Short communication: Claw block application improves locomotion and weight-bearing characteristics in cattle with foot diseases.

In cattle with foot diseases, application of a block on the healthy partner claw is a common method of pain relief. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of wooden claw blocks on locomotion characteristics and weight distribution in healthy (group C; n = 17) versus lame (group L; n = 17) cattle. Group L was further subdivided into group L1 (lameness score ≤3; n = 7) and group L2 (lameness score >3; n = 10). We performed lameness scoring using a numeric rating system and measured locomotion characteristics using 2 accelerometers (400 Hz; kinematic outcome = stance phase duration; kinetic outcomes = foot load and toe-off) and a 4-scale weighing platform (difference of mean weight distribution across the limbs; ∆weight) before and after application of a claw block. We applied claw blocks to a randomly assigned lateral or medial claw of the fore or hindlimb in group C cows, and on the healthy partner claw in group L cows. Variables were expressed as differences across limbs. We used 1-way ANOVA to determine the differences between groups C and L and between groups L1 and L2 for ∆weight after application of the claw block. We performed paired t tests to compare variables before and after application of the claw block in groups C and L. Group L scored higher on the numeric rating system than group C (mean ± SD, 3.40 ± 0.62 vs. 1.87 ± 0.28) and showed greater differences in relative stance phase duration (16.34 ± 10.78% vs. 2.13 ± 1.94%), foot load (9.68 ± 8.06 g vs. 3.26 ± 3.69 g), toe-off (3.91 ± 3.14 g vs. 0.78 ± 0.66 g), and ∆weight (53.62 ± 28.85% vs. 8.52 ± 6.19%). In group C, we observed an increase of 12.17 percentage points in ∆weight after block application, from 8.52 ± 6.19% to 20.69 ± 17.01%. Compared with the baseline, group L showed a decrease in numeric rating system score (2.88 ± 0.49 vs. 3.40 ± 0.62) and a decrease in differences between the limbs in relative stance phase duration (7.66 ± 9.96% vs. 16.34 ± 10.78%) and foot load (4.26 ± 4.14 g vs. 9.68 ± 8.06 g) after application of a claw block. Group L2 showed smaller ∆weight after application of a claw block than group L1 (-7.8 ± 8.7% vs. 10.4 ± 7.6%). After block application in group L, we observed smaller differences across the limbs in variables measured to describe gait-cycle characteristics while walking, but no significant improvement while standing. We concluded that application of a claw block must be combined with other methods of pain relief, such as analgesic medication. The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. and Fass Inc. on behalf of the American Dairy Science Association®. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).