9 In another experiment, stride and stance duration, joint angles and head movement adaptations changed in a similar way in both walk and trot, but to a lesser extent at the walk.

Also a reduction of the horizontal craniocaudal ground reaction force (GRFy) in the lame limb with increased GRFy in the contralateral forelimb and ipsilateral hindlimb was seen. One study on single supporting limb lameness at walk identified decreased vertical ground reaction force (GRFz) in the lame limb, compensated by an increased GRFz in the remaining limbs. 8 Despite this, kinematic and kinetic variables suitable for objective lameness detection at walk have received little attention. 7 It has even been suggested that gait analysis at the walk may be more sensitive in detection of subtle lameness than trot. Also, some locomotor disorders due to mechanical or neurological pathology may manifest more obviously at walk. A head and neck nod has been described as a visual indicator of forelimb lameness in horses. However, lameness evaluation at the walk can be essential in horses with conditions prohibiting the support of loads associated with trot, for example, in the immediate post-surgical period. 4- 6Īt the walk, compensatory strategies for lameness are not well understood and no specific gait parameters have yet been proposed for clinical use. 1 These include vertical ground reaction forces 2 and symmetries of the vertical excursions of the head, withers and pelvis, 3 which reflect compensatory mechanisms generally related to load redistribution. Several kinetic and kinematic parameters have been validated as clinically relevant lameness indicators. Movement symmetry parameters at the trot are the main tools for subjective and objective gait assessment in the horse. However, much like at the trot, head movement and forelimb vertical force symmetry seem to be the most useful parameters to detect forelimb lameness at walk. ConclusionsĬompensatory strategies of forelimb lameness at the walk include alteration of several kinetic and kinematic parameters and have some specific patterns and inter-individual differences that are not seen at the trot. Only one degree and type of orthopaedic pain (sole pressure) was studied. The observed changes in both kinetics and kinematics were generally smaller at walk with fewer variables being affected, compared to the trot. Several compensatory kinetic and kinematic changes were observed in the nonlame limbs. Body centre of mass (COM) translation was reduced in the side-to-side direction and increased in the vertical and fore-aft directions. Maximum limb retraction angle, fetlock extension and protraction speed were reduced in the lame limb. Lameness significantly affected the vertical movement symmetry of the head and withers. Stride and stance duration in all limbs were reduced. Lameness induction significantly reduced peak GRFz on the second force peak, and vertical impulse in the lame limb. Mixed models were used to compare sound baseline versus forelimb lameness (significance was set at P < .05). Kinematic data were collected using 3D optical motion capture (OMC), and GRFz by an instrumented treadmill. In 10 clinically sound Warmblood horses, moderate forelimb lameness was induced using a sole pressure model followed by trot and walk on a treadmill. To describe the changes in motion pattern and vertical ground reaction forces (GRFz) in horses with induced forelimb lameness at the walk and compare those changes with the changes observed at the trot. There is a paucity of research describing the gait pattern of lame horses at the walk.

Lame horse