The Effects of Chiropractic Treatment on The Range of Motion of the Carpus and Tarsus of Horses

Abstract

IntroductionThe use of complementary therapies in both humans and animals has grown over the past decade. Equine back problems are more frequently reported as a contributing factor to poor performance, and back dysfunction affects limb kinematics. This study aimed to determine if (McTimoney) chiropractic treatment has an effect on the range of motion (ROM) of the carpus and tarsus.MethodsHemispherical 35 mm markers were applied to 7 anatomical landmarks of both forelimbs and hindlimbs of 10 sound, healthy horses from the same riding school with similar workload. The treatment group (n = 5) received (McTimoney) chiropractic treatment for the neck, back, pelvis and front feet. Two digital video recorders set 5.5 m from subjects, filming both sides concurrently, collected 2‐D kinematic data at walk and trot, 1 day before, and 2 hrs and 7 days after treatment. Data was analysed using Kinovea software, minimum and maximum joint angles were measured and ROM calculated. Statistical analyses included two‐way ANOVA, Student's t‐test and symmetry indices.ResultsA significant increase in right‐side ROM for carpus at walk (+4.0 deg, p = 0.04) and trot (+5.2 deg, p = 0.02) was noted in the treated compared to the non‐treated group. For the treatment group, there was a significant change in carpus ROM asymmetry from left towards neutral at walk (P = 0.004) and trot (P = 0.04). Tarsus ROM asymmetry change from left towards neutral was significant (P = 0.02) at trot. No changes were observed in the control group.ConclusionsThese results support the hypothesis that (McTimoney) chiropractic treatment may improve the symmetry of tarsus and carpus ROM of horses. Further research is needed to assess the clinical relevance of these effects.Ethical Animal ResearchProcedures were reviewed by the McTimoney Chiropractic College Ethical Review Committee. Explicit owner informed consent for participation in this study is not stated. Sources of funding: none. Competing interests: none.