Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 17, 2025
Author Spotlight: Assessing the Reliability of Doppler Ultrasound in Measuring Leg Blood Flow
Published on: December 15, 2023
Equine blood flow restriction training: Safety validation
Sherry A Johnson1, David D Frisbie1, Gregg M Griffenhagen1
1Department of Clinical Sciences, Orthopaedic Research Center at the Translational Medicine Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
Background:
Blood flow restriction (BFR) has become a key rehabilitative tool for human orthopaedic conditions. With modernised technology and evolution of clinical application, patient-specific delivery of occlusion percentages is now considered the standard of care in human patients due to improved therapeutic outcomes and minimised safety risks. Safety validation and limb occlusion pressure (LOP) data for horses, however, are lacking.
Objective:
(1) To determine if BFR exposure resulted in forelimb biomechanical gait dysfunction as safety validation and (2) to investigate inter-horse and inter-limb LOP differences.
Study Design:
Controlled in vivo experiment.
Methods:
Daily unilateral forelimb BFR was performed in four horses over 56 days. Clinical examinations and objective gait analyses were performed on Days 0, 28 and 56. Daily LOP values were determined by Doppler evaluation to deliver 80% vascular occlusion at a walk. A linear mixed model evaluated for differences in lameness, kinetic and kinematic gait parameters.
Results:
There were no significant differences in forelimb lameness (range of Grades 0-2 across all forelimbs), kinematic or kinetic gait parameters over time or between BFR-exposed and control (contralateral) limbs (p > 0.05). Clinically apparent complications related to BFR such as thrombosis or dermatitis were not appreciated. Significant differences in mean LOP values between various horses (p < 0.001) and measured left (204.48 mmHg) and right (173.78 mmHg) forelimbs (p < 0.001) were observed. Mean LOP and standard deviation across all readings was 189.1 ± 22.2 mmHg.
Main Limitations:
Optimal BFR occlusion percentages and protocols with documented clinical efficacy are unknown. Small study population.
Conclusions:
Exposure to BFR did not result in forelimb biomechanical dysfunction in four horses. Applied pressures of 75-151 mmHg would likely simulate a range of 50%-80% vascular occlusion in horses, but inherent physiological variation between horses and forelimbs warrants incorporation of individual pressures.
