Children's Hospital of Wisconsin, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53201, USA.
Child Maltreat. 2009 Nov;14(4):376-81. doi: 10.1177/1077559508326356. Epub 2008 Nov 10.
To determine whether the presence or absence of bruising can be used to differentiate between abusive and nonabusive fractures, a retrospective study was conducted of patients with acute fractures referred to a child abuse team. A bruise and fracture were considered associated if both occurred on the same body site. Chart summaries, excluding information on bruising, were reviewed by 2 abuse experts to assign cause of injury. Of the 150 participants, fractures of 93 (62%) were categorized as abusive and 57 (38%) as nonabusive. Bruising associated with a fracture was found for 26% of abused and 25% of nonabused children. Most children (61%) had no bruises anywhere on the body, and this did not differ significantly by cause of injury. The sensitivity of a bruise associated with a fracture to predict abuse was only 26%. The presence or absence of bruising was not useful to differentiate between abusive and nonabusive fractures.
为了确定瘀伤的存在与否可以用于区分虐待性和非虐待性骨折,对被转介到儿童虐待小组的急性骨折患者进行了一项回顾性研究。如果同一身体部位同时出现瘀伤和骨折,则认为两者相关。两名滥用专家审查了图表摘要(不包括有关瘀伤的信息),以确定受伤原因。在 150 名参与者中,93 名(62%)骨折被归类为虐待性,57 名(38%)为非虐待性。26%的受虐儿童和 25%的未受虐儿童的骨折处伴有瘀伤。大多数儿童(61%)身体任何部位都没有瘀伤,受伤原因并无显著差异。与骨折相关的瘀伤预测虐待的敏感性仅为 26%。瘀伤的存在与否对于区分虐待性和非虐待性骨折没有帮助。