A practical comparison of three objective gait analysis systems in a diverse population of horses

Objective gait analysis systems can supplement veterinary lameness exams, but the agreement of many available systems is poorly understood. This study aims to compare the data from three commercially available systems across a diverse horse population with lameness originating from multiple limbs, to help guide clinical interpretation. A body-worn inertial measurement unit system (IMUS), an artificial intelligence app (AIA), and pressure sensing boots (PSB) were compared. Results from the three systems were analyzed to determine which limb each system reported as responsible for the most asymmetric movement. Comparing the AIA and IMUS in 31 horses, the two systems agreed on the limb resulting in the most asymmetrical movement for 87.1% of the population. For a subset (n=23) also equipped with the PSB, the IMUS and PSB agreed for 26.1% and the AIA and PSB agreed for 34.8% of the population. Objective gait analysis systems have the potential to be useful in aiding clinicians for both diagnosing and monitoring the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries. In cases of complex movement, mixed and inconsistent lameness presentations may create difficulties for both clinicians and objective gait systems to differentiate the movement results. When assessing cases of multi-limb lameness and/or complex movement patterns, collecting additional strides may be the best practice for the objective gait analysis systems to provide more consistent results. The authors concluded that the AIA and IMUS had comparable results when evaluating upper body kinematics in a diverse population of horses and the PSB needs further validation before more comparisons can be conducted.