Modification of the contact area of a standard force platform and runway for small breed dogs

Summary

Objectives: To develop a platform that used standard size force plates for large breed dogs to capture ground reaction force data from any size dog.

Methods: A walkway platform was constructed to accommodate two force plates (60 cm x 40 cm) positioned in series to a variety of smaller sizes. It was constructed from a custom wood frame with thick aluminium sheet force plate covers that prevented transfer of load to the force plate, except for rectangular windows of three different dimensions. A friction study was performed to ensure plates did not translate relative to one another during gait trials. A prospective, observational, single crossover study design was used to compare the effect of force platform configuration (full plate size [original plate], half plate size [modified plate]) on ground reaction forces using eight adult healthy Labrador Retriever dogs.

Results: Slippage of the steel plate on the force plate did not occur. Peak propulsion force was the only kinetic variable statistically different between the full size and half sized platforms. There were no clinically significant differences between the full and half force platforms for the variables and dogs studied.

Discussion and conclusion: The modified force platform allows the original 60 x 40 cm force plate to be adjusted effectively to a 30 x 40 cm, 20 x 40 cm and 15 x 40 cm sized plate with no clinically significant change in kinetic variables. This modification that worked for large breed dogs will potentially allow kinetic analysis of a large variety of dogs with different stride lengths.

Keywords

Force platform - kinetics - gait analysis - ground reaction forces - dogs

• References

• 1 Brown D, Boston R, Coyne J. et al. A novel approach to the use of animals in studies of pain: Validation of the canine brief pain inventory in canine bone cancer. Pain Medicine 2009; 10: 133-142.
• 2 Brown DC, Boston RC, Coyne JC. et al. Development and psychometric testing of an instrument designed to measure chronic pain in dogs with osteoarthritis. Am J Vet Res 2007; 68: 631-637.
• 3 Brown DC, Boston RC, Coyne JC. et al. Ability of the canine brief pain inventory to detect response to treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008; 233: 1278-1283.
• 4 Wiseman-Orr ML, Scott EM, Reid J. et al. Validation of a structured questionnaire as an instrument to measure chronic pain in dogs on the basis of effects on health-related quality of life. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67: 1826-1836.
• 5 Walton MB, Cowderoy E, Lascelles D. et al. Evaluation of construct and criterion validity for the “Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs” (LOAD) clinical metrology instrument and comparison to two other instruments. Plos One 2013; 8: e58125.
• 6 Hielm-Bjorkman AK, Rita H, Tulamo RM. Psychometric testing of the Helsinki chronic pain index by completion of a questionnaire in Finnish by owners of dogs with chronic signs of pain caused by osteoarthritis. Am J Vet Res 2009; 70: 727-734.
• 7 Gilette RL, Angle TC. Recent developments in canine locomotor analysis: A review. Vet J 2008; 178: 165-176.
• 8 Lascelles BD, Roe SC, Smith E. et al. Evaluation of a pressure walkway system for measurement of vertical limb forces in clinically normal dogs. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67: 277-282.
• 9 Light VA, Steiss JE, Montgomery RD. et al. Temporal-spatial gait analysis by use of a portable walkway system in healthy Labrador Retrievers at a walk. Am J Vet Res 2010; 71: 997-1002.
• 10 Kim J, Kazmierczak BS, Breur GJ. Comparison of temporospatial and kinetic variables of walking in small and large breed dog on a pressure-sensing walkway. Am J Vet Res 2011; 72: 1171-1177.
• 11 Townsend B. Static and kinetic friction [Website]. [Cited on 2002 November 2]. Available from: http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/211_fall2002.web.dir/ben_townsend/staticandkineticfriction.htm
• 12 Nordquist B, Fischer J, Kim SY. et al. Effects of trial repetition, limb side, intraday and inter-week variartion on vertical and craniocaudal ground reaction forces in clinically normal Labrador Retrievers. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 435-444.
• 13 Bertram JE, Lee DV, Case HN. et al. Comparison of the trotting gaits of Labrador Retrievers and Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2000; 61: 832-838.
• 14 Gordon-Evans WJ, Griffon DJ, Bubb C. et al. Comparison of lateral fabella suture and tibial plateau leveling osteotomy techniques for treatment of dogs with cranial cruciate ligament disease. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2013; 243: 675-680.
• 15 Braden TD, Olivier NB, Blasiser MA. et al. Objective evaluation of total hip replacement in 127 dogs utilizing force plate analysis. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2004; 17: 78-81.
• 16 Voss K, Damur DM, Guerrero T. et al. Force plate gait analysis to access limb function after tibial tuberosity advancement in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament disease. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 243-249.
• 17 McLaughlin RM, Roush JK. Effects of subject stance time and velocity on ground reaction forces in clinically normal Greyhounds at the trot. Am J Vet Res 1994; 55: 1666-1671.
• 18 McLaughlin RM, Roush JK. Effects of increasing velocity on braking and propulsion times during force plate gait analysis in Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 1995; 56: 159-161.
• 19 Budsberg SC, Rytz U, Johnston SA. Effects of acceleration on ground reaction forces collected in healthy dogs at a trot. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1999; 12: 15-19.