Skip to main content

Methods in population study of orofacial injuries in Victorian family violence homicides

Abstract

This study standardized the methods used in the determination of orofacial injuries in Victorian family violence homicides and informed potential control selection for an analytic study. Dental service contacts with family violence victims may be intervention avenues due to the presence of abusive injuries in the orofacial region. All Victorian family homicides from January 2000-September 2018 were identified by determining the kinship/relationship and grouped by age. A 20% random sample of adult cases, aged 18–64 years was selected. The median number of orofacial injuries in categories of injury mechanisms/age/gender and the nature of abusive orofacial injuries was reported for the sample. Of 357 closed cases of family homicide, 261 were adults aged 18–64 years. Offender information and injury mechanism data was available for all closed cases, enabling case selection. Of a random sample of 50 adults, 8 cases were excluded. After 2006, CT scans and photos were present in 20 (91%) and 19 (86.4%) of 22 cases, respectively. The nature and median number of orofacial injuries showed correlation to the reported injury mechanism. Strengths and limitations of the used methods were assessed. Not all cases were compatible for assessment of orofacial injuries, thus serving as an additional criterion for exclusion in our methodology. Further detailed study of the whole population of adults should be limited to the period 2006–2018 where the data is more complete. The mechanism of injury may influence control selection for analytic studies. We present preliminary evidence of the frequent occurrence of orofacial injuries in family violence homicides.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. 1.

    Health and Human Services. Victorian State Government. What is family violence? https://services.dhhs.vic.gov.au/what-family-violence. Accessed 27 Nov 2018.

  2. 2.

    Australian law Reforms Commission. Definition of family violence. Family Violence and Commonwealth Laws-Social Security Law IP 39. https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/family-violence-and-commonwealth-laws%E2%80%94social-security-law/definition-family-violence. Accessed 27 Nov 2018.

  3. 3.

    Leathers R, Le AD, Black E, McQuirter JL. Orofacial injury in underserved minority populations. Dent Clin N Am. 2003;47:127–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Sterzik V, Duckwitz D, Bohnert M. Accident or crime? About the meaning of face injuries inflicted by blunt force. Forensic Sci Res. 2016;1:14–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Caldas IM, Grams AC, Afonso A, Magalhaes T. Oral injuries in victims involving intimate partner violence. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;221:102–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Lee BT, Dierks EJ, Ueeck BA, Homer LD, Potter BF. Maxillofacial injuries associated with domestic violence. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2001;59:1227–83.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Saddki N, Suhaimi AA, Daud R. Maxillofacial injuries associated with intimate partner violence in women. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Dym H. The abused patient. Dent Clin N Am. 1995;39:621–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Aved BM, Meyers L, Burmas EL. Challenging dentistry to recognize and respond to family violence. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2007;35:553–63.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Tilden VP, Schmidt TA, Limandri BJ, Chiodo GT, Garland MJ, Loveless PA. Factors that influence clinicians’ assessment and management of family violence. Am J Public Health. 1994;84:628–33.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Little K. Family violence: an intervention model for dental professionals. US Department of Justice. Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) Bulletin. 2004. p. 1-11.

  12. 12.

    Lincoln HS, Lincoln MJ. Role of the odontologist in the investigation of domestic violence, neglect of the vulnerable, and the institutional violence and torture. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;201:68–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Walsh C, McIntyre SJ, Brodie L, Bugeja L, Hauge S. Victorian systemic review of family violence deaths–first report. Coroners Court of Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria. 2012. https://www.coronerscourt.vic.gov.au/forms-resources/publications?combine=victorian%20systemic%20review%20of%20family%20violence%20deaths&field_audience_target_id=All&field_publication_type_target_id=All&year. Accessed 2 Jun 2019.

  14. 14.

    O’Doherty L, Hegarty K, Ramsay J, Davidson LL, Feder G, Taft A. Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;7:CD007007.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Halberg IR. Surveys. In: Watson R, McKenna H, Cowman S, Keady J, editors. Nursing research: designs and methods. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2008. p. 179–87.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Kim Y. The pilot study in qualitative inquiry. Qual Soc Work. 2011;10:190–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Heale R, Forbes D. Understanding triangulation in research. Evid Based Nurs. 2013;16:98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Lancaster GA, Dodd S, Williamson PR. Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2004;10:307–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Doody O, Doody CM. Conducting a pilot study: case study of a novice researcher. Br J Nurs. 2015;24:1074–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios LP, et al. A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:573–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    National Coronial Information System. System manuals. NCIS Data dictionary. https://www.ncis.org.au/about-the-data/system-manuals/. Accessed 27 Nov 2018.

  23. 23.

    Family violence protection regulations 2008. Victorian legislation and parliamentary documents. www.legislation.vic.gov.au. Accessed 14 Mar 2019.

  24. 24.

    Bugeja L, Butler A, Buxton E, Ehrat H, Hayes M, McIntyre SJ, et al. The implementation of domestic violence deaths reviews in Australia. Homicide Stud. 2013;17:353–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Australian Institute of Family Studies. Children's exposure to domestic and family violence. https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/childrens-exposure-domestic-and-family-violence/export. Accessed 14 Mar 2019.

  26. 26.

    Australian domestic and family violence death review network. Data Report Sydney, 2018. http://www.coronerscourt.vic.gov.au/find/publications/australian+domestic+and+family+violence+death+review+network. Accessed 5 August 2019.

  27. 27.

    Cocks K, Torgerson DJ. Sample size calculations for pilot randomized trials: a confidence interval approach. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:197–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Sim J, Lewis M. The size of a pilot study for a clinical trial should be calculated in relation to considerations of precision and efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65:301–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Branche C, Ozanne-Smith J, Oyebite K, Hyder AA. World report on child injury prevention. World Health Organization. Geneva Switzerland: WHO press; 2008. pp. 1. https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/child/injury/world_report/en/. Accessed 20 June 2019.

  30. 30.

    Saukko P, Knight B. The pathology of wounds. In: Saukko P, Knight B, editors. Knight's forensic pathology, 3rd ed. Abingdon: CRC Press; 2004. p. 136–723.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Sarkar R, Ozanne-Smith J, Bassed R. Systematic review of the patterns of orofacial injuries in physically abused children and adolescents. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019827617.

  32. 32.

    Claydon LS. Rigour in quantitative research. Nurs Stand. 2015;29:43–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria. Out of Character? Legal responses to intimate partner homicides by men in Victoria 2005-2014. Victoria. 2016. https://www.dvrcv.org.au/knowledge-centre/our-publications/discussion-papers/out-character. Accessed 5 Aug 2019.

  34. 34.

    Victorian Law Reform Commission. Defences to homicide. Final report. Victoria, 2004. pp. 15, 22. https://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/projects/defences-homicide/defences-homicide-final-report. Accessed 5 Aug 2019.

  35. 35.

    NSW Domestic violence death review team. Report 2015-2017. Sydney 2017. http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Pages/Publications/dv_annual_reports.aspx. Accessed 5 Aug 2019.

  36. 36.

    Walker PL, Cook DC, Lambert PM. Skeletal evidence for child abuse: a physical anthropological perspective. J Forensic Sci. 1997;42:196–207.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the statistical expertise provided by Dr. Baki Billah from the School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University.

Authorship contribution

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Reena Sarkar. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Reena Sarkar and all authors critically appraised and reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

All phases of this study were supported by Monash University, Australia. No external funding was secured for the manuscript. Reena Sarkar is supported by a Monash Graduate Scholarship (MGS) and a Monash International Postgraduate Research Scholarship (MIPRS) for the duration of her full-time PhD.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reena Sarkar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest declared by authors.

Patient consent

Not relevant.

Data sharing

Data is not publicly available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1 Methods study

PMCT: The CT scanner was a 128-slice SOMATOM Definition Flash (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) with an in-plane (axial) and out-of-plane resolution of 1.5 and 0.98 mm respectively and a slice gap of 1 mm to ensure overlap.

Photography: Digital imaging procedures were consistently followed as per standard guidance for forensic and police laboratories by the Australian and New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency (http://www.anzpaa.org.au/publications/general/guidelines-for-digitalimaging-processes; accessed 11/04/2019).

ICD-10 Coding: The ICD-10 codes are externally added to each NCIS case by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. In violent deaths, the ICD-10 underlying cause reflected the mechanism of fatal injury while nature of injury was depicted by the ICD-10 Level 1-6 codes.[https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3303.0Explanatory%20Notes 12,017?OpenDocument, accessed 6/03/2019] Data was interpreted using the ICD-10 tabular list. [International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. - 10th revision, Fifth edition, 2016. 3 volume.]

Appendix 2

Table 3 Completeness of data in random sample (N = 42; period = 2000–2018)

Appendix 3

Table 4 Victim offender relationship data

Appendix 4

Table 5 Injuries in gender categories

Appendix 5

Table 6 STROBE statement—checklist of items that should be included in reports of cross-sectional studies

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sarkar, R., Ozanne-Smith, J. & Bassed, R. Methods in population study of orofacial injuries in Victorian family violence homicides. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 16, 78–90 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-019-00183-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Family violence
  • Homicides
  • Orofacial
  • Injury
  • Methods
  • Injury mechanism
  • Population