The process of kinetic, or force platform, data collection in dogs is well established.1–5 Kinematic data for dogs have been collected over many years, but the methods of collecting dynamic gait data and the subsequent analyses have varied. Both kinetic and kinematic gait evaluations have been performed with data collected during either overground1–5 or treadmill-based6–10 ambulation.
The use of treadmills provides the ability to collect a large quantity of data rapidly with the use of minimal laboratory space. However, debate continues regarding the use of treadmills for the collection of gait data. Recently, a study7 compared kinetic gait data for lame and nonlame dogs obtained from a treadmill with embedded force plates against data obtained with standard force plates and found that both methods provided similar peak vertical force results for the forelimbs and hind limbs of lame and nonlame dogs during trotting. In that study,7 it was noted that although vertical force measurements were obtained and compared, the treadmill force plates did not allow evaluation of medial-lateral and cranial-caudal forces. Additionally, frequent overlap of the fore- and hind paw strikes occurred. To the authors' knowledge, there are currently no reports of studies that have compared kinematic data from dogs during overground and treadmill-based dynamic gaits. In the study reported here, the hypothesis tested was that dynamic gait data collected from dogs during overground ambulation versus treadmill-based ambulation would differ.
Generalized indicator function analysis
Vicon Peak Motus L-Frame, Vicon-Peak, Centennial, Colo.
Vicon MX03, Vicon Motion Systems Inc, Centennial, Colo.
Peak Motus 9.2, Vicon Motion Systems Inc, Centennial, Colo.
SAS, version 9.2, SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC.
1. Budsberg SC, Chambers JN & Lue SL, et al. Prospective evaluation of ground reaction forces in dogs undergoing unilateral total hip replacement. Am J Vet Res 1996; 57:1781–1785.
2. Budsberg SC, Jevens DJ & Brown J, et al. Evaluation of limb symmetry indices, using ground reaction forces in healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54:1569–1574.
3. Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC & Brown J, et al. Vertical loading rates in clinically normal dogs at a trot. Am J Vet Res 1995; 56:1275–1280.
4. Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC, Soutas-Little RW. Force plate analysis of the walking gait in healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 1987; 48:915–918.
5. Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC & Soutas-Little RW, et al. Force plate analyses before and after stabilization of canine stifles for cruciate injury. Am J Vet Res 1988; 49:1522–1524.
6. Bockstahler BA, Henninger W & Muller M, et al. Influence of borderline hip dysplasia on joint kinematics of clinically sound Belgian Shepherd Dogs. Am J Vet Res 2007; 68:271–276.
7. Brebner NS, Moens NM, Runciman JR. Evaluation of a treadmill with integrated force plates for kinetic gait analysis of sound and lame dogs at a trot. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2006; 19:205–212.
8. Bockstahler BA, Skalicky M & Peham C, et al. Reliability of ground reaction forces measured on a treadmill system in healthy dogs. Vet J 2007; 173:373–378.
9. Clements DN, Owen MR & Carmichael S, et al. Kinematic analysis of the gait of 10 Labrador Retrievers during treadmill locomotion. Vet Rec 2005; 156:478–481.
10. Owen M, Richards J & Clements D, et al. Kinematics of the elbow and stifle joints in Greyhounds during treadmill trotting—an investigation of familiarisation. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2004; 17:141–140.
11. Hottinger HA, DeCamp CE & Olivier NB, et al. Noninvasive kinematic analysis of the walk in healthy large-breed dogs. Am J Vet Res 1996; 57:381–388.
12. Fu YC, Torres BT, Budsberg SC. Evaluation of a three-dimensional kinematic model for canine gait analysis. Am J Vet Res 2010; 71:1118–1122.
13. Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC & Reynolds LR, et al. Three dimensional non-invasive kinematics of the canine stifle. Vet Surg 1999; 28:387–388.
14. Lu TW, O'Connor JJ. A three-dimensional computer graphics-based animated model of the human locomotor system with anatomical joint constraints. J Biomech 1998; 31:116–116.
15. Torres BT, Punke JP & Fu YC, et al. Comparison of canine stifle kinematic data collected with three different targeting models. Vet Surg 2010; 39:504–512.
16. Veldpaus FE, Woltring HJ, Dortmans LJ. A least-squares algorithm for the equiform transformation from spatial marker coordinates. J Biomech 1988; 21:45–54.
17. Winter DA. Three-dimenstional kinematics and kinetics. In: Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2009; 183–186.
18. Yokoo T, Knight BW, Sirovich L. An optimization approach to signal extraction from noisy multivariate data. Neuroimage 2001; 14:1309–1326.
19. DeCamp CE, Riggs CM & Olivier NB, et al. Kinematic evaluation of gait in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture. Am J Vet Res 1996; 57:120–126.
20. Keegan KG, Wilson DA & Wilson DJ, et al. Evaluation of mild lameness in horses trotting on a treadmill by clinicians and interns or residents and correlation of their assessments with kinematic gait analysis. Am J Vet Res 1998; 59:1370–1377.
21. Vilensky JA, O'Connor BL & Brandt KD, et al. Serial kinematic analysis of the canine hindlimb joints after deafferentation and anterior cruciate ligament transection. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1997; 5:173–182.
22. Alton F, Baldey L & Caplan S, et al. A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill walking. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 1998; 13:434–440.
23. Wank V, Frick U, Schmidtbleicher D. Kinematics and electromyography of lower limb muscles in overground and treadmill running. Int J Sports Med 1998; 19:455–461.
24. DeCamp CE, Soutas-Little RW & Hauptman J, et al. Kinematic gait analysis of the trot in healthy Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54:627–634.
25. van Ingen Schenau GJ. Some fundamental aspects of the biomechanics of overground versus treadmill locomotion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1980; 12:257–261.
27. Savelberg HH, Vorstenbosch MA & Kamman EH, et al. Intrastride belt-speed variation affects treadmill locomotion. Gait Posture 1998; 7:26–34.
28. Watt JR, Franz JR & Jackson K, et al. A three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill walking in healthy elderly subjects. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2010; 25:444–449.
29. Matsas A, Taylor N, McBurney H. Knee joint kinematics from familiarised treadmill walking can be generalised to overground walking in young unimpaired subjects. Gait Posture 2000; 11:46–53.
Bilateral marker locations for joint coordinate system kinematic modeling of the hip, femorotibial, and tarsal joints of dogs.
|QUA||Quadriceps femoris muscle|
|PTC*†||Proximal aspect of the tibial crest|
|DTC†||Distal aspect of the tibial crest|
|Tarsal||HEE*||Caudolateral aspect of the calcaneus|
|MP5||Fifth metatarsophalangeal joint|
|MP2||Second metatarsophalangeal joint|
Marker indicated the origin of the local coordinate system for the specific segment.
Marker was removed during acquisition of dynamic testing data.