Abstract
The gold standard for accurate lameness evaluation in the horse has been extensively discussed in two of our recent editorials. This debate centres around whether the gold standard should be the experienced clinician or objective gait data. Veterinary professionals are divided on whether quantitative gait analysis is or it is not a valuable clinical tool; and around the concepts of lameness and locomotion asymmetry. The conclusions drawn so far are: a lame horse should be one deemed unfit to be used for ridden exercise, other sports or activities based on a comprehensive evaluation; lameness has a negative emotional value in society; lameness does not equal to gait asymmetry, but asymmetry may indicate lameness in the presence or absence of pain; subtle lameness is a grey area where gait asymmetry may fall either inside or outside the threshold set for quantitative gait analysis, quantitative gait analysis can provide such asymmetry measurements, of either limb loadings or upper body and limbs motion; clinicians must decide on the clinical relevance of a measured locomotion asymmetry using established reference values; and finally, that technology does not aim to replace clinical judgment but to aid it.