Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :

  • Author or Editor: Juliette L. Hart x
  • Musculoskeletal System x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To compare the effects of 3 walkway cover types on temporospatial and ground reaction force measurements of dogs during gait analysis with a pressure-sensitive walkway (PSW).

ANIMALS 35 client- and staff-owned dogs (25 nonlame and 10 lame).

PROCEDURES In a crossover study design, all dogs were evaluated at a comfortable walk on a PSW to which 3 cover types (a 0.32-cm-thick corrugated vinyl mat or a 0.32- or 0.64-cm-thick polyvinyl chloride yoga mat) were applied in random order. Temporospatial and ground reaction force measurements were obtained and compared among cover types within the nonlame and lame dog groups.

RESULTS Several variables, including maximum peak pressure, maximum force (absolute and normalized as a percentage of body weight), and vertical impulse (absolute and normalized) differed significantly in most comparisons among cover types for both nonlame and lame dogs. There was no significant difference in maximum force values between the 0.32-cm-thick corrugated vinyl and 0.64-cm-thick polyvinyl chloride cover types for both nonlame and lame dogs.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE To the authors’ knowledge, the cover type used during data collection with a PSW is rarely provided in published reports on this topic. The findings in this study suggested that to ensure that PSW data for dogs are collected in a standardized manner, the same cover type should be used during follow-up visits to evaluate clinical outcomes, for the duration of research studies, and at all locations for multi-institutional studies. The cover type should be specified in future PSW studies to allow direct comparisons of findings between studies.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate accuracy and reliability of 3 novel goniometers for measurement of canine stifle joint angles and compare the results with those obtained with a universal goniometer (UG).

SAMPLE 8 pelvic limbs from 4 canine cadavers.

PROCEDURES Each limb was secured to a wooden platform at 3 arbitrarily selected fixed stifle joint angles. Goniometry was performed with 2 smartphone-based applications (novel goniometers A and B), a digital goniometer (novel goniometer C), and a UG; 3 evaluators performed measurements in triplicate for each angle with each device. Results were compared with stifle joint angle measurements on radiographs (used as a gold standard). Accuracy was determined by calculation of bias and total error, coefficients of variation were calculated to estimate reliability, and strength of linear association between radiographic and goniometer measurements was assessed by calculation of correlation coefficients.

RESULTS Mean coefficient of variation was lowest for the UG (4.88%), followed by novel goniometers B (7.37%), A (7.57%), and C (12.71%). Correlation with radiographic measurements was highest for the UG (r = 0.97), followed by novel goniometers B (0.93), A (0.90), and C (0.78). Constant bias was present for all devices except novel goniometer B. The UG and novel goniometer A had positive constant bias; novel goniometer C had negative constant bias. Total error at 50° and 100° angles was > 5% for all devices.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE None of the devices accurately represented radiographically measured stifle joint angles. Additional veterinary studies are indicated prior to the use of novel goniometers in dogs.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research