Comparison of Training-Related Injury Rates Between Juvenile Thoroughbreds Trained for Two-Year-Old Sales and Those Trained Solely for Racing

No significant differences in injury rates or ability to start a race were observed between populations: the intensive training required for 2-year-old sales may not be detrimental to racehorses. Authors’ address: Infield Equine Diagnostics/ Florida Equine Veterinary Associates, Ocala FL 34482; e-mail: infieldems@hotmail.com.

1. Introduction

Limited information exists comparing rates of injuries between juveniles trained for 2-year-old resale and those trained exclusively to race.

2. Materials and Methods

Training records for juveniles at a single training center were reviewed. The information included miles galloped and breezed, injury type and date, and age at first start. A ratio of breezed to galloped miles was calculated for each horse. Miles at risk were compared using survival plots and age at first start was compared using T tests. The incidence rates of injury were compared between groups. The number of horses which started a race was compared using Fisher’s exact test. Significance was set at p = 0.05.

3. Results

Forty-nine percent of the 45 “race” horses demonstrated injury requiring time out of training compared to 42% of the 57 “sales” horses. Injuries were classified as sore shins, fetlock injuries, suspensory and flexor injuries, and miscellaneous. No significant difference was observed in injury incidence rates between the groups, although the timing of injury differed between groups. An analysis of the breeze/gallop ratio highlighted significant differences in training methods between groups (p = 0.04) with greater breeze miles in the “sales” group. “Sales” horses were significantly younger at first start (p = 0.004), although no difference in ability to start was observed (p = 0.76). 

4. Discussion

The distribution and rates of injury did not differ between groups even though the training methods and timing of injury differed. Further investigation is warranted to evaluate this finding in the general population.

Acknowledgments

Conflict of Interest

The Authors declare no conflicts of interest.