Movement Caused by Electrical Stimulation of the Lumbosacral Region in Standing Horses

Abstract

Electrical stimulation is commonly used as a modality for physical therapy in human and veterinary medicine. However, studies measuring the movement generated by electrical stimulation in horses are rare. The present study therefore evaluates the range of movement provoked by a commercially available physical therapy unit (FES310) and contrasts it with the movement generated by manually induced pelvic inclination (back rounding). Ten horses were tested on three measurement days over one week. Electrical stimulation was applied via a back treatment pad (belonging to the FES310 system) containing six electrodes (three on either side of the spine) placed over the lumbosacral region. This system produced a pulsed, biphasic electrical stimulation in a rectangular waveform which was gradually increased to a maximum of 10 volts. Before and after electrical stimulation testing, manual pelvic inclination was achieved by pressure on two points lateral to the root of the tail. Muscle tone and lameness were evaluated before and after treatments. Skinfold thickness, body condition score, and body mass were measured to detect possible confounding factors. Using kinematics, the angle ranges during movement of ten three-dimensional angles of the trunk, the pelvis, and the hind limbs were further analyzed. Movement was produced with manual stimulation in every tested individual on all measurement days and with electrical stimulation on at least one measurement day. The electrical stimulation led to significantly (P < .05) smaller angle ranges which were 15 %-57 % of the median of the manually stimulated movement. Strong positive correlations between angle ranges of the electrically generated movement were found for the hind limbs implicating their involvement in the movement created. Correlations between skinfold thickness, body condition score, and body mass with the angle ranges were weak and not significant. Before and after electrical and manual stimulation, muscle tone and lameness were similar. In the present study, both electrical and manual stimulation were proven to produce significant trunk and hind limb movement. Within this study's electrical stimulation treatment protocol, the movement generated by electrical stimulation was significantly less than the movement caused by manual pelvic inclination. However, electrical stimulation could easily be applied over a longer period and in a higher frequency than it would be possible for manual pelvic inclination. This treatment shows potential for stabilization and or mobilization of the lumbosacral region, although its efficiency as a therapeutic tool and its effect on specific orthopedic problems and is to be evaluated in further research.

Keywords: Electrical stimulation; Lumbosacral; Pelvic inclination; Physical therapy; Sacroiliac.