Cargando…

Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review

Child abuse is a critical social issue. The orthopedic surgeon’s role is essential in noticing signs and symptoms of physical abuse. For this reason, several authors have proposed scoring systems to identify abuse early on and reduce undiagnosed cases. The aim of this systematic review is to overvie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pavone, Vito, Vescio, Andrea, Lucenti, Ludovico, Amico, Mirko, Caldaci, Alessia, Pappalardo, Xena Giada, Parano, Enrico, Testa, Gianluca
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9406450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36010147
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children9081257
_version_ 1784774123961974784
author Pavone, Vito
Vescio, Andrea
Lucenti, Ludovico
Amico, Mirko
Caldaci, Alessia
Pappalardo, Xena Giada
Parano, Enrico
Testa, Gianluca
author_facet Pavone, Vito
Vescio, Andrea
Lucenti, Ludovico
Amico, Mirko
Caldaci, Alessia
Pappalardo, Xena Giada
Parano, Enrico
Testa, Gianluca
author_sort Pavone, Vito
collection PubMed
description Child abuse is a critical social issue. The orthopedic surgeon’s role is essential in noticing signs and symptoms of physical abuse. For this reason, several authors have proposed scoring systems to identify abuse early on and reduce undiagnosed cases. The aim of this systematic review is to overview the screening tools in the literature. In 2021, three independent authors performed a systematic review of two electronic medical databases using the following inclusion criteria: physical child abuse, questionnaire, survey, score, screening tool and predictive tool. Patients who had experienced sexual abuse or emotional abuse were excluded. The risk of bias evaluation of the articles was performed according to the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale Cohort Studies. Any evidence-level study reporting clinical data and dealing with a physical child abuse diagnosis tool was considered. A total of 217 articles were found. After reading the full texts and checking the reference lists, n = 12 (71,035 patients) articles were selected. A total of seven screening tools were found. However, only some of the seven diagnostic tools included demonstrated a high rate of sensitivity and specificity. The main limits of the studies were the lack of heterogeneity of evidence and samples and the lack of common assessing tools. Despite the multiplicity of questionnaires aimed at detecting validated child abuse, there was not a single worldwide questionnaire for early diagnosis. A combination of more than one test might increase the validity of the investigation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9406450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94064502022-08-26 Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review Pavone, Vito Vescio, Andrea Lucenti, Ludovico Amico, Mirko Caldaci, Alessia Pappalardo, Xena Giada Parano, Enrico Testa, Gianluca Children (Basel) Review Child abuse is a critical social issue. The orthopedic surgeon’s role is essential in noticing signs and symptoms of physical abuse. For this reason, several authors have proposed scoring systems to identify abuse early on and reduce undiagnosed cases. The aim of this systematic review is to overview the screening tools in the literature. In 2021, three independent authors performed a systematic review of two electronic medical databases using the following inclusion criteria: physical child abuse, questionnaire, survey, score, screening tool and predictive tool. Patients who had experienced sexual abuse or emotional abuse were excluded. The risk of bias evaluation of the articles was performed according to the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale Cohort Studies. Any evidence-level study reporting clinical data and dealing with a physical child abuse diagnosis tool was considered. A total of 217 articles were found. After reading the full texts and checking the reference lists, n = 12 (71,035 patients) articles were selected. A total of seven screening tools were found. However, only some of the seven diagnostic tools included demonstrated a high rate of sensitivity and specificity. The main limits of the studies were the lack of heterogeneity of evidence and samples and the lack of common assessing tools. Despite the multiplicity of questionnaires aimed at detecting validated child abuse, there was not a single worldwide questionnaire for early diagnosis. A combination of more than one test might increase the validity of the investigation. MDPI 2022-08-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9406450/ /pubmed/36010147 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children9081257 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Pavone, Vito
Vescio, Andrea
Lucenti, Ludovico
Amico, Mirko
Caldaci, Alessia
Pappalardo, Xena Giada
Parano, Enrico
Testa, Gianluca
Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review
title Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review
title_full Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review
title_short Diagnostic Tools in the Detection of Physical Child Abuse: A Systematic Review
title_sort diagnostic tools in the detection of physical child abuse: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9406450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36010147
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children9081257
work_keys_str_mv AT pavonevito diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview
AT vescioandrea diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview
AT lucentiludovico diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview
AT amicomirko diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview
AT caldacialessia diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview
AT pappalardoxenagiada diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview
AT paranoenrico diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview
AT testagianluca diagnostictoolsinthedetectionofphysicalchildabuseasystematicreview