Evidence Hub

Meta-analysis of risk factors for racehorse catastrophic musculoskeletal injury in flat racing

Hitchens PL, Morrice-West AV, Stevenson MA, Whitton RC

Veterinary journal (London, England : 1997), 2019

65 participants

Abstract

Studies of racehorse injury or fatality in various countries have identified common, and in some cases conflicting, risk factors. We conducted a systematic search of the relevant literature published from 1990 to 2017. Peer-reviewed articles were included if they reported the incidence of fatal or catastrophic musculoskeletal injury (CMI) in Thoroughbred flat races (n=21) or risk factors for CMI (n=65). Pooled effect sizes were estimated using the random-effects DerSimonian-Laird model. The pooled incidence of CMI was 1.17 (95% confidence interval 0.90, 1.44) per 1000 race starts. Almost 300 factors have been investigated in epidemiological studies for potential associations with CMI. Factors found to have consistent evidence of increasing risk of CMI are: (1) Horse-level factors such as older horse age and age at first start, male sex, and higher race class or lower claiming price; (2) Race-level factors such as firmer track conditions on turf and wetter conditions on dirt, longer race distance, and a greater number of starters; and (3) Management-related factors including more time since previous start, greater number of starts, longer career length, issues identified at pre-race examination, previous injury, and recent administration of medication or injections. Studies investigating recent cumulative distance of high-speed exercise were conflicting and suggestive of at least two mechanisms of injury related to the accumulation of bone damage: (1) In well adapted bone…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 65 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free