RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Horse wounds can be easily infected with bacteria depending on the nature of its cause such as laceration, abrasion, or puncture as well as the nature of its environment. Various treatments are available in managing open wounds, including the usage of topical antibiotics and antiseptics. However, antibiotic resistance has been a major concern attributed with chronic wound infection. The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of ionized water at different pH against the growth of common bacteria from horse wounds. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten swab samples from equine infected wounds were collected and bacteria isolation and identification were performed. The antibacterial effect of the ionized water of pH 2.5, 4.5, 7.0, and 11.5 was tested on Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, Staphylococcus intermedius, Escherichia coli, Pantoea agglomerans, and Klebsiella pneumoniae. The time-kill profiles of the ionized waters were determined at time 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 h. RESULTS: Ionized water of pH 2.5 and 4.5 showed antibacterial activity against S. aureus, S. pseudintermedius, and S. intermedius with significant (p>0.05) reduction in colony-forming unit/mL within 2-8 h. The degree of bactericidal effect of the acidic ionized water differs between the species with S. intermedius more susceptible. However, there was no antibacterial effect at pH 2.5, 4.5, 7.0, and 11.5 on the Gram-negative bacteria tested. CONCLUSION: Ionized water of pH 2.5 and 4.5 is effective in minimizing the growth of Gram-positive bacteria; thus it could be of clinical importance as an antiseptic for surface wound lavage in horses.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The clinical presentation of horses with back pain (BP) vary considerably with most horse's willingness to take part in athletic or riding purpose becoming impossible. However, there are some clinical features that are directly responsible for the loss or failure of performance. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical features of the thoracolumbar region associated with BP in horses and to use some of the clinical features to classify equine BP. METHODS: Twenty-four horses comprised of 14 with BP and 10 apparently healthy horses were assessed for clinical abnormality that best differentiate BP from normal horses. The horses were then graded (0-5) using the degree of pain response, muscular hypertonicity, thoracolumbar joint stiffness and overall physical dysfunction of the horse. RESULTS: The common clinical features that significantly differentiate horses with BP from non-BP were longissimus dorsi spasm at palpation (78.6%), paravertebral muscle stiffness (64.3%), resist lateral bending (64.3%), and poor hindlimb impulsion (85.7%). There were significantly (p < 0.05) higher scores for pain response to palpation, muscular hypertonicity, thoracolumbar joint stiffness and physical dysfunction among horses with BP in relation to non-BP. A significant relationship exists between all the graded abnormalities. Based on the cumulative score, horses with BP were categorized into mild, mild-moderate, moderate and severe cases. CONCLUSIONS: BP in horse can be differentiated by severity of pain response to back palpation, back muscle hypertonicity, thoracolumbar joint stiffness, physical dysfunctions and their cumulative grading score is useful in the assessment and categorization of BP in horses.
