This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (11)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Physical Examination  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Kathryn Bowen, MD; Michael B. Aldous, MD, MPH

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999;153:1160-1164.

Objectives  To investigate why sexual abuse was suspected and what physical findings were present among children referred for the evaluation of sexual abuse without a verbal disclosure or witnessed abuse, and to determine if the reasons for requesting medical evaluation varied by referral source.

Design  Prospective descriptive study.

Setting/Patients  Two groups of consecutive children referred to a sexual abuse evaluation clinic.

Main Outcome Measure  Categorization of physical examination findings for likelihood of sexual abuse (definite, suggestive, nonspecific, normal, non–abuse-related finding).

Results  Of 393 children studied, 190 (48.3%) had a definite or probable history of sexual abuse, 130 (33.1%) had a suspicious history, and 73 (18.6%) had "no history." The no-history group was referred most often for physical findings (42 patients [57%]). Compared with other referral sources, physicians more frequently referred patients for physical findings, parental anxiety, and behavior changes. Regardless of history, examination findings were normal or nonspecific in 83.5% to 94.4% of cases. Suggestive or definite examination findings were more frequent for children with definite or probable histories, while non–abuse-related findings were more common for the no-history group. Only 2 children (3%) with no reported history of abuse had suggestive physical findings, and none had definite findings.

Conclusions  Physicians are more likely than public agencies to refer children for sexual abuse evaluation for reasons other than disclosure by the child. For most of these children, examination is unlikely to influence the suspicion of abuse. Improved physician training and selected referrals are indicated.

From the Department of Pediatrics and Steele Memorial Children's Research Center, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Medical Evaluation of Suspected Child Sexual Abuse: It's Time for Standardized Training, Referral Centers, and Routine Peer Review
Joyce A. Adams
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999;153(11):1121-1122.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Unmet Health Care Needs Among Children Evaluated for Sexual Assault
Girardet et al.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2006;160:70-73.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Healing Patterns in Anogenital Injuries: A Longitudinal Study of Injuries Associated With Sexual Abuse, Accidental Injuries, or Genital Surgery in the Preadolescent Child
Heppenstall-Heger et al.
Pediatrics 2003;112:829-837.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Child Sexual Abuse: History More Important Than Examination
JWatch Emergency Med. 2000;2000:15-15.
FULL TEXT  

Medical Evaluation of Suspected Child Sexual Abuse: It's Time for Standardized Training, Referral Centers, and Routine Peer Review
Adams
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1999;153:1121-1122.
FULL TEXT