Citation

Bilo RAC. Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol. 2018; 14(4): 541-544.

Affiliation

Department of Forensic Medicine, Section on Forensic Pediatrics, Netherlands Forensic Institute, PO Box 24044, 2490 AA, The Hague, The Netherlands. r.bilo@nfi.minvenj.nl.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/s12024-018-0006-7

PMID

30069661

Abstract

The 2016 Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services (SBU) systematic review deals with the role of the 'triad' (subdural hematoma, retinal hemorrhages, and various forms of brain symptoms) in the medical investigation of suspected traumatic shaking. In this commentary we will not discuss the methodological shortcomings of the SBU-review but will concentrate on the effects of the review on the daily practice of protecting children and families in court procedures. In our opinion the report did not add anything to what was already known in clinical and forensic medicine. The SBU-review confirmed that shaking can cause the 'triad' and that there are other explanations for the 'triad' and its components. The report however did not provide a realistic list of these other explanations. The review reduced the discussion about inflicted head injury in young children to a discussion about the 'triad' and traumatic shaking, ignoring the fact that 'diagnosing' inflicted head injury concerns a complete clinical and forensic evaluation of all individual and combined findings, of which for example the presence of bruising or fractures, were excluded by the SBU-panel.

Language: en

Keywords

Differential diagnosis; Inflicted head injury/abusive head trauma; SBU-report; Shaken baby syndrome; ‘Triad’