The effect of horseshoes and surfaces on horse and jockey centre of mass displacements at gallop

Timing Differences in Stride Cycle Phases in Retired Racehorses Ridden in Rising and Two-Point Seat Positions at Trot on Turf, Artificial and Tarmac Surfaces

Injuries to racehorses and their jockeys are not limited to the racetrack and high-speed work. To optimise racehorse-jockey dyads' health, well-being, and safety, it is important to understand their kinematics under the various exercise conditions they are exposed to. This includes trot work on roads, turf and artificial surfaces when accessing gallop tracks and warming up. This study quantified the forelimb hoof kinematics of racehorses trotting over tarmac, turf and artificial surfaces as their jockey adopted rising and two-point seat positions. A convenience sample of six horses was recruited from the British Racing School, Newmarket, and the horses were all ridden by the same jockey. Inertial measurement units (HoofBeat) were secured to the forelimb hooves of the horses and enabled landing, mid-stance, breakover, swing and stride durations, plus stride length, to be quantified via an in-built algorithm. Data were collected at a frequency of 1140 Hz. Linear Mixed Models were used to test for significant differences in the timing of these stride phases and stride length amongst the different surface and jockey positions. Speed was included as a covariate. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Hoof landing and mid-stance durations were negatively correlated, with approximately a 0.5 ms decrease in mid-stance duration for every 1 ms increase in landing duration (r2 = 0.5, p < 0.001). Hoof landing duration was significantly affected by surface (p < 0.001) and an interaction between jockey position and surface (p = 0.035). Landing duration was approximately 4.4 times shorter on tarmac compared to grass and artificial surfaces. Mid-stance duration was significantly affected by jockey position (p < 0.001) and surface (p = 0.001), speed (p < 0.001) and jockey position*speed (p < 0.001). Mean values for mid-stance increased by 13 ms with the jockey in the two-point seat position, and mid-stance was 19 ms longer on the tarmac than on the artificial surface. There was no significant difference in the breakover duration amongst surfaces or jockey positions (p ≥ 0.076) for the ridden dataset. However, the mean breakover duration on tarmac in the presence of a rider decreased by 21 ms compared to the in-hand dataset. Swing was significantly affected by surface (p = 0.039) and speed (p = 0.001), with a mean swing phase 20 ms longer on turf than on the artificial surface. Total stride duration was affected by surface only (p = 0.011). Tarmac was associated with a mean stride time that was significantly reduced, by 49 ms, compared to the turf, and this effect may be related to the shorter landing times on turf. Mean stride length was 14 cm shorter on tarmac than on grass, and stride length showed a strong positive correlation with speed, with a 71 cm increase in stride length for every 1 m s-1 increase in speed (r2 = 0.8, p < 0.001). In summary, this study demonstrated that the durations of the different stride cycle phases and stride length can be sensitive to surface type and jockey riding position. Further work is required to establish links between altered stride time variables and the risk of musculoskeletal injury.

Hoof Impact and Foot-Off Accelerations in Galloping Thoroughbred Racehorses Trialling Eight Shoe-Surface Combinations

The athletic performance and safety of racehorses is influenced by hoof−surface interactions. This intervention study assessed the effect of eight horseshoe−surface combinations on hoof acceleration patterns at impact and foot-off in 13 galloping Thoroughbred racehorses retired from racing. Aluminium, barefoot, GluShu (aluminium−rubber composite) and steel shoeing conditions were trialled on turf and artificial (Martin Collins Activ-Track) surfaces. Shod conditions were applied across all four hooves. Tri-axial accelerometers (SlamStickX, range ±500 g, sampling rate 5000 Hz) were attached to the dorsal hoof wall (x: medio-lateral, medial = positive; y: along dorsal hoof wall, proximal = positive; and z: perpendicular to hoof wall, dorsal = positive). Linear mixed models assessed whether surface, shoeing condition or stride time influenced maximum (most positive) or minimum (most negative) accelerations in x, y and z directions, using ≥40,691 strides (significance at p < 0.05). Day and horse−rider pair were included as random factors, and stride time was included as a covariate. Collective mean accelerations across x, y and z axes were 22−98 g at impact and 17−89 g at foot-off. The mean stride time was 0.48 ± 0.07 s (mean ±2 SD). Impact accelerations were larger on turf in all directions for forelimbs and hindlimbs (p ≤ 0.015), with the exception of the forelimb z-minimum, and in absolute terms, maximum values were typically double the minimum values. The surface type affected all foot-off accelerations (p ≤ 0.022), with the exception of the hindlimb x-maximum; for example, there was an average increase of 17% in z-maximum across limbs on the artificial track. The shoeing condition influenced all impact and foot-off accelerations in the forelimb and hindlimb datasets (p ≤ 0.024), with the exception of the hindlimb impact y-maximum. Barefoot hooves generally experienced the lowest accelerations. The stride time affected all impact and foot-off accelerations (p < 0.001). Identifying factors influencing hoof vibrations upon landing and hoof motion during propulsion bears implication for injury risk and racing outcomes.

Champing at the Bit for Improvements: A Review of Equine Welfare in Equestrian Sports in the United Kingdom

Equestrian sports, including racing (e.g., flat, steeple-chasing, harness or donkey derby); show-jumping; cross-country; dressage; polo; polocrosse; endurance; carriage driving; vaulting and hunting; are hugely popular in the UK, and they involve a significant number of people, both as participants and spectators, and tens of thousands of equids. In this paper, we discuss animal welfare as a complex and disputed issue, clarifying what the term means and how it can be measured. We review many aspects of welfare risk to equids used for sport, addressing issues encountered throughout their lives, including housing, feeding, veterinary intervention, shoeing, handling, training, breeding and equipment. This is followed by a unique exploration of the institutions and social processes influencing equine welfare. The institutional components comprise the rules of competition, the equids, attributes of the stakeholders and the space where participants strive to achieve a common purpose. We endeavour to untangle the most significant elements that create barriers or provide opportunities for equine welfare improvement. We expose the challenges faced by a broad range of stakeholders with differing ethics, attitudes and values. Evidently, there are many welfare risks to which equids used in sports continue to be exposed. It is also evident that significant improvements have occurred in recent times, but there remains a barrier to reducing the risks to an acceptable level. We conclude with recommendations regarding a process for change, involvement of stakeholders and management of knowledge to improve equine welfare that involves identifying and prioritising the risk factors and ultimately leading to interventions, further research and/or education.