Abstract

Background: Overriding or impinging dorsal spinous process’ is the most common diagnosis of primary back pain in the sports horse population with confirmed links to loss of performance. Racehorses may be predisposed to this condition due to the nature of the work performed from a young age.

Objectives: The current study aimed to establish whether 5 non-invasive clinical assessment measures routinely used within physiotherapy were able to predict underlying symptomatic overriding dorsal spinous processes (ORDSP) or osseous pathology prior to confirmation via veterinary diagnostics.

Study Design: This study was conducted as a retrospective study of 11 horses treated between September 2018 and April 2019. Horses were in training at stables in the Sydney metropolitan area.

Methods: Physiotherapy assessment comprised 5 objective measures inclusive of epaxial and hindlimb atrophy scores (0 - 3 via modified muscle condition score WSAVA), lumbopelvic flexion (inclinometer measurements), thoracolumbar epaxial pressure algometry scores (Wagner Pain Test scores Kgf/cm²), presence of dorsal spinous pain (DSP) (yes/no), presence of hindlimb asymmetry (yes/no) as well as performance reports from Racing New South Wales (0 - 2 race ratings). Veterinary diagnostics utilising 1 or a combination of ultrasonography, radiography or scintigraphy were employed post physiotherapy assessment to either confirm or deny the presence of ORDSP or osseous pathology.

Results: The 5 objective measures were not statistically significant when employed independently for detecting the presence of ORDSP. Collectively, the 5 measures did, however, identify pathological osseous changes in all 11 horses. Although not specific for ORDSP, the 5 measures may provide improved objective sensitivity to inform clinical assessment of performance limiting back pain in the racehorse.

Main Limitations: Results should be interpreted as indicative given the small sample size and the retrospective nature of objective data collection. Furthermore, sampling bias may have occurred due to including horses only from stables that are routinely serviced by both physiotherapists and veterinarians.

Conclusion: Despite veterinary diagnostics providing information regarding pathoanatomical issues and metabolic activity of osseous lesions, the inclusion of physiotherapy assessment may provide further objective information regarding pain and function.

Keywords:Horse; Thoroughbred; Racehorse; Imaging; Spinous Process; Kissing Spines; Physiotherapy

References

1. Jeffcott LB. “The diagnosis of diseases of the horse’s back”. Equine Veterinary Journal 7 (1975): 69-78.
2. Jeffcott LB. “Radiographic features of the normal equine thoracolumbar spine”. Veterinary Radiology 20 (1979): 140-147.
3. Jeffcott LB. “Disorders of the thoracolumbar spine of the horse - a survey of 443 cases”. Equine Veterinary Journal 12 (1980): 197-210.
4. Denoix JM. “Spinal Biomechanics and functional anatomy”. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Equine Practice 15 (1999): 27-60.
5. Zimmerman M., et al. “Close, impinging and overriding spinous processes in the thoracolumbar spine: the relationship between radiological and scintigraphic findings and clinical signs”. Equine Veterinary Journal 44 (2012): 178-184.
6. Marks D. “Medical management of back pain”. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Equine Practice 15 (1999): 179-194.
7. ZimmermanM Dyson S and Murray R. “Comparison of radiographic and scintigraphic findings of the spinous processes in the equine thoracolumbar region”. Veterinary Radiology and Ultrasound 52 (2011): 661-671.
8. Walmsley JP., et al. “Impingement of the dorsal spinous processes in two hundred and fifteen horses: case selection, surgical technique and results”. Equine Veterinary Journal 34 (2002): 23-28.
9. Coutsy M., et al. “Location of radiological lesions of the thoracolumbar column in French trotters with and without signs of back pain”. Veterinary Record 166 (2010): 41-45.
10. Santarossa A., et al. “Assessment of canine and feline body composition by veterinary health care teams in Ontario, Canada”. Canadian Veterinary Journal 59 (2018): 1280-1286.
11. Varcoe-Cocks K., et al. “Pressure algometry to quantify muscle pain in racehorses with suspected sacroiliac dysfunction”. Equine Veterinary Journal 38 (2006): 558-562.
12. Denoix JM. “Ultrasonographic evaluation of back lesions”. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Equine Practice 15 (1999): 131-159.
13. Fonseca BPA., et al. “Thermography and ultrasonography in back pain diagnosis of equine athletes”. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 26 (2006): 507-516.
14. Erichson C., et al. “Relationship between scintigraphic and radiographic evaluations of spinous processes in the thoracolumbar spine in riding horses without clinical signs of back problems”. Equine Veterinary Journal 36 (2004): 458-465.
15. O’Sullivan P. “It’s time for a change with management of non-specific chronic low back pain”. British Journal of Sports Medicine 46 (2012): 224-227.
16. Kamper SJ., et al. “Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis”. British Medical Journal 350 (2015): 1-11.
17. Lesimple C., et al. “Detecting and measuring back pain disorders in nonverbal individuals: the example of domestic horses”. Animal Behavior and Cognition 3 (2016): 159-179.

Citation

Citation: Butcher H and Simpson T. “A Retrospective Review of Physiotherapy Findings in Thoroughbred Racehorses with Confirmed Diagnoses of Impinging Dorsal Spinous Processes”. Acta Scientific Medical Sciences 2.6 (2020): 18-27.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2020 Butcher H and Simpson T. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.