1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

THE EFFECT OF GLUE-ON SHOES ON DORSAL HOOF DISTORTION

P. T. REILLY Resident Farrier, Rochester Equine Clinic,19 Deep Hole Road, Chester New Hampshire, 03036, USA 1-603-490-9992 e-mail: Pat@theFarrierCenter.com Keywords: horse, horseshoe, glue, distortion, hoof wall

Word count: 2,157

47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

Summary In every equine hoof there exists a certain amount of distortion. This is present in various forms: flares, dished toes, under-run heels, and cracks. Several recent studies suggest a correlation between hoof capsule distortion and lameness. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of the Sigafoos Series I glue-on shoe on hoof capsule distortion, and in particular, on its effect on dorsal wall deviation. Measurements of the hoof were made using the Metron hoof evaluating system by Eponatech. Comparisons were made of the following values: dorsal length, hoof angle, dorsal wall deviation, hairline angle, hairline deviation, heel/toe height, heel height, heel angle, and support length. The study group consisted of front feet of horses shod exclusively in the Sigafoos glue-on shoe for the period of one year, and the control group consisted of 133 front feet from horses in various nailed on shoes and of various stages of lameness. The results show a 48% reduction in dorsal wall deviation for the study group. This suggests that the use of this glue-on shoe is beneficial if the goal is to reduce capsular distortion of the dorsal wall. The distortion reducing capabilities with regard to other measurable values of the foot remain to be studied.

Reasons for Performing Study

75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

Distortion of the hoof capsule has long been hypothesized to be either a direct cause of equine lameness, or as pathology associated with chronic degenerative conditions. Several recent studies have implicated hoof capsule distortion as a contributing factor in equine lameness. In managing chronic laminitis, mechanical failure of the foot has been shown to serve as a major limiting factor to successful rehabilitation (Hood, 1999). Distortion in the form of under-run heels has been associated with the frequency of catastrophic musculoskeletal injuries (Balch, Helman, and Collier, 2001). Stabilization of the hoof has been suggested as a directive in the treatment of various acute injuries, including hoof wall resections, coronary avulsion, and toe and quarter cracks. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of the Sigafoos Series I glue-on shoe with regard to capsular distortion, and in particular on its effect on dorsal wall deviation. The results showed a significant reduction in hoof wall deviation. This would suggest that the attachment system utilized by the Sigafoos shoe plays an important role in alleviating distortion, and is an important modality in treating both acute and chronic conditions of the hoof that cause lameness.

Hypothesis Anecdotal experience indicates that the absence of nails alone should increase the integrity of the hoof capsule, and therefore, reduce the amount of wall deviation. Research using strain distribution tests have shown a steep strain gradient associated with defects such as cracks and unstable nail holes (Davies, 1997). When combining this with the presence of the polymethylmethacrylate and the reinforcement of the fabric cuff, there is reason to

101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122

believe that the Sigafoos shoe would add to the overall integrity of the hoof wall, whereas a nailed on shoe would detract from overall wall strength. Dishing of the dorsal wall can indicate a prior rotation of the distal phalanx or a flexural deformity involving the deep digital flexor tendon (Stashak, 2002). At a more subtle level, dishing has been explained as a tearing of the laminae at the toe (Rooney, 1974), presumably due to excessive stress of the deep flexor tendon during locomotion. This can be a precursor to lameness if untreated, as the breakover point and the entire base of support may move cranially. Recent studies have explored the deformation of the dorsal wall while under this stress. During the stance phase of locomotion, the dorsal wall rotates caudo-ventrally about the distal border. This amount of movement may be quantified as high as 0.92mm in the dorsal wall (Burns JF, Brockington C, 2001). The dorsal wall has been shown to be thicker, and also to be more rigid than the wall at the medial and lateral quarters. This is presumably to protect the adjacent internal sensitive structures (Douglas, Mittal, Thomason and Jofriet, 1996). It is therefore potentially beneficial to externally reinforce the structure of the hoof in order to minimize the stress to the sensitive structures and the chronic pathology associated with distortion of the dorsal wall. In this study, I test the following hypothesis: The use of Sigafoos glue-on shoes decreases hoof wall distortion in the form of dorsal wall deviation. Support for this hypothesis will be indicated by a statistically and substantively significant relationship between these variables. Alternative explanations for hoof

123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148

deviation that will be evaluated in this study include the role of dorsal length and hoof angle. Materials and Methods Study population: The study was conducted on front feet only, in horses with varying degrees of lameness presented at Rochester Equine Clinic between October 2000 and June 2002. This study group consisted of horses shod in the Sigafoos Series I glue-on shoe for a period of at least one year, so as to ensure that the data represents hoof growth during the period influenced by the glue-on shoes. As the only horses I have shod with these shoes over a period of a year have been on front feet, the control group was limited to front feet in order to minimize variations. The control group consists of horses presented with nail-on shoes, having been shod by a variety of farriers.

Data Collection: Digital photographs were analyzed with the Metron software by Eponatech. The images were calibrated using the protocol described by the manufacturer (Craig, 2000) Among the recorded values considered for each case is dorsal length, hoof angle, dorsal wall deviation, hairline angle, hairline deviation, heel/toe height, heel height, heel angle, and support length. Of the 133 cases in this study, 15 cases constitute the study group (11% of the horses). A dichotomous variable was created to represent the use of the Sigafoos shoe, with a value of 1 for the presence of and 0 for the absence of glue-on shoes.

149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165

Hoof deviation is the measured value quantifying the variance of the dorsal wall from a straight line. As this value would theoretically be a straight line, it presents an opportunity to measure distortion. In the sample of horses, hoof deviation varies from a minimum of 0.04 to a maximum of 1.13. The mean average dorsal hoof deviation in the sample is 0.25.

Results In order to evaluate the effect of glue-on shoes for hoof deviation, I conduct a multiple regression analysis using the data described above.1 Multiple regressions is an appropriate statistical method for addressing the aforementioned question given that it allows for studying the relationship between a single dependent variable and one or more independent variables. This technique is widely used in the biological and physical sciences.

TABLE ONE: Descriptive Statistics for Hoof Deviation and Glue-On Shoes Mean Hoof Deviation Horses without Glue-On Shoes Horses with Glue-On Shoes .26 .14 Minimum Maximum .05 .04 1.13 .43 n 118 15

6 7 8 9 10 11

Analysis performed using Intercooled Stata ver. 6.0 for Windows 98 with the regress function. Regress estimates a model of the dependent variable (hoof deviation) on the set of independent variables using linear regression. Robust standard errors are reported using the Huber/White/ sandwich estimator of variance. For more details, see: http://www.stata.com. Data is available upon request from reillyshoe@aol.com.

12

166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176
177

Table One presents the mean score of hoof deviation for the study and control groups. This descriptive analysis reveals, in simple terms, the importance of glue-on shoes for hoof deviation: The average hoof deviation for horses wearing glue-on shoes is about half that of horses wearing conventional shoes (.14 to .26). For this sample, we can be confident that glue-on shoes have a substantial influence on minimizing dorsal wall deviation.

TABLE TWO: Multiple Regressionthe Effect of Glue-On Shoes on Hoof Deviation Coefficient Robust Standard Errors .03 .002 .05 .19 t-score Significance

Glue-On Shoes (0=No, 1=Yes) Hoof Angle Dorsal Length Constant

178 179 180

-.12 -.002 .14 -.12

-3.86 -0.68 2.97 -0.62

0.000** 0.496 0.004** 0.539

** Denotes significance at the .01 level n = 133 R2 = 0.145

181 182 183 184 185 186 187

The results of the multiple regression analysis are presented in Table Two. This technique enables researchers to hold certain conditionssuch as dorsal length and hoof angleconstant, while evaluating the strength and direction of other relationships. Immediately obvious in the reported results is the fact that the hypothesis is supported by a negative, statistically significant coefficient for glue-on shoes. The coefficient of -.12 indicates that, on average, horses with glue-on shoes have .12 less hoof deviation than

13

188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212

horses without glue-on shoes. This is a substantively important effect, given that the average hoof deviation is .25. Note as well that this effect holds when controlling for dorsal length and hoof anglein other words, glue-on shoes have a statistically and substantively important effect on hoof deviation even when taking into account the role of these other explanations. The control variables are not irrelevant to hoof deviation. While hoof angle is statistically and substantively irrelevant, dorsal length is positively related to hoof deviation in a statistically significant way. The longer the hoof, the greater the dorsal wall deviation. The substantive effect is less important, however, given that a 1-unit change in dorsal length is associated with a change in .14 of hoof deviation. Given that the range of dorsal length for horses in the sample is from 2.334 to 4.617, this is a relatively minimal effect. It is worth noting as well that the goodness of fit measure, the R2, indicates that with these three variables we account for nearly 15% of the variance in hoof deviation. Although this is a small number, it is substantively important given the variety of factors that influence horses hooves. Climate, type and intensity of work, and many other factors are likely to affect hoof deviation. It is not unimportant that by knowing the hoof angle, the dorsal length, and whether the horse wears glue-on shoes we know 15% of the factors that influence hoof deviation (in this sample, at least). Conclusion As the frequency with which I use the Sigafoos glue-on shoe has increased, I have made many anecdotal observations. Hemoglobin staining of the white line, a sign of lamellar stress (Stashak), becomes markedly decreased. The overall symmetry of the hoof appears to improve after shoeing with glue-on shoes. While these observations are beyond the

14

213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237

scope of this study, the data analysis suggests there may be explanations to account for these observations. The shoeing of a laminitis case, for example, may require extensive repositioning of the hoof capsule to account for the altered positioning of the coffin bone. In such a case, externally reinforcing the horny wall would seem to be a tremendous advantage in maximizing the weight bearing capacity of the remaining hoof wall. That said, the small number of cases limits the generalizability of this study. A 95% confidence interval in hoof deviation for those cases involving glue-on shoes range from -.18 to -.06. Although both ends of this spectrum are non-trivial for how glue-on shoes affect hoof deviation, this is a large spread. By investigating more cases, we can increase our confidence in the effect of the Sigafoos shoe have on hoof deviation. A time-series analysis would have provided a more accurate analysis for the overall effect of the Sigafoos shoe in terms of hoof distortion. Dorsal wall deviation is the sole measurable value with an independent ideal value (ideal being 0.00). Heel angle, hairline deviation and hoof angle might prove to be more pertinent values in correlating distortion with lameness, but require analysis of the hoof prior to the original application of the glueon shoes. This is an important direction for future research, one that the author has already begun to investigate. Potential Relevance There are innumerous variations in styles and approaches to corrective shoeing. Regardless of the trimming options, shoe positioning or shoe style, reduction of hoof capsule deformation has remained a constant goal. The Sigafoos shoe would seem to present a beneficial option for any therapeutic shoe applied with the desire of achieving maximum reduction of hoof capsule distortion. Regardless of the specific causal

15

238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281

mechanism, the results of the research indicate that this shoe can play a significant role in reducing hoof distortion and deserves consideration as a therapeutic modality.

References Balch OK, Helman RG, Collier MA. Underrun Heels and Toe-grab length as Possible Risk Factors for Catastrophic Musculoskeletal Injuries in Oklahoma Racehorses. (2001) AEEP Proceedings 334-338 Burn JF, Brockington C. Quantification of hoof Deformation using Optical Motion Capture. Equine Vet J Suppl 2001 Apr; (33):50-3 Colahan PT, Mayhew IG, Merritt AM, Moore JN. Equine Surgery and Medicine vol II. (1991) 1420-1425 Craig J. Eponatech Metron:Software for Hoof Conformation.www.eponatech.com (2000)18 Douglas JE, Mittal C, Thomasson JJ, Jofriet JC. (1996) The Modulus of Elasticity of Equine Hoof Wall: Implications for the Mechanical Function of the Hoof. J Exp Biol 199 (pt 8):1829-36 Hood DM. The Mechanisms and Consequences of Structural Failure of the Foot. Vet Clinics of North America Equine Pract 1999 Aug;15(2);437-61 Rooney JR. The Lame Horse. (1974) 133-135 Stashak TS. Adams Lameness in Horses fifth edition. Explanation for Lameness. 127

16

10

282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323

17

11