"Decreasing the risk of Eventing horse falls - should we focus on the horse, the rider or the fence?"

Murray, J.K. University of Bristol.

Introduction:  In 1999 five UK riders died as a result of horse falls in the cross-country phase of Eventing competitions.  As a consequence of these falls, the Hartington Committee was set up to discuss the safety of the sport of Eventing, their report stated that “everything should be done to prevent horses from falling” (Hartington, 2000).  Since 2000, steps have been taken by British Eventing and the F.E.I. (Fédération Équestre Internationale) to try to reduce the risk of a horse fall.  These include the development of the ‘frangible pin’, penalising riders for reckless riding on the cross-country course and the annual publication of horse fall statistics by British Eventing.

In order to effectively reduce the risk of a horse fall it is important to identify factors that significantly increase or decrease the risk of a horse fall.  Thus, the Horse Trust (formerly The Home of Rest for Horses) funded a three year study (2001-2004) which was designed to identify factors that increased or decreased the risk of a horse fall in the cross-country phase of Eventing competitions.

Materials and Methods:  Data were obtained for 180 ‘cases’ (jumping efforts resulting in a horse fall) and 540 matched controls (jumping efforts not resulting in a horse fall) from randomly selected British Eventing competitions held in Great Britain during 2001 and 2002.  Controls were matched by day of competition and event venue.  The risk of a horse fall was modelled using univariable and multivariable conditional logistic regression models.  The statistical packages R (www.r-project.org) and Egret (Cytel Software Corporation, USA) were used for the data analysis.

Results:  The risk of a horse fall was 0.35 per 1000 jumping efforts (95% CI 0.30-0.41).   The risk increased with the level of difficulty and duration of the event.  An increased risk of a horse fall was associated with jumping into or out of water; taking off from good-to-soft, soft or heavy ground; fences with a drop landing; non-angled fences with a base spread of ≥2 m; and angled fences (Table 1). Other risk factors included riders who knew that they were in the lead within the competition before the cross-country phase; an inappropriate speed of approach to the fence (too fast or too slow); horse-and rider partnerships that had not incurred refusals at earlier fences; and riders who received cross-country tuition (Table 1).

Table 1. Multivariable conditional logistic regression model for risk factors for cross-country horse falls at eventing competitions in Great Britain (2001-2002).

Discussion and Conclusions: This study identified factors associated with the course and the fence that could be modified with the aim of reducing the risk of horse falls on the cross-country phase of Eventing competitions. Maintaining good to firm take-off surfaces at fences, reducing the base spread of fences to <2 m and reducing the use of angled fences and fences at which horses are required to jump into or out of water are approaches that could be taken in an attempt to reduce the risk of a horse fall and hence the risk of injury to horse and rider.  Angled fences and fences with a base spread of >2 m are not recommended for fences jumped in or out of water.  Risk reduction arising from course and fence modification needs to be confirmed by intervention studies.

Acknowledgements:  The Horse Trust is thanked for funding this study.  British Eventing and F.E.I. officials kindly enabled data collection to take place.  The riders who completed questionnaires for this study are thanked.  The co-authors of publications arising from this work are gratefully acknowledged: Dr Ellen Singer, Professors Nigel French, Kenton Morgan and Chris Proudman.  Jane Barnes is thanked for her help with data collection throughout the study.

This work was presented by Dr Jane Murray during her key note speech at the 2012 Alltech conference.