Feldman Kenneth W, Tayama Tricia M, Strickler Leslie E, Johnson Lee A, Kolhatkar Gauri, DeRidder Catherine A, Matthews Dana C, Sidbury Robert, Taylor James A
From the Children's Protection Program.
Division of General Pediatrics, Seattle Children's and the University of Washington Department of Pediatrics, Seattle, WA.
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2020 Feb;36(2):e43-e49. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000001311.
This study had 2 objectives. First, to determine the behavior of physicians evaluating premobile infants with bruises. Second, and most importantly, to learn whether infants with unexplained bruising who had been initially evaluated by primary care and emergency department (ED) physicians are as likely to have their bruises attributed to child abuse as those children evaluated by child abuse physicians.
Primary care, ED, and child abuse pediatricians (CAPs) in King County, Washington, San Mateo, Calif, Albuquerque, NM, La Crosse, Wis, and Torrance, Calif prospectively identified and studied infants younger than 6 months with less than 6 bruises, which were judged by the evaluating clinician to be explained or unexplained after their initial clinical examination.
Between March 1, 2010, and March 1, 2017, 63 infants with initially explained and 46 infants with initially unexplained bruises were identified. Infants with unexplained bruises had complete coagulation and abuse evaluations less frequently if they were initially identified by primary care pediatricians or ED providers than by CAPs. After imaging, laboratory, and follow-up, 54.2% (26) of the infants with initially unexplained bruises, including 2 who had been initially diagnosed with accidental injuries, were diagnosed as abused. Three (6.2%) infants had accidental bruising, 6 (12.4%) abuse mimics, 1 (2.5%) self-injury, 1 (2.5%) medical injury, and 11 (22.9%) remained of unknown causation. None had causal coagulation disorders. A total of 65.4% of the 26 abused infants had occult injuries detected by their imaging and laboratory evaluations. Six (23.1%) abused infants were not diagnosed until after they sustained subsequent injuries. Three (11.5%) were recognized abused by police investigation alone. Thirty-eight percent of the abused, bruised infants had a single bruise. Clinicians' estimates of abuse likelihood based on their initial clinical evaluation were inaccurate. Primary care, ED, and child abuse physicians identified abused infants at similar rates.
More than half of premobile infants with initially unexplained bruises were found to be abused. Abuse was as likely for infants identified by primary care and ED providers as for those identified by CAPs. Currently, physicians often do not obtain full abuse evaluations in premobile infants with unexplained bruising. Their initial clinical judgment about abuse likelihood was inadequate. Bruised infants often have clinically occult abusive injuries or will sustain subsequent serious abuse. Bruised infants should have full abuse evaluations and referral for Protective Services and police assessments.
本研究有两个目标。其一,确定评估有瘀伤的未开始活动婴儿的医生的行为。其二,也是最重要的,了解那些最初由初级保健医生和急诊科医生评估的有不明原因瘀伤的婴儿,与那些由儿童虐待问题医生评估的儿童相比,其瘀伤被归因于虐待儿童的可能性是否相同。
华盛顿州金县、加利福尼亚州圣马特奥、新墨西哥州阿尔伯克基、威斯康星州拉克罗斯以及加利福尼亚州托伦斯的初级保健医生、急诊科医生和儿童虐待问题儿科医生(CAPs)前瞻性地识别并研究了6个月以下、瘀伤少于6处的婴儿,这些瘀伤在初始临床检查后由评估医生判断为可解释或不可解释。
在2010年3月1日至2017年3月1日期间,识别出63名最初瘀伤原因可解释的婴儿和46名最初瘀伤原因不明的婴儿。与由CAPs识别的婴儿相比,最初由初级保健儿科医生或急诊科医生识别的有不明原因瘀伤的婴儿,进行全面凝血和虐待评估的频率较低。经过影像学、实验室检查及随访后,最初瘀伤原因不明的婴儿中有54.2%(26名)被诊断为受虐,其中包括2名最初被诊断为意外伤害的婴儿。3名(6.2%)婴儿有意外瘀伤,6名(12.4%)有虐待假象,1名(2.5%)有自我伤害,1名(2.5%)有医疗损伤,11名(22.9%)原因仍不明。无一例有因果性凝血障碍。26名受虐婴儿中,共有65.4%通过影像学和实验室检查发现有隐匿性损伤。6名(23.1%)受虐婴儿直到再次受伤后才被诊断。3名(11.5%)仅通过警方调查才被认定为受虐。38%的受虐瘀伤婴儿有一处瘀伤。临床医生基于初始临床评估对虐待可能性的估计不准确。初级保健医生、急诊科医生和儿童虐待问题医生识别受虐婴儿的比例相似。
超过一半最初有不明原因瘀伤的未开始活动婴儿被发现受虐。初级保健医生和急诊科医生识别的婴儿与CAPs识别的婴儿受虐可能性相同。目前,医生通常不会对有不明原因瘀伤的未开始活动婴儿进行全面的虐待评估。他们对虐待可能性的初始临床判断不足。瘀伤婴儿常常有临床上隐匿的虐待性损伤或会遭受后续严重虐待。有瘀伤的婴儿应进行全面的虐待评估,并转介至保护服务部门和警方进行评估。