Persistence of orthopaedic hoof blocks for the treatment of lame cattle kept permanently at pasture

ABSTRACT

Aims

To compare the retention by New Zealand dairy cows kept at pasture in a lame cow group, of three hoof block products commonly used in the remediation of lameness.

Methods

Sixty-seven farmer-presented Friesian and Friesian x Jersey dairy cows from a single herd in the Manawatū region (New Zealand) suffering from unilateral hind limb lameness attributable to a claw horn lesion (CHL) were randomly allocated to one of three treatments: foam block (FB), plastic shoe (PS) and a standard wooden block (WB). Blocks were applied to the contralateral healthy claw and checked daily by the farm staff (present/not present) and date of loss was recorded. Blocks were reassessed on Day 14 and Day 28 and then removed unless further elevation was indicated. Daily walking distances were calculated using a farm map and measurement software. Statistical analyses included a linear marginal model for distance walked until block loss and a Cox regression model for the relative hazard of a block being lost.

Results

Random allocation meant that differences between products in proportion used on left or right hind foot or lateral or medial claw were small. Mean distance walked/cow/day on farm tracks whilst the block was present was 0.32 (min 0.12, max 0.45) km/day; no biologically important difference between products in the mean distance walked was identified. Compared to PS, cows in the WB group were five times more likely to lose the block (HR = 4.8 (95% CI = 1.8–12.4)), while cows in the FB group were 9.5 times more likely to lose the block (HR = 9.5 (95% CI = 3.6–24.4)).

Conclusions

In this study, PS were retained for much longer than either FB or WB. As cows were managed in a lame cow group for the study duration, walking distances were low and did not impact on the risk of block loss. More data are needed to define ideal block retention time.

Clinical relevance

In cows with CHL the choice of block could be based on the type of lesion present and the expected re-epithelisation times.

KEYWORDS:

• Hoof block
• lameness
• cattle
• treatment

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the farmer and the farm staff for their support with this study and the BVScIV SPINE group (2017) for their work on mapping the tracks and creating distance data.

Notes

1 The wooden blocks in the current study were compared to the low-density blocks used by Ranjbar et al. (2021) as the density of Pinus radiata, the main plantation pine in New Zealand, is 380 to 450 kg/m³ (Kimberley et al. 2015), lower than the density of the Eucalyptus grandis wood (547 kg/m³) used in the low-density blocks by Ranjbar et al. (2021).