Abstract
Images of bruises serve as a clinical record and may facilitate forensic analysis in the assessment of suspected physical child abuse. Currently, only conventional imaging techniques are employed; however, alternative imaging modalities using visible and non-visible light may provide additional information. We sought to determine the image modality preferences of paediatricians and the between-observer agreement therein. Nine paediatricians who work in child protection independently compared five image modalities (conventional colour, conventional grey-scale, cross-Polarised, ultraviolet, and infrared) of four bruises, with a compliance rate of 95%. All images were taken using a standardised set of protocols with Nikon D90 cameras and 105-mm macro-lenses. The paediatricians almost unanimously chose cross-Polarised as their preferred modality for all four bruises when assessing boundary, shape, colour, size, and absence of light reflectance. Conventional colour and grey-scale imaging were typically ranked second and third. Ultraviolet and infrared were consistently ranked in the least two favourable positions. Between-observer agreement on ranking order was high, with coefficients of concordance ranging from 0.76 to 0.96. Combinations of imaging modalities chosen to give the most complete picture of the bruise predominantly consisted of cross-Polarised and conventional (colour and grey-scale). This pilot study demonstrated that clinicians collectively favoured cross-Polarised in addition to conventional imaging. Further studies are required to determine the value of ultraviolet and infrared imaging in the assessment of childhood bruises.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
McMahon P, Grossman W, Gaffney M, Stanitski C (1995) Soft tissue injury as an indication of child abuse. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77:1179–1183
Smith SM, Hanson R (1974) 134 battered children: a medical and psychological study. Br Med J 3:666–670
Lynch A (1975) Child abuse in the school-age population. J Sch Health 45:141–148
Kaczor K, Pierce MC, Makoroff K, Corey TS (2006) Bruising and physical child abuse. Clin Pediatr Emerg Med 7:153–160
Thompson S (2005) Accidental or inflicted? Pediatr Ann 34:372–381
Harris TS (2009) Bruises in children: normal or child abuse? J Pediatr Health Care 24(4):216–221. doi:10.1016/j.padhc.2009.03.007
Child Protection Companion (2006) Guidance for clinicians on how to recognise and manage child abuse and neglect, 1st edn. Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, London http://www.rcpch.ac.uk/Policy/Child-Protection/Child-Protection-Publications
BAFO (British Association of Forensic Odontology) Guidelines BiteMark Methodology (2001) http://www.bafo.org.uk/resources/bitemarks.php
ABFO (American Board of Forensic Odontology) Bite Mark Guidelines http://www.abfo.org/id_mark_guidelines.htm
Wright FD (1998) Photography in bite mark and patterned injury documentation—part 1. J Forensic Sci 43(4):877–880
Wright FD, Golden GS (2010) The use of full spectrum digital photography for evidence collection and preservation in cases involving forensic odontology. Forensic Sci Int 201:59–67
Wright FD (1998) Photography in bite mark and patterned injury documentation—part 2. J Forensic Sci 43(4):881–887
Seifert D, Krohn J, Larson M, Lambe A, Puschel K, Kurth H (2010) Violence against children: further evidence suggesting a relationship between burns, scalds, and the additional injuries. Int J Leg Med 124:49–54. doi:10.1007/s00414-009-0347-6
Feldman KW (1992) Patterned abusive bruises of the buttocks and the pinnae. Pediatrics 90:633–636
Kos L, Shwayder T (2006) Cutaneous manifestations of child abuse. Pediatr Dermatol 23(4):311–320
Thali MJ, Braun M, Bruschweiler W, Dirnhofer R (2000) Matching tire tracks on the head using forensic photogrammetry. Forensic Sci Int 113:281–287
Maguire S, Mann MK, Sibert J, Kemp A (2005) Are there patterns of bruising in childhood which are diagnostic or suggestive of abuse? A systematic review. Arch Dis Child 90:182–186. doi:10.1136/adc.2003.044065
Munang LA, Leonard PA, Mok JYQ (2002) Lack of agreement on colour description between clinicians examining childhood bruising. J Clin Forensic Med 9:171–174
Bariciak ED, Plint AC, Gaboury I, Bennett S (2003) Dating of bruises in children: an assessment of physician accuracy. Pediatrics 112:804–807. doi:10.1542/peds.112.4.804
Pilling ML, Vanezis P, Perrett D, Johnston A (2010) Visual assessment of the timing of bruising by forensic experts. J Forensic Leg Med 17:143–149
Benson PE, Shah AA, Willmot DR (2008) Polarized versus nonpolarized digital images for the measurement of demineralization surrounding orthodontic brackets. Angle Orthod 78(2):288–293. doi:10.2319/121306-511.1
Robertson AJ, Toumba KJ (1999) Cross-polarized photography in the study of enamel defects in dental paediatrics. J Audiov Media Med 22(2):63–70
Rizova E, Kligman A (2001) New photographic techniques for clinical evaluation of acne. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 15(3):13–18
Ortonne JP, Gupta G, Ortonne N, Duteil L, Queille C, Mallefet P (2009) Effectiveness of cross polarized light and fluorescence diagnosis for detection of sub-clinical and clinical actinic keratosis during imiquimod treatment. Exp Dermatol 19:641–647. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0625.2009.01047.x
Raymond MA, Hall RL (1986) An interesting application of infra-red reflection photography to blood splash pattern interpretation. Forensic Sci Int 31:189–194
Tseng S, Grant A, Durkin A (2008) In vivo determination of skin near-infrared optical properties using diffuse optical spectroscopy. J Biomed Opt 13(1):014016
Krauss TC, Warlen SC (1985) The forensic science use of reflective ultraviolet photography. J Forensic Sci 30(1):262–268
David TJ, Sobel MN (1994) Recapturing a five-month-old bite mark by means of reflective ultraviolet photography. J Forensic Sci 39(6):1560–1567
David TJ (1990) Documentation of a Seven Month Old Bite Mark with Ultraviolet Photography. Presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Cincinnati, February 1990
Sheasby DR, MacDonald DG (2001) A forensic classification of distortion in human bite marks. Forensic Sci Int 122:75–78
Tetley C, Young S (2009) Digital infrared and ultraviolet photography using advanced camera services modified equipment. J Vis Commun Med 32(2):40–42. doi:10.1080/17453050902995407
Hyzer WG, Krauss TC (1988) The bite mark standard reference scale–ABFO No. 2. J Forensic Sci 33(2):498–506
Friedman M (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc 32(200):675–701
Friedman M (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc 34(205):109
Friedman M (1940) A comparison of alternative tests of significance for the problem of m rankings. Ann Math Statist 11(1):86–92
Kendall MG, Babington Smith B (1939) The problem of $m$ rankings. Ann Math Statist 10(3):275–287
Wallis WA (1939) The correlation ratio for ranked data. J Am Stat Assoc 34(207):533–538
Legendre P (2005) Species associations: the Kendall coefficient of concordance revisited. J Agr Biol Environ Stat 10(2):226–245. doi:10.1198/108571105X46642
Rowan P, Hill M, Gresham GA, Goodall E, Moore T (2010) The use of infrared aided photography in identification of sites of bruises after evidence of the bruise is absent to the naked eye. J Forensic Leg Med 17(6):293–297. doi:10.1016/j.jflm.2010.04.007
Vogeley E, Clyde Pierce M, Bertocci G (2002) Experience with wood lamp illumination and digital photography in the documentation of bruises on human skin. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 156:265–268
Tetley C, Young S (2007) Digital infrared and ultraviolet imaging part 1: infrared. J Vis Commun Med 30(4):162–171. doi:10.1080/17453050701767106
Dyer AG, Muir LL, Muntz WRA (2004) A calibrated gray scale for forensic ultraviolet photography. J Forensic Sci 49:5
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge and thank all members of the PROTECT project team and the successful collaboration between the Schools of Primary Care and Public Health, Child Health, and the Dental Illustration Unit at Cardiff University, and the Media Resources Centre at the University Hospital of Wales. We would also like to thank members of the Cardiff and Vale University Hospital Board child protection team for participating in the study.
Funding sources
The study forms part of the PROTECT study funded by the Medical Research Council.
Ethical standards
This study was compliant with current laws. The study methodology adhered to ethical approval number 09/H0504/53 Southampton Ethics committee, as of 7 May 2009.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lawson, Z., Nuttall, D., Young, S. et al. Which is the preferred image modality for paediatricians when assessing photographs of bruises in children?. Int J Legal Med 125, 825–830 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-010-0532-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-010-0532-7