Flexion testing - the done thing?

[Toast]

My horse was vetted this afternoon for sale. He's 2. I was happy with everything until the vet asked me to hold him out on the hard standing to flextion test.

He had an injury to his knee a year ago which was purely a flesh wound and there was no trauma to the joint, The vet report states this. So when i asked why he was flexion testing such a young horse he replied it was just to compare the two legs.

Although he trotted out sound and all was ok, was he doing it to cover his own back despite the vet report? I wasn't very happy that he'd done it but i suppose i cant complain too much because there were no ill effects. But surely its not good for his joints to be flexion tested at the age of two?

How would you feel about that?

 

[PandorasJar]

I am not a fan and wouldn't allow mine to have it done or expect it when buying. It's often not done properly or too vigorously and lots of vets don't know the purpose of it. There's lots of reading matter on this subject and the damage it can create.

 

[ribbons]

I only ever sell homebred youngstock. I would never allow a flexion test on any of them. I once had a vet come out with potential buyer for a weanling. I had explained to the buyer that only a two stage vetting would be possible on a baby. The vet wanted to do a flexion test. I insisted he left my property immediately, phoned his practice and complained strongly about this vet. My customer after finding another practice to do the vetting bought the filly. She was very grateful I had stopped the vetting as she hadn't realised the potential damage that could have been done, and was very upset that a professional she was paying and had full trust in was not so knowledgable after all.

 

[JillA]

There is a feeling that the test itself can result in a loss of full movement momentarily so I thought it had been discredited. Haven't had experience of a vetting recently though

 

[Toast]

I only ever sell homebred youngstock. I would never allow a flexion test on any of them. I once had a vet come out with potential buyer for a weanling. I had explained to the buyer that only a two stage vetting would be possible on a baby. The vet wanted to do a flexion test. I insisted he left my property immediately, phoned his practice and complained strongly about this vet. My customer after finding another practice to do the vetting bought the filly. She was very grateful I had stopped the vetting as she hadn't realised the potential damage that could have been done, and was very upset that a professional she was paying and had full trust in was not so knowledgable after all.

Well, i was all ready to do the same. But i wanted to see others thoughts before i complained. The buyer used this Vet on my recommendation and im a bit upset that he decided to flexion test such a baby. I would've stopped him only i felt like they may think i had something to hide regarding the injury, which i certainly dont. Bit of a rock and a hard place situation... so im unsure of whether im right to be a bit annoyed you see!

 

[HBM1]

No, I would not allow it on one of mine.

 

[Toast]

God now i feel terrible for letting him do it =/

 

[Aru]

I wouldn't consider it a full vetting without flexions done. In a young unhandled horse then it may not be possible due to the safety aspect but in a well mannered youngster I would see it as a matter of course...

Im confused are horses so delicate now that they cannot have a portions of their legs helt up for less then 2 minutes without breaking??

The flexions are designed done to place minor strain on the leg in order to highlight potential issues within the limb...I do would want to know if a horse I was buying had issues with basic function...they are interpreted with a degree of care, caution and experience in most cases and can be useful in lameness diagnosis...

What is the hugh issue that people appear to have with them? Have I missed out on something very obvious?

In your case Toast I would guess doing a flexion proved that function was not impaired by the scarring on that side.
The vetting is for that day but an old wound would be something that would have to be noted and checked before the animal could be certified as currently fit for function. Had he trotted up lame I imagine that the vet would have had to question if the scarring/previous damage a potential issue that would effect wether or not he was fit for purpose . What better way to test then placing the suspect area under mild strain and comparing it to the sound unblemished legs function?

 

[Toast]

Thanks Aru, when you put it in that light i suppose he was only doing his job to prove whether or not he was fit for purpose. I always just assumed it wasn't the done thing when vetting youngsters, especially at 2 stage!

 

[natalia]

Flexions are part of any vetting. Unless you just request a basic eye and heart exam then they will be done at 2 or 5 stage.

 

[Marydoll]

My vet uses them, weve discussed them and he only ever gently flexes and holds for around 10 seconds, his opinion is there doesnt need to be much pressure just gentle and that should be enough to highlight any issues and i agree with that.
I would expect them done at a vetting on a horse i wanted to ride and compete i do think they are useful if done correctly as part of a series of diagnostic tests

 

[Toast]

Flexions are part of any vetting. Unless you just request a basic eye and heart exam then they will be done at 2 or 5 stage.

But what are your views on flexion testing youngsters? I understand there was a reason as to why my vet flexion tested my gelding today. But if it is a standard part of any vetting would you agree to have an otherwise fit 2yo flexion tested? what about a yearling or weanling?

 

[ribbons]

There is possibly justification for flexion testing a mature ridden horse. Although I think results are far from conclusive. To want to perform a flexion test on a young immature body is in my opinion not only pointless but damaging, and, as in my case, a weanling it is totally ridiculous. An outrageous thing for a vet to suggest. Which is what I told the practice.

 

[NaeNae87]

I wouldn't consider it a full vetting without flexions done. In a young unhandled horse then it may not be possible due to the safety aspect but in a well mannered youngster I would see it as a matter of course...

Im confused are horses so delicate now that they cannot have a portions of their legs helt up for less then 2 minutes without breaking??

The flexions are designed done to place minor strain on the leg in order to highlight potential issues within the limb...I do would want to know if a horse I was buying had issues with basic function...they are interpreted with a degree of care, caution and experience in most cases and can be useful in lameness diagnosis...

What is the hugh issue that people appear to have with them? Have I missed out on something very obvious?

In your case Toast I would guess doing a flexion proved that function was not impaired by the scarring on that side.
The vetting is for that day but an old wound would be something that would have to be noted and checked before the animal could be certified as currently fit for function. Had he trotted up lame I imagine that the vet would have had to question if the scarring/previous damage a potential issue that would effect wether or not he was fit for purpose . What better way to test then placing the suspect area under mild strain and comparing it to the sound unblemished legs function?

^^^^ This

 

[HBM1]

I should have been clearer..all mine are youngsters under three who would be for sale. I still do not agree with them though. I would only allow my own vet to do one and then only on a ridden horse over the age of four. Even good vets cannot decide if they are even worth it.