Background: With an increasing number of systems for quantifying lameness-related movement asymmetry, between-system comparisons under non-laboratory conditions are important for multi-centre or ...referral-level studies. This study compares an artificial intelligence video app to a validated inertial measurement unit (IMU) gait analysis system in a specific group of horses. Methods: Twenty-two reining Quarter horses were equipped with nine body-mounted IMUs while being videoed with a smartphone app. Both systems quantified head and pelvic movement symmetry during in-hand trot (hard/soft ground) and on the lunge (left/right rein, soft ground). Proportional limits of agreement (pLoA) were established. Results: Widths of pLoA were larger for head movement (29% to 50% in-hand; 22% to 38% on lunge) than for pelvic movement (13% to 24% in-hand; 14% to 24% on lunge). Conclusion: The between-system pLoAs exceed current “lameness thresholds” aimed at identifying the affected limb(s) in lame horses. They also exceed published limits of agreement for stride-matched data but are similar to repeatability values and “lameness thresholds” from “non-lame” horses. This is encouraging for multi-centre studies and referral-level veterinary practice. The narrower pLoA values for pelvic movement asymmetry are particularly encouraging, given the difficulty of grading hind limb lameness “by eye”.
