Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39720090›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Kinematics and kinetics of dogs walking over increasing heights of cavaletti exercise.

Katie Clarke, Jade Terry, Scott Blake, Roberta Ferro de Godoy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Katie ClarkeAnglia Ruskin University, Writtle School of Agriculture, Animal and Environmental Sciences, Lordship Road, Chelmsford, CM1 3RR, United Kingdom.
Jade TerryAnglia Ruskin University, Writtle School of Agriculture, Animal and Environmental Sciences, Lordship Road, Chelmsford, CM1 3RR, United Kingdom.
Scott BlakeAnglia Ruskin University, Writtle School of Agriculture, Animal and Environmental Sciences, Lordship Road, Chelmsford, CM1 3RR, United Kingdom.
Roberta Ferro de GodoyAnglia Ruskin University, Writtle School of Agriculture, Animal and Environmental Sciences, Lordship Road, Chelmsford, CM1 3RR, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify the effects of four heights of cavaletti exercise on canine kinematics and kinetics. Eight dogs had kinematics and kinetics data collected whilst completing cavaletti pole exercises at four different heights (floor, mid-metatarsal, hock, and stifle). Dogs had anatomical markers placed on bony landmarks of the fore and hindlimb joints. Each trial was recorded via a high-speed camera and two pressure mats. Kinematics outcomes were joint range of motion (ROM). Kinetic outcomes were force (%BW), impulse and peak pressure. Friedman and Wilcoxon's tests were performed to identify significant differences between cavaletti heights. A statistically significant increase was found at hock height placement across all joints whilst maintaining kinetic parameters similar to floor height. No significant differences were found for hip range of motion at any pole height. It was found that stifle height showed no increase in joint range of motion but has the highest forces involved. This determines that hock height is the most beneficial height for improving joint range of motion whilst not increasing forces upon the limbs. Stifle height should be avoided, in some conditions, due to high peak pressures, which do not necessarily lead to a significant further increase in range of motion.

Indexed as

Ground reaction forcesPoleRemedial exerciseROM

Identifiers

PMID39720090
PMCPMC11665453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.