Dataset Information

The Reported Use of Nosebands in Racing and Equestrian Pursuits.

ABSTRACT: This article reports on the results of a survey designed to explore the types of nosebands that owners, riders and trainers use in training and competition, their reasons for using nosebands, the design preferences in different disciplines and approaches to noseband tightness and monitoring, as well as the incidence of negative impacts related to noseband usage. Respondents (n = 3040) were asked to specify the type of noseband they were currently using and to rate how effective they were in achieving these stated reasons. Respondents who used nosebands (n = 2332) most commonly used Plain Cavesson (46.6%, n = 1087) and Hanoverian (24.8%, n = 579) nosebands. The reasons provided in the survey for noseband usage were grouped into three broad, mutually exclusive categories: Anatomical; Consequential and Passive. Responses across these categories were fairly evenly distributed overall: Anatomical (29.5%, n = 1501), Consequential (30.6%, n = 1560), Passive (32.9%, n = 1673) and other reasons (7.0%, n = 358). Across all respondents (n = 2332), the most common Anatomical reason given was to prevent the horse's tongue from moving over the bit (20.8%, n = 485), the most common Consequential reason was to improve the appearance of the horse (20.4%, n = 476), with aligning with the rules of the sport (30.2%, n = 705) the most popular Passive reason. Of the respondents who answered the question of checking noseband tightness (n = 2295), most reported checking noseband tightness at the bridge of the nose (62.1%, n = 1426), some (10.4%, n = 238) reported checking for tightness on the side of the face and others under the chin (21.5%, n = 496). This survey also revealed some of the potential issues associated with noseband use, with 18.6% (n = 434) reporting at least one physical or behavioural complication. The most common complication was hair loss under the noseband (39.9%, n = 173). Crank systems were reported to be used by 28.9% (n = 665) of respondents. This is of concern as these devices can be excessively tightened, minimising jaw and tongue movement and may compromise horse welfare. Indeed, the current data in our study show that these devices are associated with an increased risk of complications being reported. Against the backdrop of potential harm to horse welfare associated with restrictive nosebands, this report may serve as a guide for future regulations and research. It helps improve our understanding of noseband preferences and their use in different disciplines.

SUBMITTER: Weller D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7278451 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Reported Use of Nosebands in Racing and Equestrian Pursuits.

Weller Dominic D Franklin Samantha S Shea Glenn G White Peter P Fenner Kate K Wilson Bethany B Wilkins Cristina C McGreevy Paul P

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI 20200430 5

This article reports on the results of a survey designed to explore the types of nosebands that owners, riders and trainers use in training and competition, their reasons for using nosebands, the design preferences in different disciplines and approaches to noseband tightness and monitoring, as well as the incidence of negative impacts related to noseband usage. Respondents (<i>n</i> = 3040) were asked to specify the type of noseband they were currently using and to rate how effective they were ...[more]

PMID: 32365844

Similar Datasets

Project description:Nosebands are used by riders to prevent the horse from opening its mouth, to increase control and, in some cases, to comply with the competition rules. While equestrian texts traditionally recommend that two adult human fingers should be able to fit under a fastened noseband, noseband tightness levels are not, in general, regulated in competition. Possible detrimental consequences for the horse, of excessively tight nosebands, include discomfort, pain or tissue damage. The current study investigated noseband usage in equestrian competition. Data regarding noseband type, position, width and tightness were collected from 750 horses in eventing (n = 354), dressage (n = 334) and performance hunter (n = 62) competitions in Ireland, England and Belgium. Data were collected immediately before or after the performance. Using the ISES taper gauge as a guide, results were classified according to the number of 'fingers' that could fit under the noseband at the nasal planum, and assigned to six groups: greater than 2 fingers; 2 fingers; 1.5 fingers; 1 finger; 0.5 fingers; zero fingers. A calliper was used to measure noseband width and position relative to the facial crest. The data were not normally distributed so Kruskall-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used. In all, 44% of horses fell into the zero fingers classification while only 7% were in the two fingers classification. Significant differences emerged between disciplines (p<0.001), with the highest levels of noseband tightness measured among eventers followed by dressage horses with lowest levels among performance hunters. Noseband tightness did not differ significantly with horse age (p>0.05), which ranged from 4 to 19 years. The flash noseband was the most commonly used noseband (n = 326) and was significantly tighter than the cavesson (p < 0.001), drop noseband (p < 0.001) and the Micklem (p < 0.005). Noseband width ranged from 10 to 50 mm. Noseband position varied widely with the distance between the facial crest and upper noseband margin ranging from 0 to 70 mm. The high proportion of very tight nosebands found in this study raises concerns regarding the short and long term behavioural and physiological consequences of such tight nosebands are for the horse. Although these data are currently lacking, the findings are of concern.

Project description:This article reports on the results of a survey of racehorse trainers (n = 112) outlining the reasons for tongue-tie (TT) and noseband (NB) use by Thoroughbred trainers (TBTs) (n = 72) and Standardbred trainers (SBTs) (n = 40). The study also investigated the reported effectiveness of TTs and possible complications arising from their use. Tongue-tie use was reported by 62.5% (n = 70) of racehorse trainers. The reasons for TT use varied between TBTs and SBTs. For TBTs, the most common reason for TT use was to prevent or reduce airway obstruction (72.3%, n = 34), followed closely by to prevent or reduce airway noise (55.3%, n = 16). Standardbred trainers assigned equal importance for TT use [to prevent or reduce airway obstruction (69.6%, n = 16) and to prevent the horse from moving its tongue over the bit (69.6%, n = 16)]. Tongue-ties were considered significantly less effective at improving performance than at reducing airway obstruction and preventing the tongue from moving over the bit (t = -2.700, p = 0.0007). For respondents who used both TTs and NBs, there was a mild to moderate positive association between the reasons for using TTs and NBs. Of the 70 TT-using respondents, 51.4% (n = 36) recorded having encountered either a physical or behavioural complication due to TT use, with redness/bruising of the tongue (20.0%, n = 14) being the most common physical complication reported. Duration of use influenced the risk of observing complications. The likelihood of a respondent reporting a behavioural complication due to TT use increased with every minute of reported application and a nine-minute increment in application period doubled the odds of a respondent reporting a complication. Tightness was a risk factor for physical complications: Checking TT tightness by noting the tongue as not moving was associated with increased reporting of physical complications (OR = 6.59; CI 1.1-67.5). This pilot study provides some insight into how and why TTs are applied by some racehorse trainers, and the potential risks associated with their use. A further study of a larger cohort is recommended because these results are valid for only the 112 trainers who responded and cannot be generalized to the equine industry.

Project description:BackgroundLoss of hand strength is a predictor of mortality in aging populations. Despite reliance on the hands to participate in equestrian driving activity, no existing studies focus on associations of hand strength to athletic performance. Therefore, this study 1) established baseline handgrip of equestrian combined drivers in standing and task-specific positions, 2) determined endurance of task-specific handgrip, 3) compared handgrip strength to normative data, and 4) evaluated associations of handgrip and equestrian-specific variables.MethodsThere were 51 combined drivers (9 males, 42 females) ages 21-78 who completed a survey, standing handgrip, and grip strength and endurance in a task-specific position. Sixty-three percent of participants were 50 years or older. The dynamometer grip bar was normalized by hand size for standing tests; to duplicate sport-specific tasks, the bar was set to the closest setting. Significances were determined at p < 0.05.ResultsDrivers with more than 30 years of experience demonstrated highest summed standing (73.1 ± 5.2 kg) and summed sitting (59.9 ± 6.3 kg) grip strength. Females 60-years and older had greater handgrip endurance (Χ2 = 8.323, df = 2, p = .0156) in non-dominant (left) hands. Males (60%) reported more cold weather fatigue than females. Glove wearing was associated with bilateral endurance balance; a higher proportion of endurance balance between dominant and non-dominant (49% high-high and 29% low-low; Χ2 = 11.047, df = 1, p = .0009) was realized. There were no associations of handgrip and prior injury.ConclusionsOur results have implications in understanding task-specific and normative grip strengths in aging equestrian populations. Bilateral balance in handgrip strength and endurance is important particularly in maintaining strength in non-dominant hands over time. Equestrian driving sport promotes greater endurance in older females. Strength can be improved by participating in combined driving, and engagement in this sport over several years' benefits hand strength over time. This cohort of equestrian participants provides evidence that participating in hand-specific activities promotes greater strength, which has been previously shown to improve aging outcomes.

Dataset Information

The Reported Use of Nosebands in Racing and Equestrian Pursuits.

Publications

The Reported Use of Nosebands in Racing and Equestrian Pursuits.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets