Measurement differences between three versus five photocells during collection of ground reaction forces in dogs

Summary

The differences between velocities and accelerations obtained from three and five photocells were examined when obtaining ground reaction force (GRF) data in dogs. Ground reaction force data was collected 259 times from 16 different dogs in two experimental phases. The first phase compared velocities and accelerations reported by the two systems based on trials accepted by the three photocell system. The second phase accepted trials based on data from five photocells. Three photocell data were calculated mathematically in the second phase in order to compare the values of both systems. The velocity and acceleration values obtained from each system were significantly different (at the hundredth of a meter per second). Differences in measured values did not result in acceptance of data by the three photocell system that would not have been acceptable with the five photocell system (false positives), but did result in rejection of acceptable data by the three photocell system (11% false negative rate). Given the small differences between the two systems, GRF data collected should not be significantly different, though the three photocell system is less efficient in gathering data due to the number of trials rejected as false negatives.

Keywords

Canine - velocity - acceleration - ground reaction force - kinetic

• References

• 1 Evans R, Horstman C, Conzemius M. Accuracy and optimization of force platform gait analysis in Labradors with cranial cruciate disease evaluated at a walking gait. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 445-449.
• 2 Karnik PS, Johnston S, Ward D. et al. The effects of epidural deracoxib on ground reaction forces in the acute stifle synovitis model. Vet Surg 2006; 35: 34-42.
• 3 McLaughlin RM, Miller CW, Taves CL. et al. Force plate analysis of triple pelvic osteotomy for the treatment of Canine hip dysplasia. Vet Surg 1991; 20: 291-297.
• 4 Budsberg SC, Chambers JN, Van Lue SL. et al. Prospective evaluation of ground reaction forces in dogs undergoing unilateral total hip replacement. Am JVet Res 1996; 57: 1781-1785.
• 5 Jevens DJ, DeCamp CE, Hauptman J. et al. Use of force-plate analysis of gait to compare two surgical techniques for treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. Am JVet Res 1996; 57: 389-393.
• 6 Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC, Soutas-Little RW. et al. Force plate analyses before and after stabilization of canine stifles for cruciate injury. Am JVet Res 1988; 49: 1522-1524.
• 7 Riggs CM, DeCamp CE, Soutas-Little RW. et al. Effects of subject velocity on force plate- measured ground reaction forces in healthy Greyhounds at the trot. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54: 1523-1526.
• 8 Budsberg SC, Rytz U, Johnston SA. Effects of acceleration on ground reaction forces collected in healthy dogs at a trot. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1999; 12: 15-19.
• 9 Jevens DJ, Hauptman JG, DeCamp CE. et al. Contributions to variance in force plate analysis of gait in dogs. Am JVet Res 1993; 54: 612-615.
• 10 Budsberg SC. Long term temporal evaluation of ground reaction forces in a canine model of osteoarthritis. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 1207-1211.
• 11 McLaughlin McLaughlin, Roush JK. Effects of increasing velocity on braking and propulsion times during force plate gait analysis in Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 1995; 56: 159-161.
• 12 Rendberg WC, Johnston SA, Ye K. et al. Comparison of stance time and velocity as control variables in force plate analysis of dogs. Am JVet Res 1999; 60: 814-819.
• 13 Lopez MJ, Quinn MM, Markel MD. Evaluation of gait kinetics in puppies with coxofemoral joint laxity. AmJVet Res 2006; 67: 236-241.
• 14 Trumble TN, Billinghusrt C, McIlwraith CW. Correlation of prostaglandin E2 concentrations in synovial fluid with ground reaction forces and clinical variables for pain or inflammation in dogs with osteoarthritis induce by transection of the cranial cruciate ligament. Am J Vet Res 2004; 65: 1269-1275.