Evaluation of a treadmill with integrated force plates for kinetic gait analysis of sound and lame dogs at a trot

Summary

The objective was to compare mean peak vertical force (PVF) obtained with a treadmill with two integrated force plates (TM) with the piezoelectric force platform (FP) for sound and lame dogs at a trot. The aim was also to report the inter-step variability (ISV) for both systems and the effect of lameness on these values. Six sound dogs (20.0–25.5 kg) and six dogs with a grade 2/5 forelimb lameness (17.0–36.1 kg) were used in the study. Dogs were acclimatized and assigned an individual target velocity (1.8–2.2 m/s). Mean PVF measurements were obtained for both TM and FP. Subject velocity was controlled by belt speed on TM and restricted to 0.25 M/s above or below the assigned target velocity for FP. Acceleration was limited to +/- 0.3 M/s2. For the sound dogs, concordance and correlation coefficients of the mean PVF for the front limbs was 0.79 and 0.76, respectively. Concordance and correlation for the rear limbs was 0.90 and 0.81, respectively. For the lame dogs, concordance and correlation for the front limbs was 0.73 and 0.59, respectively. Concordance and correlation for the rear limbs was 0.89 and 0.95, respectively. ISV was 0.94 with TM and 0.84 with FP for the sound dogs and 0.96 with TM and 0.87 with FP for the lame dogs. In conclusion, TM provided rapid PVF measurements, good concordance for the hind limbs, and substantial concordance for the forelimbs in both sound and lame dogs at a trot as compared to FP. Both systems demonstrated excellent ISV for both lame and sound dogs.

Keywords

Treadmill - kinetic - gait analysis - force plate - dog

• References

• 1 Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC, Souta-Little RW. Force plate analysis of the walking gait in healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 1987; 48: 915-8.
• 2 Anderson AM, Mann FA. Force plate analysis: a non-invasive tool for gait evaluation. Comp Vet Cont Edu 1994; 16: 857-65.
• 3 Bertram JE, Lee DV, Case HN. Comparison of the trotting gaits of Labrador Retrievers and Greyhounds. Am JVet Res 2000; 61: 832-8.
• 4 Adriany E, Matis U. Gait analysis in dogs following TPLO: Short term results of a prospective study ESVOT-VOS proceedings abstract. 2002
• 5 Bertram JE, Lee DV, Todhunter RJ. Multiple force platform analysis of the canine trot: a new approach to assessing basic characteristics of locomotion. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1997; 10: 160-9.
• 6 Kennedy S, Lee D, Bertram G. et al. Gait evaluation in hip osteoarthritic and normal dogs using a serial force plate system. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 16: 170-7.
• 7 Besancon M, Conzemius M, Derrick T. et al. Comparison ofvertical forces in normal greyhounds between force platform and pressure walkway system. VetCompOrthop Traumatol 2003; 16: 154-7.
• 8 Romans CW, Conzemius MG, Horstman CL. et al. Use of pressure platform gait analysis in cats with and without bilateral onychectomy. Am J Vet Res 2004; 65: 1276-8.
• 9 Waltraud O, Matis U. Ganganalyse beim Hund. Teil 1: Dynamometrische und kinemetrische Meßverfahren und ihre Anwendung bei Tetrapoden. Tierärztl Prax 1997; 25: 8-14.
• 10 Waltraud O, Matis U. Ganganalyse beim Hund. Teil 2: Aufbau eines Ganglabors und bewegungsanalytische Untersuchungen. Tierärztl Prax 1997; 25: 303-11.
• 11 McLauglin RM. Kinetic and kinematic gait analysis in dogs. Vet Clin of North America. Volume 31. No. 1 January 2001
• 12 Budsberg SC, Vertstraete MC, Brown J. et al. Vertical loading rates in clinically normal dogs at a trot. Am JVet Res 1995; 56: 1275-80.
• 13 Jevens D, Hauptman JG, DeCamp CE. Contributions to variance in force plate analysis of gait in dogs. Am JVet Res 1993; 54: 612-5.
• 14 Riggs CM, DeCamp CE, Soutas-Little RW. Effects of subject velocity on force plate measure ground reaction forces in healthy Greyhounds at the trot. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54: 1523-6.
• 15 McLaughlin RM, Roush JK. Effects of subject stance time and velocity on ground reaction forces in clinically normal Greyhounds at the trot. Am J VetRes 1994; 55: 1666-71.
• 16 Roush J, McLaughlin R. Effects of stance time and velocity on ground reaction forces in clinically normal Greyhounds at the walk. Am J Vet Res 1994; 22: 1672-6.
• 17 Rumph PF, Lander JE, Kincaid SA. Ground reaction force profiles from platform gait analysis of clinically normal mesomorphic dogs at the trot. Am JVet Res 1994; 55: 756-61.
• 18 McLaughlin R, Roush J. Effects of increasing velocity on braking and propulsion times during force plate gait analysis in Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 1995; 56: 139-61.
• 19 Rumph P, Steiss J, Montgomery R. Effects of selection and habituation on vertical ground reactionforces in Greyhounds. Am JVet Res 1997; S8: 1206-8.
• 20 Rumph PF, Steiss JE, West MS. Interday variation in vertical ground reaction force in clinically normal Greyhounds at the trot. Am J Vet Res 1999; 60: 679-83.
• 21 Renberg W, Johnston S, Keying Y. et al. Comparison of stance time and velocity as control variables in force plate analysis of dogs. Am JVet Res 1999; 60: 814-9.
• 22 Budsberg S, Rytz U, Johnston S. Effects of acceleration on ground reaction forces collected in healthy dogs at a trot. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1999; 12: 1S-9.
• 23 Yanoff S, Hulse D, Hogan H. et al. Measurements of vertical ground reaction force in jumping dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1992; 5: 44-50.
• 24 Budsberg S, Jevens D, Brown J. et al. Evaluation of limb symmetry indices, using ground reaction forces inhealthydogs. Am JVetRes 1993; S4: 1569-74.
• 25 DuLaney D, Puriton P. Dookwah et al. Effect of starting distance on vertical ground reaction forces in the normal dog. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005; 18: 183-5.
• 26 Rumph PF, Kincaid SA, Baird DK. Vertical ground reaction force distribution during experimentally induced acute synovitis in dogs. Am JVet Res 1993; 54: 365-9.
• 27 Cross A, Budsberg A, Keefe T. Kinetic gait analysis assessment of meloxicam efficacy inasodium urate-induced synovitis model. Am J Vet Res 1997; 58: 626-31.
• 28 Budsberg S. Long term temporal evaluation of ground reaction forces during development of experimentally induced osteoarthritis in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 1207-11.
• 29 Moreau M, Dupuis J, Bonneau N. et al. Clinical evaluation of a neutraceutical, carprofen and meloxicam for the treatment of dogs with osteoarthritis. VetRec 2003; 152: 323-9.
• 30 Hoelzler M, Millis D, Francis D. et al. Results of arthroscopic versus open arthrotomy for surgical management of cranial cruciate ligament deficiency in dogs. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 146-S3.
• 31 Marsolais G, Dvorak G, Conzemius M. Effects of postoperative rehabilitation on limb function after cranial cruciate ligament repair in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002; 220: 1325-30.
• 32 Conzemius M, Evans R, Besancon M. et al. Effect of surgical technique on limb function after surgery for rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 226: 232-6.
• 33 Clements D, Owen M, Carmichael S. et al. Kinematic analysis of 10 Labrador retrievers during treadmill locomotion. Vet Rec 2005; 156: 478-81.
• 34 Shwartz P, Millis DL, Hicks DA. et al. A kinematic comparison of over ground vs. treadmill walking in dogs. VOS Abstract 2004
• 35 Owen MR, Richards J, Clements DN. et al. Is canine treadmill kinematic data reliable?. VOS Abstract 2004
• 36 Bockstahler BA, Skalicky M, Peham C. et al. Reliability of ground reaction forces measured on a treadmill system in healthy dogs. Vet J. 2005 Nov 29 (epub ahead of print).
• 37 Kistler information brochure. Gaitway Instrumented treadmill Type. 9810AS10.
• 38 Lin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989; 45: 255-68.
• 39 Lin LI. Assay validation using the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics 1992; 48: 599-604.
• 40 Statistics for Veterinary Science and Animal Science. Petrie A, Watson P. Blackwell Science; 1999. Oxford, UK: pp 170-5.
• 41 White SC, Yack HJ, Tucker CA. et al. Comparison of vertical ground reaction forces during overground and treadmill walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998; 30: 1537-42.
• 42 Buchner HH, Savelberg HH, Schamhardt HC. et al. Kinematics of treadmill versus overground locomotion in horses. Vet Q 1994; Suppl 2 S87-90.
• 43 Nigg DM, De Boer RW, Fisher V. A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995; 27: 98-105.
• 44 Nelson RC, Dillman CJ, Lagasse Petal. Biomechanics of overground versus treadmill running. Med Sci Sports 1972; 4: 233-40.
• 45 Masanei K, Kouzaki M, Fukunaga T. Variability of ground reaction forces during treadmill walking. J Appl Physiol 2002; 92: 1885-90.