Effects of shoeing on forelimb swing phase kinetics of trotting horses

Summary

The objective of this study was to compare swing phase phase kinetics in the equine forelimb under three shoeing conditions: unshod, flat shoes, eggbar shoes. Flat shoes and eggbar shoes were matched for weight. A 60 Hz video camera recorded a full trotting stride in the sagittal plane during three passes per horse for each shoeing condition. A general linear model ANOVA, treating the horse as a random variable was used to detect differences (p <0.05) between shoeing conditions. All of the joints showed significant differences in net joint moments and energy bursts, between the two shod conditions versus unshod, but differences were not evident between flat shoes and eggbar shoes. When the horses were shod the elbow flexors generated more energy in the early swing phase in order to overcome the increased inertia associated with the weight of the shoes; and the elbow extensors generated more energy in late swing phase to overcome the increased momentum of the shod hoof as it was swung forward. In the distal limb in the early swing phase, energy absorption increased on the extensor (dorsal) aspect, to control joint flexion, and in the late swing phase on the flexor (palmar) aspect to control forward motion and extension. It is concluded as a consequence of changing the inertial parameters of the hoof that the weight of the shoes altered the limb kinetics of trotting horses.

Keywords

Animation - moments - powers - energies - inertial parameters

• References

• 1 Abdel-Aziz Y, Karara H. Direct linear transformation from comparator coordinates in closerange photogrammetry. In: ASP Symposium on close-Range Photogrammetry. Am Society Photogrammetry, Falls Church VA. 1971: 1-19.
• 2 Balch O, Clayton HM, Lanovaz JL. Weightand length-induced changes in limb kinematics in trotting horses. AAEP Proceedings 1996; 42: 218-9.
• 3 Buchner HHF, Savelberg HHCM, Schamhardt HC, Barneveld A. Inertial properties of Dutch warmblood horses. J. Biomech 1997; 30: 653-8.
• 4 Colborne GR, Lanovaz JL, Sprigings EJ, Schamhardt HC, Clayton HM. Joint moments and power in equine gait: a preliminary study. Equine vet. J., suppl 1997; 23: 33-6.
• 5 Jackson KM. Fitting of mathematical functions to biomechanical data. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 1979; 26: 122-4.
• 6 Lanovaz JL, Clayton HM, Colborne GR, Schamhardt HC. Forelimb kinematics and net joint moments during the swing phase phase of the trot. Equine vet. J., suppl 1999; 30: 235-9.
• 7 Lanovaz JL, Clayton HM. Sensitivity of forelimb swing phase phase inverse dynamics to inertial parameter errors. Equine vet J., suppl 2001; 33: 27-31.
• 8 Van Weeren PR, van den Bogert AJ, Barneveld A. Correction models for skin displacement in equine kinematic gait analysis. J. Equine vet. Sci 1992; 12: 178-92.
• 9 Willemen MA. Horseshoeing, a Biomechanical Analysis. PhD, Thesis, University of Utrecht, 1997
• 10 Willemen MA, Savelberg HHCM, Barneveld A. The improvement of the gait quality of sound trotting warmblood horses by normal shoeing and its effect on the load of the lower limb. Livest. Prod. Sci 1998; 52: 145-53.
• 11 Willemen MA, Savelberg HHCM, Barneveld A. The effect of orthopedic shoeing on the force exerted by the deep digital flexor tendon on the navicular bone in horses. Equine Vet. J 1999; 31: 25-30.
• 12 Winter DA. Kinematics: forces and moments of force. In: Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement, 2^nd edn. John Wiley & Sons; New York: 1990: 75-102.
• 13 Witte H. et al. Die Ganarrten der Pferde: sind Schwingungsmechanismen entscheidend? Teil II: Federschwingungen bestimmen den Trab und den Gallopp. Pferdeheilkunde 1995; 11: 265-72.