The effect percussive therapy on equine thoracic profile, mechanical nociceptive thresholds, spinal and limb kinematics and gait symmetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Therapeutic devices are increasingly used by therapists and horse owners. Percussive therapy (PCT) has been shown to effect blood flow, tissue oxygenation, increase range of motion (ROM) and improve recovery in humans. The aims of this study were to investigate the immediate effects of PCT on horses. Using a within-subjects randomised blinded cross-over design, twelve polo horses in training received two 12-min PCT sessions to the major superficial muscle groups, with the device on or off, 24-h apart. Pre- and post-intervention or sham sessions epaxial muscle mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNT) and thoracic (T) profile dimensions were measured. Each horse performed four in-hand trot passes where spinal kinematics and gait symmetry were measured with inertial measurement units, plus stride length was analysed via 2D video recordings. There were no significant differences between MNT measures. Within the sham group, thoracic profile was significantly different pre and post at T18 (mean change -0.48 cm ± 1.03; ) and in the intervention group, there was a significant difference between the pre and post at T13 (mean change = −0.76 cm ± 1.35). There was no significant difference in stride length or gait symmetry at the poll, withers, and pelvis but differences in T6, T13, L3 and sacrum ROM in the sham group and T6 and T18 in the intervention group were seen. Overall, the application of PCT did not result in MNT or stride length changes in the intervention group when compared to the sham scenario although there were minor changes to thoracolumbar profile and spinal ROM. Further research assessing walk kinematics, ridden horse performance are recommended, along with assessing different PCT applications and other variables such as blood flow and neurophysiological responses that affect behaviour.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".