Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces

Jacob J. Setterbo, Tanya C. Garcia, Ian P. Campbell, Jennifer L. Reese, Jessica M. Morgan, Sun Y. Kim, Mont Hubbard, Susan M Stover

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective - To compare hoof acceleration and ground reaction force (GRF) data among dirt, synthetic, and turf surfaces in Thoroughbred racehorses. Animals - 3 healthy Thoroughbred racehorses. Procedures - Forelimb hoof accelerations and GRFs were measured with an accelerometer and a dynamometric horseshoe during trot and canter on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces at a racecourse. Maxima, minima, temporal components, and a measure of vibration were extracted from the data. Acceleration and GRF variables were compared statistically among surfaces. Results - The synthetic surface often had the lowest peak accelerations, mean vibration, and peak GRFs. Peak acceleration during hoof landing was significantly smaller for the synthetic surface (mean ± SE, 28.5g ± 2.9g) than for the turf surface (42.9g ± 3.8g). Hoof vibrations during hoof landing for the synthetic surface were < 70% of those for the dirt and turf surfaces. Peak GRF for the synthetic surface (11.5 ± 0.4 N/kg) was 83% and 71% of those for the dirt (13.8 ± 0.3 N/kg) and turf surfaces (16.1 ± 0.7 N/kg), respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - The relatively low hoof accelerations, vibrations, and peak GRFs associated with the synthetic surface evaluated in the present study indicated that synthetic surfaces have potential for injury reduction in Thoroughbred racehorses. However, because of the unique material properties and different nature of individual dirt, synthetic, and turf racetrack surfaces, extending the results of this study to encompass all track surfaces should be done with caution.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1220-1229
Number of pages10
JournalAmerican Journal of Veterinary Research
Volume70
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2009

Fingerprint

Hoof and Claw
racehorses
hooves
lawns and turf
Vibration
vibration
Forelimb
forelimbs
Wounds and Injuries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • veterinary(all)

Cite this

Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces. / Setterbo, Jacob J.; Garcia, Tanya C.; Campbell, Ian P.; Reese, Jennifer L.; Morgan, Jessica M.; Kim, Sun Y.; Hubbard, Mont; Stover, Susan M.

In: American Journal of Veterinary Research, Vol. 70, No. 10, 10.2009, p. 1220-1229.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Setterbo, Jacob J. ; Garcia, Tanya C. ; Campbell, Ian P. ; Reese, Jennifer L. ; Morgan, Jessica M. ; Kim, Sun Y. ; Hubbard, Mont ; Stover, Susan M. / Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces. In: American Journal of Veterinary Research. 2009 ; Vol. 70, No. 10. pp. 1220-1229.
@article{18341bc034b24ce1ae9d9c988ff7e922,
title = "Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces",
abstract = "Objective - To compare hoof acceleration and ground reaction force (GRF) data among dirt, synthetic, and turf surfaces in Thoroughbred racehorses. Animals - 3 healthy Thoroughbred racehorses. Procedures - Forelimb hoof accelerations and GRFs were measured with an accelerometer and a dynamometric horseshoe during trot and canter on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces at a racecourse. Maxima, minima, temporal components, and a measure of vibration were extracted from the data. Acceleration and GRF variables were compared statistically among surfaces. Results - The synthetic surface often had the lowest peak accelerations, mean vibration, and peak GRFs. Peak acceleration during hoof landing was significantly smaller for the synthetic surface (mean ± SE, 28.5g ± 2.9g) than for the turf surface (42.9g ± 3.8g). Hoof vibrations during hoof landing for the synthetic surface were < 70{\%} of those for the dirt and turf surfaces. Peak GRF for the synthetic surface (11.5 ± 0.4 N/kg) was 83{\%} and 71{\%} of those for the dirt (13.8 ± 0.3 N/kg) and turf surfaces (16.1 ± 0.7 N/kg), respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - The relatively low hoof accelerations, vibrations, and peak GRFs associated with the synthetic surface evaluated in the present study indicated that synthetic surfaces have potential for injury reduction in Thoroughbred racehorses. However, because of the unique material properties and different nature of individual dirt, synthetic, and turf racetrack surfaces, extending the results of this study to encompass all track surfaces should be done with caution.",
author = "Setterbo, {Jacob J.} and Garcia, {Tanya C.} and Campbell, {Ian P.} and Reese, {Jennifer L.} and Morgan, {Jessica M.} and Kim, {Sun Y.} and Mont Hubbard and Stover, {Susan M}",
year = "2009",
month = "10",
doi = "10.2460/ajvr.70.10.1220",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "70",
pages = "1220--1229",
journal = "American Journal of Veterinary Research",
issn = "0002-9645",
publisher = "American Veterinary Medical Association",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces

AU - Setterbo, Jacob J.

AU - Garcia, Tanya C.

AU - Campbell, Ian P.

AU - Reese, Jennifer L.

AU - Morgan, Jessica M.

AU - Kim, Sun Y.

AU - Hubbard, Mont

AU - Stover, Susan M

PY - 2009/10

Y1 - 2009/10

N2 - Objective - To compare hoof acceleration and ground reaction force (GRF) data among dirt, synthetic, and turf surfaces in Thoroughbred racehorses. Animals - 3 healthy Thoroughbred racehorses. Procedures - Forelimb hoof accelerations and GRFs were measured with an accelerometer and a dynamometric horseshoe during trot and canter on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces at a racecourse. Maxima, minima, temporal components, and a measure of vibration were extracted from the data. Acceleration and GRF variables were compared statistically among surfaces. Results - The synthetic surface often had the lowest peak accelerations, mean vibration, and peak GRFs. Peak acceleration during hoof landing was significantly smaller for the synthetic surface (mean ± SE, 28.5g ± 2.9g) than for the turf surface (42.9g ± 3.8g). Hoof vibrations during hoof landing for the synthetic surface were < 70% of those for the dirt and turf surfaces. Peak GRF for the synthetic surface (11.5 ± 0.4 N/kg) was 83% and 71% of those for the dirt (13.8 ± 0.3 N/kg) and turf surfaces (16.1 ± 0.7 N/kg), respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - The relatively low hoof accelerations, vibrations, and peak GRFs associated with the synthetic surface evaluated in the present study indicated that synthetic surfaces have potential for injury reduction in Thoroughbred racehorses. However, because of the unique material properties and different nature of individual dirt, synthetic, and turf racetrack surfaces, extending the results of this study to encompass all track surfaces should be done with caution.

AB - Objective - To compare hoof acceleration and ground reaction force (GRF) data among dirt, synthetic, and turf surfaces in Thoroughbred racehorses. Animals - 3 healthy Thoroughbred racehorses. Procedures - Forelimb hoof accelerations and GRFs were measured with an accelerometer and a dynamometric horseshoe during trot and canter on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces at a racecourse. Maxima, minima, temporal components, and a measure of vibration were extracted from the data. Acceleration and GRF variables were compared statistically among surfaces. Results - The synthetic surface often had the lowest peak accelerations, mean vibration, and peak GRFs. Peak acceleration during hoof landing was significantly smaller for the synthetic surface (mean ± SE, 28.5g ± 2.9g) than for the turf surface (42.9g ± 3.8g). Hoof vibrations during hoof landing for the synthetic surface were < 70% of those for the dirt and turf surfaces. Peak GRF for the synthetic surface (11.5 ± 0.4 N/kg) was 83% and 71% of those for the dirt (13.8 ± 0.3 N/kg) and turf surfaces (16.1 ± 0.7 N/kg), respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - The relatively low hoof accelerations, vibrations, and peak GRFs associated with the synthetic surface evaluated in the present study indicated that synthetic surfaces have potential for injury reduction in Thoroughbred racehorses. However, because of the unique material properties and different nature of individual dirt, synthetic, and turf racetrack surfaces, extending the results of this study to encompass all track surfaces should be done with caution.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350509376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350509376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2460/ajvr.70.10.1220

DO - 10.2460/ajvr.70.10.1220

M3 - Article

C2 - 19795936

AN - SCOPUS:70350509376

VL - 70

SP - 1220

EP - 1229

JO - American Journal of Veterinary Research

JF - American Journal of Veterinary Research

SN - 0002-9645

IS - 10

ER -