Ludolph E, van Loh W, Niezold D
Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik, Duisburg-Buchholz.
Aktuelle Traumatol. 1987 Aug;17(4):160-2.
Fifty-two expertises on connections between cause and effect of patellar dislocations were examined with a view to improving the standards of medical expertizing. On principle, the mechanism of injury is the decisive criterion in determining whether the injury can be considered capable of causing the dislocation. It was found that in about one-half of the cases the dislocation was wrongly attributed to the event and that a reasonable connection existed in only one-quarter of the cases. The typical causes of error in reasoning - first dislocation, impressive pattern of injury, no degenerative changes - are listed and discussed. The importance of the pattern of damage for the first occurrence of a dislocation is demonstrated. The suitability of different courses of events for contributing essentially to the dislocation is discussed.
为提高医学鉴定标准，对52例髌骨脱位因果关系的专业鉴定进行了审查。原则上，损伤机制是判断损伤是否可被视为导致脱位的决定性标准。结果发现，在大约一半的病例中，脱位被错误地归因于该事件，只有四分之一的病例存在合理的关联。列出并讨论了推理中典型的错误原因——首次脱位、明显的损伤模式、无退行性改变。证明了损伤模式对首次脱位的重要性。讨论了不同事件过程对脱位产生实质性影响的适用性。
