NPA

[expanding_horizon]

This is interesting

I’ve no idea of the validity, though shared by an equine performance vet so must have some credibility.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0wVDgSVoxZJorECSzTmwBRFPBWuSsXZXQj4ojXAfjEmUohq5KVK3g5ajwAWRHcJBal&id=100001878519387

I’d understood that NPA (in front or behind) was bad. And that angles should be positive. Is that not widely accepted. It is what my vet and trimmer said.

 

[ycbm]

I don't read anything there that isn't saying that a negative palmar angle (coffin bone in the foot too low at the back) is a bad thing, just that horses can compensate more behind than they can in front.

 

[Cragrat]

"here is little doubt a low plantar angle will have comparable ill effects on the structures around the navicular bone "

NPA is bad, but the horse can deal with the effects to an extent, by changing its' kinematics and lifting the limb in a more upward direction. I'm not sure Id want my horse doing that long term!

 

[expanding_horizon]

I don't read anything there that isn't saying that a negative palmar angle (coffin bone in the foot too low at the back) is a bad thing, just that horses can compensate more behind than they can in front.

That not how interpreted this bit

“ Manipulating plantar angles:
Generally speaking the effect of a change in PA affects the posture of the hind limb in that when lowering the PA beyond a particular threshold, the hind limb will show a camped under stance, where raising the PA above a particular threshold, will have a camped out effect on the hind limb. These compensatory postures, were and still are commonly used by many farriers shoeing performance horses.
Several publications have shown a clear correlation between hoof shape and lameness, degenerative disease and injuries. Many farriers however continue to trigger compensatory postures by manipulating dorsal hoof wall angles. The result of a lack of information perhaps, but definitely encouraged by perceived customer demand as well. Although research debunked many presumptions over the years, short term results appear to weigh heavier than long term soundness."

 

[Cragrat]

That not how interpreted this bit

“ Manipulating plantar angles:
Generally speaking the effect of a change in PA affects the posture of the hind limb in that when lowering the PA beyond a particular threshold, the hind limb will show a camped under stance, where raising the PA above a particular threshold, will have a camped out effect on the hind limb. These compensatory postures, were and still are commonly used by many farriers shoeing performance horses.
Several publications have shown a clear correlation between hoof shape and lameness, degenerative disease and injuries. Many farriers however continue to trigger compensatory postures by manipulating dorsal hoof wall angles. The result of a lack of information perhaps, but definitely encouraged by perceived customer demand as well. Although research debunked many presumptions over the years, short term results appear to weigh heavier than long term soundness."

How do you interpret it?

I think it's saying the horse 'adapts' to changes in PA by camping under or out. These postures are sort after by some owners /farriers, who prioritise short term performance at the expense of soundness in the long term.

 

[expanding_horizon]

How do you interpret it?

I think it's saying the horse 'adapts' to changes in PA by camping under or out. These postures are sort after by some owners /farriers, who prioritise short term performance at the expense of soundness in the long term.

So I had understood the prevailing view point was that NPA is bad, and should be corrected. And that open heeled shoes can lead to the back of the foot collapsing and low heels and NPA in some horses. And biomechanically the correct thing to do, is to correct the NPA. If a shod horse doesnt have enough depth of foot to correct this with trim, the farrier put a wedge pad on that supports the back of the foot and the frog to create a positive pedal bone angle. And that biomechanically horses should have a positive pedal bone angle of 2-7 degrees or something like that not to be at risk of compensative injury.

I read the article as saying you should NOT change pedal bone angles in feet to change posture.

Perhaps I am misreading it, and it means a horse standing square is desirable and any artificial change in pedal bone angle in either direction that means a horse doesnt stand square (cannon bone vertical) is deterimental. But doesnt mean you shouldnt alter pedal bone angles to be within 2-7 degrees so long as doing so doesnt result in a non square posture?

So the overall conclusion is having a horse that stands square is very important for long term soundness.

Thoughts?

 

[expanding_horizon]

I don't read anything there that isn't saying that a negative palmar angle (coffin bone in the foot too low at the back) is a bad thing, just that horses can compensate more behind than they can in front.

So I had understood the prevailing view point was that NPA is bad, and should be corrected. And that open heeled shoes can lead to the back of the foot collapsing and low heels and NPA in some horses. And biomechanically the correct thing to do, is to correct the NPA. If a shod horse doesnt have enough depth of foot to correct this with trim, the farrier should put a wedge pad on that supports the back of the foot and the frog to create a positive pedal bone angle. And that biomechanically horses should have a positive pedal bone angle of 2-7 degrees or something like that not to be at risk of compensative injury.

I read the article as saying you should NOT change pedal bone angles in feet to change posture.

Perhaps I am misreading it, and it means a horse standing square is desirable and any artificial change in pedal bone angle in either direction that means a horse doesnt stand square (cannon bone vertical) is deterimental. But doesnt mean you shouldnt alter pedal bone angles to be within 2-7 degrees so long as doing so doesnt result in a non square posture?

So the overall conclusion is having a horse that stands square is very important for long term soundness.

Thoughts?

 

[ycbm]

I read the article as saying you should NOT change pedal bone angles in feet to change posture.

I read it as saying that you should not change the angles to make a show horse stand camped out, for example. Not that you shouldn't correct incorrect angles.
.

 

[sbloom]

I can't decide what the article is proposing! This could be interesting as the research pans out https://equusmagazine.com/horse-car..._7uirz6J6DQryhTT8QnfYabKX6SHzBfsAqt2tkQ0L3uK4.

I don't think the accepted attitude is correcting NPA with composite shoes etc (if shod), wedges are still mostly used under open heel shoes and I see tons of horses with NPA behind. The barefoot debate (and I am a fan) seems to come down mainly to trimming the heels to the widest point of the frog but there's no agreement on that, as arguable it takes the heel down when so many horses need that to get out of NPA.

 

[expanding_horizon]

I can't decide what the article is proposing! This could be interesting as the research pans out https://equusmagazine.com/horse-car..._7uirz6J6DQryhTT8QnfYabKX6SHzBfsAqt2tkQ0L3uK4.

I don't think the accepted attitude is correcting NPA with composite shoes etc (if shod), wedges are still mostly used under open heel shoes and I see tons of horses with NPA behind. The barefoot debate (and I am a fan) seems to come down mainly to trimming the heels to the widest point of the frog but there's no agreement on that, as arguable it takes the heel down when so many horses need that to get out of NPA.

Yes, I think the article is very hard to interpret.

>> I don't think the accepted attitude is correcting NPA with composite shoes etc (if shod), wedges are still mostly used under open heel shoes and I see tons of horses with NPA behind.

Do YOU think this is the correct approach "If a shod horse doesnt have enough depth of foot to correct this with trim, the farrier should put a wedge pad on that supports the back of the foot and the frog to create a positive pedal bone angle."

>>The barefoot debate (and I am a fan) seems to come down mainly to trimming the heels to the widest point of the frog but there's no agreement on that, as arguable it takes the heel down when so many horses need that to get out of NPA.

Yes I didnt think taking heels back to widest part of the frog was still typical barefoot trimming as reduces heel height, but I am not very technical.

 

[ycbm]

I'm not surprised about what that article is claiming about the energy required to stand under.

We don't pay nearly enough attention to camped under stance in the UK. I don't think any horse that does it is "right" yet I also don't know of any vet who is actively interested in finding out what's causing it in a horse which looks sound.
.

 

[sbloom]

Camped under is exhausting for the horse by all accounts and agree with you about it not being on many radars, it's seen as so normal.

 

[dapple_grey]

We don't pay nearly enough attention to camped under stance in the UK. I don't think any horse that does it is "right" yet I also don't know of any vet who is actively interested in finding out what's causing it in a horse which looks sound.
.

Following this thread with interest as my young horse is a prime example of this. He’s always struggled to stand square and this photo is an example of how camped under he’d be. He has negative angles behind and in front and has been lame on and off. This photo was taken a while ago - I find it hard to look at now I know how much is wrong with it!

 

[sbloom]

And yet so common. Every new saddle fitting customer sends me stood up photos from both sides, I'd say over 50% are at least slightly camped under behind and many many comments about how hard it was to get the horse to stand square.