Objective: To compare attempts to stand, duration, quality, and occurrence of injuries between head‐tail rope assistance and unassisted recoveries in healthy horses undergoing general anesthesia for elective surgeries.Study design: Randomized, prospective, clinical trial.Methods: Three hundred one healthy horses undergoing elective surgeries were randomly assigned to recover with head‐tail rope assistance (group A) or unassisted (group U); 305 recoveries (group A, n = 154; group U, n = 151) were analyzed. Anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane and triple drip. For each recovery, attempts to stand, duration, quality, and recovery‐associated injuries were recorded. Data were analyzed by linear regression and analysis of covariance.Results: Anesthesia duration was similar between groups (mean ± SD, 70 ± 29 minutes). Compared with group U, group A had fewer attempts to stand (median [range], group A = 1 [1‐7] vs group U = 3 [1‐34]) and shorter duration of recovery (mean ± SD, A = 36 ± 12 minutes vs U = 41 ± 15 minutes). Recovery quality in group A (28 points [15‐70]) was better than that in group U (38 points [11‐87]). More horses had recovery‐associated injuries in group U (9 horses) compared with group A (2 horses). One horse per group was euthanized.Conclusion: Head‐tail rope assistance reduced standing attempts, shortened recovery duration, improved recovery quality, and reduced recovery‐associated minor injuries after general anesthesia for elective surgery in healthy horses. Fatalities could not be prevented.Clinical significance: Head‐tail rope assistance may improve recovery in healthy horses after short‐duration elective surgeries with isoflurane and triple drip.

Aim of the study was to compare the effect of neuroleptic sedation with acepromazine and neuroleptanalgesia with acepromazine and buprenorphine on thermal thresholds (TT) obtained at the nostrils and at the withers. The study was carried out as a randomized, blinded, controlled trial with cross-over design. Thermal thresholds were determined by incremental contact heat applied to the skin above the nostril (N) or the withers (W). Eleven horses were treated with saline (S), acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg) (ACE) or acepromazine and buprenorphine (0.0075 mg/kg) (AB) intravenously (IV). Single stimulations were performed 15 minutes prior and 15, 45, 75, 105, 165, 225, 285, 405 and 525 minutes after treatment. Sedation score, gastrointestinal auscultation score and occurrence of skin lesions were recorded. Data were analysed with analysis of variance for repeated measurements.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of contact heat thermal stimulation in horses at different body sites and under different environmental conditions and different test situations. Five warm-blood horses were equipped with the thermal probe located on the skin of nostril (N), withers (W) or coronary band (C). Skin temperature and reaction temperature (thermal threshold) at each location were measured and percent thermal excursion (% TE = 100 * (threshold temperature - skin temperature)/(cut-out temperature - skin temperature) was calculated. Environmental conditions were changed in partial random order for all locations, so each horse was tested in its familiar box stall and stocks, in the morning and evening and at warm and cold ambient temperatures. Type of reaction to the stimulus and horse’s general behaviour during stimulation were recorded. The stimulation sites were examined for the occurrence of possible skin lesions.