What does the recent literature add to the identification and investigation of fractures in child abuse: an overview of review updates 2005–2013

Sabine Maguire, Laura Cowley, Mala Mann, Alison Kemp
{"title":"What does the recent literature add to the identification and investigation of fractures in child abuse: an overview of review updates 2005–2013","authors":"Sabine Maguire,&nbsp;Laura Cowley,&nbsp;Mala Mann,&nbsp;Alison Kemp","doi":"10.1002/ebch.1941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background:</h3>\n \n <p>Fractures are a manifestation of physical abuse and common accidental injuries. Distinguishing which fractures are indicative of abuse and optimizing the identification of occult fractures are the challenges.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives:</h3>\n \n <p>To identify additional studies published since our original systematic reviews to address these two issues.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods:</h3>\n \n <p>An all-language literature search of 14 databases was conducted for the years 2005–2013, using revised keywords. All studies underwent standardized critical appraisal by two independent reviewers, applying quality criteria relating to the confirmation of child abuse, exclusion of abuse and quality of skeletal survey conducted. A meta-analysis, stratified by age, was conducted to determine the predictive value for abuse of specific fractures by fitting a random effects model.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results:</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty-three studies addressed ‘radiological investigations’, and nine studies ‘fractures indicative of abuse’. Radiological studies reiterated that a single investigation (skeletal survey or radionuclide imaging ) will miss some abusive fractures; in 8.4–37.6% of children, the repeat skeletal survey added new information that influenced the child protection procedures. Debate continues as to the optimal images to include in the repeat skeletal survey. A meta-analysis of femoral and humeral fractures by age highlighted that children younger than 18 months are significantly more likely to have sustained their fracture as a consequence of abuse, than those aged 1–4 years.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Authors' Conclusions:</h3>\n \n <p>Recent literature validates the original conclusions that repeat skeletal imaging adds important information on fractures. Comparative studies of femoral, humeral, rib and skull fractures enabled a meta-analysis by age, however further comparative studies are needed.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12162,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based child health : a Cochrane review journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebch.1941","citationCount":"30","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based child health : a Cochrane review journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ebch.1941","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30

Abstract

Background:

Fractures are a manifestation of physical abuse and common accidental injuries. Distinguishing which fractures are indicative of abuse and optimizing the identification of occult fractures are the challenges.

Objectives:

To identify additional studies published since our original systematic reviews to address these two issues.

Methods:

An all-language literature search of 14 databases was conducted for the years 2005–2013, using revised keywords. All studies underwent standardized critical appraisal by two independent reviewers, applying quality criteria relating to the confirmation of child abuse, exclusion of abuse and quality of skeletal survey conducted. A meta-analysis, stratified by age, was conducted to determine the predictive value for abuse of specific fractures by fitting a random effects model.

Results:

Twenty-three studies addressed ‘radiological investigations’, and nine studies ‘fractures indicative of abuse’. Radiological studies reiterated that a single investigation (skeletal survey or radionuclide imaging ) will miss some abusive fractures; in 8.4–37.6% of children, the repeat skeletal survey added new information that influenced the child protection procedures. Debate continues as to the optimal images to include in the repeat skeletal survey. A meta-analysis of femoral and humeral fractures by age highlighted that children younger than 18 months are significantly more likely to have sustained their fracture as a consequence of abuse, than those aged 1–4 years.

Authors' Conclusions:

Recent literature validates the original conclusions that repeat skeletal imaging adds important information on fractures. Comparative studies of femoral, humeral, rib and skull fractures enabled a meta-analysis by age, however further comparative studies are needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
最近的文献对儿童虐待中骨折的识别和调查有什么补充:2005-2013年综述更新
背景:骨折是身体虐待和常见的意外伤害的表现。区分哪些骨折是滥用的迹象,并优化隐匿性骨折的识别是一个挑战。目的:确定自我们最初的系统综述以来发表的其他研究来解决这两个问题。方法:使用修订后的关键词检索2005-2013年14个数据库的全语言文献。所有研究都由两名独立的审稿人进行标准化的严格评价,采用与确认虐待儿童、排除虐待和所进行的骨骼调查质量有关的质量标准。通过拟合随机效应模型,进行了按年龄分层的meta分析,以确定滥用特定骨折的预测价值。结果:23项研究涉及“放射学调查”,9项研究涉及“骨折表明虐待”。放射学研究重申,单一的调查(骨骼调查或放射性核素成像)将错过一些滥用骨折;在8.4-37.6%的儿童中,重复骨骼调查增加了影响儿童保护程序的新信息。关于重复骨骼调查中包含的最佳图像的争论仍在继续。一项按年龄划分的股骨和肱骨骨折荟萃分析强调,18个月以下的儿童比1-4岁的儿童更有可能因虐待而持续骨折。作者的结论:最近的文献证实了原来的结论,即重复骨骼成像增加了骨折的重要信息。股骨、肱骨、肋骨和颅骨骨折的比较研究可以按年龄进行荟萃分析,但需要进一步的比较研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Issue Information A meta-epidemiological study to examine the association between bias and treatment effects in neonatal trials Pros and cons … Formoterol or salmeterol for asthma—should they be used as monotherapy? Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1