search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
EQUINE VETERINARY EDUCATION Equine vet. Educ. (2022) 34 (7) 371 doi: 10.1111/eve.13434_1


Original Article


The influence of rider skill on ridden horse behaviour, assessed using the Ridden Horse Pain Ethogram, and gait quality


S. Dyson†* , C. Martin‡, A. Bondi§ and A. D. Ellis¶ †The Cottage, Market Weston; ‡Writtle University College, Chelmsford; §Firbeck House, Worksop; and ¶UNEQUI Ltd., West Bridgford, UK *Corresponding author email: sue.dyson@aol.com


Keywords: horse; riding; lameness; trot; canter


Summary Background The Ridden Horse Pain Ethogram (RHpE) was developed to facilitate identification of musculoskeletal pain.


Objectives To determine the influence of rider skill on ridden horse performance and behaviour, the latter using the RHpE. It was hypothesised that gait quality at trot and canter would improve with a more skilled rider compared with a less-skilled rider, but the RHpE scores would be similar.


Study design Repeated measures investigation.


Methods Forty horses, in regular work and presumed by their riders to be non-lame, were ridden by their normal rider (N) and a skilled professional rider (P), performing a dressage-type test over 8.5 min. Twenty horses were ridden first by rider P and 20 were ridden first by rider N. The presence of lameness or gait abnormalities in canter was recorded. Standardised video recordings were acquired. All videos were anonymised and presented in random order to the assessors. Rider skill and horse gait quality were graded (F


ed eration Equestre Internationale scale, 1–10), and the


RHpE was applied to each horse using the video recordings.


Results Rider P had a higher median skill score (6/10) compared with the N riders (4.5/10) (P<0.001). There was a correlation between rider skill scores and gait quality scores (P<0.001). The presence of lameness or gait abnormalities in canter,


when ridden by riders N and P, varied among horses. The median RHpE score for all horses was 9/24 (range 3–14). There was no difference in mean or median RHpE scores between the N riders and rider P. There was some variance in the frequency of occurrence of specific behaviours between the N riders and rider P.


Main limitations The identity of rider P could not be concealed.


Conclusions There was no direct relationship between rider skill level and the RHpE score, but riders did alter the manifestations of some behaviours.


Clinical relevance


• Different riders influence the presence or absence of mild lameness or gait abnormalities in canter in an unpredictable way.


• A more skilled rider may keep some horses better balanced, effectively concealing low-grade lameness, although he/she may accentuate lameness in others by asking for increased hindlimb impulsion. The same effect may not be seen with more severe lameness, or when horses are required to perform more biomechanically demanding movements.


• Although a skilled rider may improve the gait quality of a horse and reduce the degree of lameness, the RHpE score may not improve, although the manifestations of different behaviours may change.


371


© 2020 EVJ Ltd


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88