New research has found that measuring noseband tightness at the side of a horse’s face may produce unreliable results because of natural differences in equine head shape.
The study, published in the International Journal of Equine Science, investigated whether a lateral measuring tool could provide an alternative way of assessing noseband laxity.
The research was led by Russell MacKechnie-Guire of Hartpury University, alongside Animalweb’s Dr David Marlin, Jane Williams, Mark Fisher, Diana Fisher, Victoria Walker and Rachel Murray.
Noseband tightness has become an increasingly important welfare issue within equestrian sport. Current competition checks involve passing a measuring device underneath the noseband over the dorsal nasal bone – essentially the front of the horse’s nose.
However, the researchers wanted to investigate whether an alternative measurement taken from the side of the horse’s face could be useful. This could potentially provide another option if a horse became distressed during a conventional check, or where the anatomy beneath the noseband appeared to influence the result.
Testing an alternative way to measure noseband tightness
The researchers developed a lateral measuring tool equivalent to 1.5 finger equivalents (Fe) and tested it on 31 horses.
The tool was inserted beneath the noseband at two different locations on the side of the horse’s face – the lateral nasal bone and the lateral maxilla, just in front of the facial crest. Each measurement was repeated three times and recorded as either a pass or fail.
Researchers also used 3D light scanning in a randomly selected group of 12 horses to examine the shape of the maxilla beneath the noseband and investigate differences in facial anatomy.
The results demonstrated significant anatomical variation between individual horses.
When measurements were taken in the lateral nasal region, unsuccessful passes increased significantly as noseband laxity decreased compared with the 2.0 finger-equivalent setting. At the lateral maxilla, however, a significant increase in unsuccessful passes was only identified at the tightest, 0.0 Fe setting.
Anatomy could influence the result
Importantly, the researchers concluded that measurements taken from the side of the horse’s face were affected by considerable anatomical variability.
This meant the lateral measuring tool could produce false-positive results – potentially indicating that a noseband was too tight when the outcome was actually being influenced by the underlying shape of the individual horse’s head.
Although there was significant variation between different horses, the researchers found minimal differences between the left and right sides of the lateral nasal bone.
The authors therefore concluded that lateral locations are not recommended for determining noseband laxity.
The findings add further evidence to the ongoing discussion around how noseband tightness should be measured objectively and consistently, while taking into account differences in individual equine anatomy.
The study, “Quantifying Equine Head Morphology: Implications for Lateral Noseband Measurement Tools”, was published on 6 September 2026 in the International Journal of Equine Science.
Read the full open-access research: International Journal of Equine Science – Quantifying Equine Head Morphology
