Meschan Eva M, Peham Christian, Schobesberger Hermann, Licka Theresia F
Movement Science Group, Department V, Clinic of Orthopaedics in Ungulates, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, 1210 Wien, Austria.
Vet J. 2007 May;173(3):578-84. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2006.02.005. Epub 2006 Apr 24.
As there is no statistical evidence that saddle fit influences the load exerted on a horse's back, this study was performed to assess the hypothesis that the width of the tree significantly alters the pressure distribution on the back beneath the saddle. Nineteen sound horses were ridden at walk and trot on a treadmill with three saddles differing only in tree width. Kinetic data were recorded by a sensor mat. A minimum of 14 motion cycles were used in each trial. The saddles were classified into four groups depending on fit. For each horse, the saddle with the lowest overall force (LOF) was determined. Saddles were classified as "too-narrow" if they were one size (2 cm) narrower than the LOF saddle, and "too-wide" if they were one size (2 cm) wider than the LOF saddle. Saddles two sizes wider than LOF saddles were classified as "very-wide". In the group of narrow saddles, the pressure in the caudal third (walk 0.63 N/cm(2)+/-0.10; trot 1.08 N/cm(2)+/-0.26) was significantly higher compared to the LOF saddles (walk 0.50 N/cm(2)+/-0.09; trot 0.86 N/cm(2)+/-0.28). In the middle transversal third, the pressure of the wide saddles (walk 0.73 N/cm(2)+/-0.06; trot 1.52 N/cm(2)+/-0.19) and very-wide saddles (walk 0.77 N/cm(2)+/-0.06; trot 1.57 N/cm(2)+/-0.19) was significantly higher compared to LOF saddles (walk 0.65 N/cm(2)+/-0.10/ 0.63 N/cm(2)+/-0.11; trot 1.33 N/cm(2)+/-0.22/1.27 N/cm(2)+/-0.20). This study demonstrates that the load under poorly fitting saddles is distributed over a smaller area than under properly fitting saddles, leading to potentially harmful pressures peaks.
由于没有统计证据表明鞍具贴合度会影响施加在马背上的负荷，因此进行本研究以评估如下假设：鞍座宽度会显著改变鞍座下方马背的压力分布。19匹健康马匹在跑步机上以慢步和快步骑行，使用了三种仅鞍座宽度不同的鞍具。通过传感垫记录动力学数据。每次试验至少使用14个运动周期。根据贴合度将鞍具分为四组。对于每匹马，确定总体力最低（LOF）的鞍具。如果鞍具比LOF鞍具窄一个尺寸（2厘米），则分类为“过窄”；如果比LOF鞍具宽一个尺寸（2厘米），则分类为“过宽”。比LOF鞍具宽两个尺寸的鞍具分类为“非常宽”。在窄鞍具组中，与LOF鞍具相比，尾三分之一处的压力（慢步0.63 N/cm²±0.10；快步1.08 N/cm²±0.26）显著更高（慢步0.50 N/cm²±0.09；快步0.86 N/cm²±0.28）。在横向中间三分之一处，宽鞍具（慢步0.73 N/cm²±0.06；快步1.52 N/cm²±0.19）和非常宽鞍具（慢步0.77 N/cm²±0.06；快步1.57 N/cm²±0.19）的压力与LOF鞍具相比显著更高（慢步0.65 N/cm²±0.10/0.63 N/cm²±0.11；快步1.33 N/cm²±0.22/1.27 N/cm²±0.20）。本研究表明，不合适的鞍具下的负荷分布区域比合适的鞍具下更小，从而导致潜在有害的压力峰值。
