Evaluation of gait kinetics in puppies with coxofemoral joint laxity
American Journal of Veterinary Research, ISSN: 0002-9645, Vol: 67, Issue: 2, Page: 236-241
2006
- 20Citations
- 11Usage
- 61Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations20
- Citation Indexes20
- 20
- CrossRef18
- Usage11
- Abstract Views11
- Captures61
- Readers61
- 61
Article Description
Objective - To characterize ground reaction forces (GRFs) and determine whether there were correlations between forces and passive coxofemoral joint laxity in puppies. Animals - Fifty-one 16-week-old hound-breed dogs. Procedure - Force-plate gait evaluation and distraction radiographic imaging were performed. Ground reaction forces evaluated included x (mediolateral), y (craniocaudal breaking and propulsion), and z (vertical) peak force and impulse. Z-plane limb loading and unloading rates, loading interval, and weight distribution and y-plane stance time breaking and propulsion percentages were calculated. One-way ANOVA with the Duncan multiple range test was used to evaluate differences in gait variables among limbs. The relationships of left, right, highest, and mean distraction index (DI) with individual limb data of each dog were evaluated with the Spearman rank correlation. Left and right DIs were compared by means of linear regression analysis. Results - Mean ± SEM DI was 0.67 ± 0.02. Left and right DIs were strongly correlated, but there were no significant relationships between DIs and gait variables. Most fore- and hind limb gait variables differed significantly, whereas paired fore- and hind limb gait variables did not. Asymmetry was most pronounced in the x- and y-planes. Conclusions and clinical relevance - GRFs were consistent with those of clinically normal mature dogs, supporting an absence of association between GRF and DI in young dogs. The GRFs and elucidation of the relationship between GRFs and DI may be useful for future studies in immature dogs.
Bibliographic Details
https://repository.lsu.edu/vetmed_pubs/737; https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/bio_engineering_pubs/186; https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/vetmed_pubs/737; https://repository.lsu.edu/bio_engineering_pubs/186
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=33344460902&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.67.2.236; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16454627; https://avmajournals.avma.org/view/journals/ajvr/67/2/ajvr.67.2.236.xml; https://repository.lsu.edu/vetmed_pubs/737; https://repository.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1737&context=vetmed_pubs; https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/bio_engineering_pubs/186; https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1185&context=bio_engineering_pubs; https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/vetmed_pubs/737; https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1737&context=vetmed_pubs; https://repository.lsu.edu/bio_engineering_pubs/186; https://repository.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1185&context=bio_engineering_pubs; https://dx.doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.67.2.236; https://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/ajvr.67.2.236; http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/ajvr.67.2.236
American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know