Vertical head and pelvic movement symmetry at the trot in dogs with induced supporting limb lameness

Álvarez, C. B. Gómez; Gustås, Pia; Bergh, Anna; Rhodin, Marie

doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2017.10.011

Cited by 7 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thereafter, the dogs were recorded while trotting on the treadmill (“sound registration”). Two types of lameness (supporting and swinging limb lameness) were randomly induced in all fore- and hind limbs, one limb at a time (results from our parallel study regarding the supporting limb lameness is presented in Gómez Álvarez et al [31]). The dogs were randomly assigned to one of 10 different orders of induction by drawing a number from a container.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The kinematic data was processed and three-dimensionally reconstructed with motion analysis software (Qualisys Track Manager, Qualisys AB, Gothenburg, Sweden). A custom made script in Matlab (The MathWorks, Inc, MA, USA) was used for further analyses as described in [31]. The vertical displacement of the head, pelvic and greater trochanters markers was reconstructed for all strides per trial.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been shown that a supporting forelimb lameness results in an asymmetry of the vertical head motion, with the lowest head position observed during the stance phase of the sound forelimb [4, 29–31] and that a supporting hind limb lameness results in an asymmetry of the pelvic motion, with the lowest pelvic position observed during the initial and mid-stance phase of the sound hind limb [30, 31]. Further, supporting hind limb lameness increases the overall vertical hip motion on the affected side during the stance phase of the sound limb, showing a hip movement asymmetry (“hip hike”) on the affected side [31]. Furthermore, a primary supporting fore- or hind limb lameness may result in additional movements of the hip and head, respectively, referred to as a “false” or compensatory lameness [30, 31].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, supporting hind limb lameness increases the overall vertical hip motion on the affected side during the stance phase of the sound limb, showing a hip movement asymmetry (“hip hike”) on the affected side [31]. Furthermore, a primary supporting fore- or hind limb lameness may result in additional movements of the hip and head, respectively, referred to as a “false” or compensatory lameness [30, 31]. Despite the prevalent use of the “head nod” and “hip hike” in the visual lameness investigation of dogs, little is known on how the motion alters during different types of lameness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the prevalent use of the “head nod” and “hip hike” in the visual lameness investigation of dogs, little is known on how the motion alters during different types of lameness. Quantification of head and pelvic motion in dogs during lameness (induced or clinical) has so far only been reported in a few studies [14, 30, 31]. The first [14] showed a correlation between a greater mean total pelvic vertical motion and a higher peak vertical force, registered during the stance phase of the sound hind limb, in dogs with subtle clinical stifle problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Head and pelvic vertical displacement in dogs with induced swinging limb lameness: an experimental study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSwinging limb lameness is defined as a motion disturbance ascribed to a limb in swing phase. Little is known about its biomechanics in dogs, particularly about the body motions that accompany it, such as vertical head and pelvic motion asymmetry. The aim of this study was to describe the changes in vertical head and pelvic motion asymmetry in dogs with induced swinging limb motion disturbance, mimicking a swinging limb lameness. Fore- and hind-limb lameness was induced in ten sound dogs by placing a weight (200 g) proximal to the carpus or tarsus, respectively. Marker-based motion capture by eight infrared light emitting video cameras recorded the dogs when trotting on a treadmill. Body symmetry parameters were calculated, including differences between the two highest positions of the head (HDmax) and pelvis (PDmax) and between the two lowest positions of the head (HDmin) and pelvis (PDmin), with a value of zero indicating perfect symmetry.ResultsInduction of swinging forelimb lameness showed significant changes in HDmax (median and range: sound 1.3 mm [− 4.7 to 3.1], in the left side − 28.5 mm [− 61.2 to − 17.9] and in the right side 20.1 mm [− 4.4 to 47.5]) and, induction of swinging hind limb lameness showed significant changes in PDmax (sound 2.7 mm [− 7.4 to 7.2], in the left side − 10.9 mm [− 22.4 to 0.5] and in the right side 8.6 mm [− 3 to 30]), as well as an increased hip movement asymmetry (sound 1.6 mm [− 8.6 to 19.9], in the left side − 18.1 mm [− 36.7 to 5.4] and in the right side 15 mm [− 20.7 to 32.1]) (P < 0.05).ConclusionsInduced swinging fore- and hind limb lameness resulted in significant increased asymmetry of the maximal vertical displacement movement of the head and pelvis, due to decreased lifting of the head in forelimb lameness and of the pelvis in hind limb lameness. The results suggest that asymmetry of the maximal vertical displacement of the head and pelvis (i.e. lifting) is a key lameness sign to evaluate during examination of swinging limb lameness.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Head and pelvic vertical displacement in dogs with induced swinging limb lameness: an experimental study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Inertial sensor-based system for lameness detection in trotting dogs with induced lameness

Rhodin

Bergh

Gustås

et al. 2017

The Veterinary Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lameness detection can be challenging in dogs, as reflected in the reported low inter-rater agreement when visually assessing lameness. The aim of this study was to use an inertial sensor-based system to detect and quantify induced distal and proximal limb disturbances mimicking supporting and swinging limb lameness in dogs trotting on a treadmill by measuring vertical head and pelvic movement symmetry. Ten clinically sound dogs were equipped with inertial measurement units that were attached to the head, pelvis and right distal forelimb. Vertical head and pelvic movement symmetry were measured while dogs trotted on a treadmill, before and after the induction of moderate support or swinging fore- and hindlimb lameness. Four symmetry variables were calculated: the differences in displacement between the two lowest and between the two highest values of the head and pelvis per stride, respectively. These variables were defined as minimum head difference (HDmin), maximum head difference (HDmax), minimum pelvic difference (PDmin) and maximum pelvic difference (PDmax). Induction of supporting forelimb and hindlimb lameness produced significant changes in HDmin and PDmin, respectively. Swinging forelimb and hindlimb lameness produced significant changes in HDmax and PDmax, respectively. Additional compensatory ipsilateral forelimb and contralateral hindlimb movements were detected. Based on our findings, inertial sensor-based systems can be used to detect and quantify induced moderate lameness and differentiate between supporting and swinging limb lameness in dogs trotting on a treadmill. Further studies are needed to evaluate this method in dogs presented for clinical lameness evaluation and in overground locomotion.

show abstract

Simple Video-Based Spatiotemporal Gait Analysis Is Not Better than Subjective Visual Assessment of Lameness in Dogs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Visual gait analysis is prone to subjectivity, but objective analysis systems are not widely available to clinicians. Simple video analysis using high-definition recordings might enable identification of temporal or spatial variations that could permit objective and repeatable assessments of lameness in general practice. Methods Cohorts of normal and mildly to moderately lame dogs were filmed using a standardized protocol. Using freely available software, measurements of stance, swing and stride time were obtained, along with measurements of pelvic, shoulder, and head height for each limb. Symmetry ratios were calculated, and distributions of normal and lame dogs compared using Mann–Whitney U test and Kruskal–Wallis test. Results Recordings from 35 normal dogs were assessed along with 30 dogs with grade 1 to 3/5 lameness. While no consistent significant differences in temporal characteristics could be found, head height asymmetry was significantly different between lame and normal dogs (p = 0.003), with pairwise comparison showing this difference was restricted to forelimb-lame dogs (p = 0.03). Conclusion While potentially useful for patient records, use of video recordings at walking speeds for simple spatiotemporal gait analysis does not appear to offer clinically significant advantages over visual gait analysis in a typical clinical population of lame dogs.

show abstract

Vertical head and pelvic movement symmetry at the trot in dogs with induced supporting limb lameness

Cited by 7 publications

References 41 publications

Head and pelvic vertical displacement in dogs with induced swinging limb lameness: an experimental study

Head and pelvic vertical displacement in dogs with induced swinging limb lameness: an experimental study

Inertial sensor-based system for lameness detection in trotting dogs with induced lameness

Simple Video-Based Spatiotemporal Gait Analysis Is Not Better than Subjective Visual Assessment of Lameness in Dogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About