Quick Search:

uzh logo
Browse by:

Zurich Open Repository and Archive

Maintenance: Tuesday, 5.7.2016, 07:00-08:00

Maintenance work on ZORA and JDB on Tuesday, 5th July, 07h00-08h00. During this time there will be a brief unavailability for about 1 hour. Please be patient.

Permanent URL to this publication: http://dx.doi.org/10.5167/uzh-19490

Weishaupt, Michael A; Wiestner, Thomas; von Peinen, Katja; Waldern, Nina; Roepstorff, L; van Weeren, R; Meyer, H; Johnston, C (2006). Effect of head and neck position on vertical ground reaction forces and interlimb coordination in the dressage horse ridden at walk and trot on a treadmill. Equine Veterinary Journal. Supplement, 36:387-392.



REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Little is known in quantitative terms about the influence of different head-neck positions (HNPs) on the loading pattern of the locomotor apparatus. Therefore it is difficult to predict whether a specific riding technique is beneficial for the horse or if it may increase the risk for injury. OBJECTIVE: To improve the understanding of forelimb-hindlimb balance and its underlying temporal changes in relation to different head and neck positions.
METHODS: Vertical ground reaction force and time parameters of each limb were measured in 7 high level dressage horses while being ridden at walk and trot on an instrumented treadmill in 6 predetermined HNPs: HNP1 - free, unrestrained with loose reins; HNP2 - neck raised, bridge of the nose in front of the vertical; HNP3 - neck raised, bridge of the nose behind the vertical; HNP4 - neck lowered and flexed, bridge of the nose considerably behind the vertical; HNP5 - neck extremely elevated and bridge of the nose considerably in front of the vertical; HNP6 - neck and head extended forward and downward. Positions were judged by a qualified dressage judge. HNPs were assessed by comparing the data to a velocity-matched reference HNP (HNP2). Differences were tested using paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test (P<0.05).
RESULTS: At the walk, stride duration and overreach distance increased in HNP1, but decreased in HNP3 and HNP5. Stride impulse was shifted to the forehand in HNP1 and HNP6, but shifted to the hindquarters in HNP5. At the trot, stride duration increased in HNP4 and HNP5. Overreach distance was shorter in HNP4. Stride impulse shifted to the hindquarters in HNP5. In HNP1 peak forces decreased in the forelimbs; in HNP5 peak forces increased in fore- and hindlimbs.
CONCLUSIONS: HNP5 had the biggest impact on limb timing and load distribution and behaved inversely to HNP1 and HNP6. Shortening of forelimb stance duration in HNP5 increased peak forces although the percentage of stride impulse carried by the forelimbs decreased.
POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: An extremely high HNP affects functionality much more than an extremely low neck.



56 downloads since deposited on 29 Jun 2009
18 downloads since 12 months

Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:05 Vetsuisse Faculty > Veterinary Clinic > Equine Department
Dewey Decimal Classification:570 Life sciences; biology
630 Agriculture
Deposited On:29 Jun 2009 12:04
Last Modified:05 May 2016 07:23
Publisher:Equine Veterinary Journal
PubMed ID:17402453

Users (please log in): suggest update or correction for this item

Repository Staff Only: item control page