessing horse gait kinetics.
The study found that the IHB closely approximates FP data during walking and trotting, suggesting it is a practical tool for clinical kinetic gait evaluation in horses.

Background and Motivation

Force plates (FP) provide precise kinetic data during equine gait analysis but are restricted to laboratory or experimental settings due to their size, cost, and setup complexity.
Clinicians need portable and practical devices to objectively measure kinetic parameters and symmetry in horse gaits during routine evaluations.
The instrumented hoof boot (IHB) integrates pressure sensors and an inertial measurement unit directly into a wearable boot, potentially enabling on-site gait analysis.

Objective

The main goal was to validate the IHB by assessing how well its kinetic measurements match those obtained simultaneously from force plates during walking and trotting.
This ensures that the portable boot can reliably approximate the gold standard data in clinical or field conditions.

Methodology

Subjects: 27 horses of mixed breeds.
Procedure:
- Horses were outfitted with IHBs on their hooves while walking and trotting over force plates.
- Kinetic parameters were recorded by both systems simultaneously to enable direct comparison.
Measured kinetic parameters included:
- Peak Vertical Force (PVF) and Peak Vertical Pressure (PVP) normalized by body weight [N/kg]
- Vertical Impulse (Area Under Curve, AUC) [Nms/kg]
- Peak Loading Rate (PLR) [N/ms]
- Stance Duration (StD) [ms]
- Time of Peak Vertical Force/Pressure (TPVF/TPVP) expressed as a percentage of stance phase [% stance]
Data analysis:
- Agreement between IHB and FP was assessed with Bland-Altman plots, which show bias and limits of agreement.
- Correlations were analyzed using Kendall’s tau correlation coefficient (τ) to assess the strength and direction of association.
- A significance level of 5% (α=0.05) was set for statistical tests.

Results

Bland-Altman Analysis:
- Generally showed moderate to good agreement across parameters during walk and trot.
- Bias values for parameters like PVF/PVP were close to zero, confirming small systematic differences between devices.
- 95% Limits of Agreement (LoA) indicated variability ranges within acceptable bounds for clinical use, though wider for some measures like vertical impulse.
Kendall’s Tau Correlations:
- Correlations between IHB and FP measurements ranged from fair to very strong positive, confirming that both devices tracked similar kinetic patterns.
- Correlations were consistent for both walking and trotting gaits.

Conclusions

The instrumented hoof boot provides a portable, rapid method for kinetic gait analysis that reasonably approximates force plate data.
This positions the IHB as a valuable tool for clinical environments where standard force plates are impractical.
Study limitations noted include the small and mixed-breed sample size and the need for further studies on repeatability and ex vivo calibration to confirm accuracy and reliability.
Overall, the IHB offers promise for more accessible, objective assessment of horse locomotion in clinical and field conditions.

Cite This Article

APA

Keller J, Hassenstein MJ, Jung K, Geburek F. (2026). Validation of a novel instrumented hoof boot with pressure sensors using force plate gait kinetics in horses at walk and trot. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1002/evj.70332

Publication

Equine veterinary journal

ISSN: 2042-3306

NlmUniqueID: 0173320

Country: United States

Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Keller, Jasmin

Clinic for Horses, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.

Hassenstein, Max J

Institute of Animal Genomics, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Unit for Research Data Management, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.

Jung, Klaus

Institute of Animal Genomics, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.

Geburek, Florian

Clinic for Horses, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.

Grant Funding

ContiTech Deutschland GmbH

References

This article includes 50 references

Merkens HW, Schamhardt HC. Evaluation of equine locomotion during different degrees of experimentally induced lameness I: lameness model and quantification of ground reaction force patterns of the limbs. Equine Vet J 1988;20(S6):99–106.
Clayton HM, Schamhardt HC. Measurement techniques for gait analysis. In: Equine locomotion. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Saunders/Elsevier; 2013. p. 31–60.
Clayton HM. The force plate: established technology, new applications. Vet J 2005;169(1):15–16.
Dow SM, Leendertz JA, Silver IA, Goodship AE. Identification of subclinical tendon injury from ground reaction force analysis. Equine Vet J 1991;23(4):266–272.
Williams GE, Silverman BW, Wilson AM, Goodship AE. Disease‐specific changes in equine ground reaction force data documented by use of principal component analysis. Am J Vet Res 1999;60(5):549–555.
Back W, MacAllister CG, van Heel MCV, Pollmeier M, Hanson PD. Vertical frontlimb ground reaction forces of sound and lame warmbloods differ from those in quarter horses. J Equine Vet Sci 2007;27(3):123–129.
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;234:11–23.
Oosterlinck M, Pille F, Back W, Dewulf J, Gasthuys F. Use of a stand‐alone pressure plate for the objective evaluation of forelimb symmetry in sound ponies at walk and trot. Vet J 2010;183(3):305–309.
Oosterlinck M, Pille F, Huppes T, Gasthuys F, Back W. Comparison of pressure plate and force plate gait kinetics in sound warmbloods at walk and trot. Vet J 2010;186(3):347–351.
Merkens HW, Schamhardt HC, van Osch GJVM, van den Bogert AJ. Ground reaction force patterns of Dutch warmblood horses at normal trot. Equine Vet J 1993;25(2):134–137.
Quddus M, Kingsbury H, Rooney J. A force and motion study of the foreleg of a standardbred trotter. J Equine Med Surg 1978;2:233–242.
Merkens HW, Schamhardt HC, Hartman W, Kersjes AW. Ground reaction force patterns of Dutch warmblood horses at normal walk. Equine Vet J 1986;18(3):207–214.
Frederick F Jr, Henderson JM. Impact force measurement using preloaded transducers. Am J Vet Res 1970;31(12):2279–2284.
Ratzlaff MH, Hyde ML, Grant BD, Balch O, Wilson PD. Measurement of vertical forces and temporal components of the strides of horses using instrumented shoes. J Equine Vet Sci 1990;10(1):23–35.
Kai M, Aoki O, Hiraga A, Oki H, Tokuriki M. Use of an instrument sandwiched between the hoof and shoe to measure vertical ground reaction forces and three‐dimensional acceleration at the walk, trot, and canter in horses. Am J Vet Res 2000;61(8):979–985.
Roepstorff L, Drevemo S. Concept of a force‐measuring horseshoe.. Cells Tissues Organs 1993;146(2–3):114–119.
Hjertén G, Drevemo S. Semi‐quantitative analysis of hoof‐strike in the horse.. J Biomech 1994;27(8):997–1004.
Hjertén G, Drevemo S. A method to analyse forces and moments in the extremities of the horse during the stance phase at the trot.. Equine Exerc Physiol Suppl 1987;2:587–598.
Björck G. Studies on the draught force of horses. Development of a method using strain gauges for measuring forces between hoof and ground.. Acta Agric Scand 1958;8(Suppl. 4):1–109.
Chateau H, Robin D, Simonelli T, Pacquet L, Pourcelot P, Falala S. Design and validation of a dynamometric horseshoe for the measurement of 3D ground reaction force on a moving horse.. J Biomech 2009;42:336–340.
Roland ES, Hull ML, Stover SM. Design and demonstration of a dynamometric horseshoe for measuring ground reaction loads of horses during racing conditions.. J Biomech 2005;38(10):2102–2112.
Dohne W. Biokinetische Untersuchungen am Huf des Pferdes mittels eines Kraftmessschuhes [Biokinetic investigations of the equine hoof using a force‐measuring hoofboot] [dissertation].. Hannover, Deutschland: Stiftung Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover; 1991.
Barrey E. Investigation of the vertical hoof force distribution in the equine forelimb with an instrumented horseboot.. Equine Vet J 1990;22(S9):35–38.
Devolin A, Haider I, Kenny O, Edwards WB, Murari K, Scott WM. An instrumented equine shoe for kinetic gait analysis.. In: 2023 IEEE biomedical circuits and systems conference (BioCAS), 2023 Oct 19–21, Toronto, ON, Canada. p. 1–5.
Marey EJ. La machine animale: locomotion terrestre et aérienne.. Paris: G. Bailliére; 1878.
Perino VV, Kawcak CE, Frisbie DD, Reiser RF, McIlwraith CW. The accuracy and precision of an equine in‐shoe pressure measurement system as a tool for gait analysis.. J Equine Vet Sci 2007;27(4):161–166.
Judy CE, Galuppo LD, Snyder JR, Willits NH. Evaluation of an in‐shoe pressure measurement system in horses.. Am J Vet Res 2001;62(1):23–28.
Hoffmann JR, Geburek F, Hagen J, Büttner K, Cruz AM, Röcken M. Bilateral change in vertical hoof force distribution in horses with unilateral forelimb lameness before and after successful diagnostic anaesthesia.. Animals 2022;12(18):2485.
Chan YH. Biostatistics 104: correlational analysis.. Singapore Med J 2003;44(12):614–619.
Weishaupt MA, Hogg HP, Auer JA, Wiestner T. Velocity‐dependent changes of time, force and spatial parameters in warmblood horses walking and trotting on a treadmill.. Equine Vet J Suppl 2010;38:530–537.
Braganca F, Hernlund E, Thomsen MH, Waldern NM, Rhodin M, Byström A. Adaptation strategies of horses with induced forelimb lameness walking on a treadmill. Equine Vet J 2020;53(3):600–611.
Oosterlinck M, Pille F, Back W, Dewulf J, Gasthuys F. A pressure plate study on fore and hindlimb loading and the association with hoof contact area in sound ponies at the walk and trot. Vet J 2011;190(1):71–76.
Sirohi J, Chopra I. Fundamental understanding of piezoelectric strain sensors. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2000;11(4):246–257.
Lotichius J. Modellbildung der Messunsicherheit resistiver Sensorsysteme [Modeling the Measurement Uncertainty of Resistive Sensor Systems]. [dissertation]. Darmstadt: Technische Universität Darmstadt; 2017.
Bae B, Flachsbart BR, Park K, Shannon MA. Design optimization of a piezoresistive pressure sensor considering the output signal‐to‐noise ratio. J Micromech Microeng 2004;14(12):1597–1607.
Ishihara A, Bertone AL, Rajala‐Schultz PJ. Association between subjective lameness grade and kinetic gait parameters in horses with experimentally induced forelimb lameness. Am J Vet Res 2005;66(10):1805–1815.
Logan AA, Nielsen BD, Hallock DB, Robison CI, Popovich JM Jr. Evaluation of within‐ and between‐session reliability of the TekscanTM hoof system with a glue‐on shoe. J Equine Vet Sci 2022;110:103862.
Müller‐Quirin J, Dittmann MT, Roepstorff C, Arpagaus S, Latif SN, Weishaupt MA. Riding soundness—comparison of subjective with objective lameness assessments of owner‐sound horses at trot on a treadmill. J Equine Vet Sci 2020;95:103314.
Weishaupt MA, Wiestner T, Hogg HP, Jordan P, Auer JA, Barrey E. Assessment of gait irregularities in the horse: eye vs. gait analysis. Equine Vet J 2001;33(S33):135–140.
Rhodin M, Egenvall A, Andersen PH, Pfau T. Head and pelvic movement asymmetries at trot in riding horses perceived as sound by their owner. Equine Vet J 2015;47(S48):10–11.
Weishaupt MA, Wiestner T, Hogg HP, Jordan P, Auer JA. Compensatory load redistribution of horses with induced weightbearing hindlimb lameness trotting on a treadmill. Equine Vet J 2004;36(8):727–733.
Weishaupt MA, Wiestner T, Hogg HP, Jordan P, Auer JA. Compensatory load redistribution of horses with induced weight‐bearing forelimb lameness trotting on a treadmill. Vet J 2006;171(1):135–146.
Faramarzi B, Hung F, Dong F. Correlational characteristics of hoof conformation and midstance kinetics at walk. J Equine Vet Sci 2020;94:103208.
Hagen J, Bos R, Brouwer J, Lux S, Jung FT. Influence of trimming, hoof angle and shoeing on breakover duration in sound horses examined with hoof‐mounted inertial sensors. Vet Rec 2021;189(4):e450.
Mokry A, van de Water E, Politiek HT, van Doorn DA, Pille F, Oosterlinck M. Dynamic evaluation of toe–heel and medio‐lateral load distribution and hoof landing patterns in sound, unshod standardbred horses with toed‐in, toed‐out and normal hoof conformation. Vet J 2021;268:105593.
Amitrano FN, Gutierrez‐Nibeyro SD, Schaeffer DJ. Effect of hoof boots and toe‐extension shoes on the forelimb kinetics of horses during walking. Am J Vet Res 2016;77(5):527–533.
Rumpler B, Riha A, Licka T, Kotschwar A, Peham C. Influence of shoes with different weights on the motion of the limbs in Icelandic horses during toelt at different speeds. Equine Vet J 2010;42(s38):451–454.
Lawin FJ, Byström A, Roepstorff C, Rhodin M, Almlöf M, Silva M. Is markerless more or less? Comparing a smartphone computer vision method for equine lameness assessment to multi‐camera motion capture. Animals 2023;13(3):390.
Kallerud AS, Marques‐Smith P, Bendiksen HK, Fjordbakk CT. Objective movement asymmetry in horses is comparable between markerless technology and sensor‐based systems. Equine Vet J 2025;57(1):115–125.
Briggs EV, Mazzà C. Automatic methods of hoof‐on and ‐off detection in horses using wearable inertial sensors during walk and trot on asphalt, sand and grass. PLoS One 2021;16(7):e0254813.