Lameness measuring

[4x4]

Ok, so I got talking to a friend who is also horsey and then another friend, and the subject of lameness came up. How do you interpret 1/10, 1/5 th lame etc. Is there a chart or something? We have looked it up on the Internet but probably putting the wrong thing in. So is it a scale or does it depend on the vet (and are all 3 of us totally stupid) as we agreed in the end that a horse is either lame or not!

 

[grhands]

This is good! http://www.poolhousevets.co.uk/equine_lameness.html

 

[4x4]

Thank you.

 

[alsiola]

0/10 is sound, 10/10 is literally will not let foot touch floor. Everything in between is interpretation, and different vets will vary greatly. This is not a problem, as long as any given person is consistent with their grading. For example, if we were looking for an improvement following a nerve block, it doesn't matter whether one vet says it improved from 6/10 to 3/10, and another one says it improved from 4/10 to 2/10, as long as they both see the improvement.

 

[4x4]

Thanks alsiola, that was sort of the debate. A friend's horse has been described as 1/5th lame and been advised by vet to ride it and give bute to see if it makes any difference. We were saying would all vets make it 1/5th lame or some maybe more or less - is it like the rickter (sp?) scale for example. So obviously not, so if you wanted a second opinion, apart from being told vet 1 said 1/5th lame vet 2 would have nothing to gauge the lameness against. Hope that makes sense. Also, I presume 1/5th = 2/10ths.

 

[alsiola]

Lameness graded out of 5 is a different system, not used much in the UK. It was devised by the AAEP (American Association of Equine Practitioners). It has much more specific definitions of the grades:

0: Lameness not perceptible under any circumstances.
1: Lameness is difficult to observe and is not consistently apparent, regardless of circumstances (e.g. under saddle, circling, inclines, hard surface, etc.).
2: Lameness is difficult to observe at a walk or when trotting in a straight line but consistently apparent under certain circumstances (e.g. weight-carrying, circling, inclines, hard surface, etc.).
3: Lameness is consistently observable at a trot under all circumstances.
4: Lameness is obvious at a walk.
5: Lameness produces minimal weight bearing in motion and/or at rest or a complete inability to move.

It is used less in this country because it is not well suited to comparing lameness pre/post nerve blocks. E.g. a positive response to a nerve block might reduce lameness from 5/10 to 2/10 using a 10ths system, but both of these lameness's may still be obvious at trot in a straight line, so would both be 3/5.

Personally, and I think many do the same, I grade lameness out of 10 with different scores for different situations, e.g. 2/10 in a straight line, 3/10 left rein on soft ground, 4/10 left rein hard ground, 5/10 after fetlock flexion etc etc. It probably introduces unnecessary complexity, and is pretty subjective, but I feel it gives the best chance of having a true comparison.

 

[4x4]

I saw her bill and it said 1/5 lame - the horse was trotted up with no rider on a road.

 

[pintoluv13]

It is used less in this country because it is not well suited to comparing lameness pre/post nerve blocks.
/QUOTE]
Interesting, I agree with this, wish it was used more often in the U.S.
My simple guess would be that a 1/5 is similar to a 2/10, but something about that doesn't seem right

 

[4x4]

I KNOW!!!