@article{ref1,
title="Ano-genital findings in 3569 pediatric examinations for sexual abuse/assault",
journal="Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology",
year="2018",
author="Smith, Tanya D. and Raman, Sudha R. and Madigan, Sheri and Waldman, Judy and Shouldice, Michelle",
volume="31",
number="2",
pages="79-83",
abstract="OBJECTIVES: Accurate interpretation of ano-genital examination findings in the context of suspected child and adolescent sexual abuse/assault is essential, as misinterpretation has significant child protection and criminal justice implications. A consensus approach to the interpretation of ano-genital examination findings is widely utilized to support accurate diagnosis; however, a large-scale study using this standardized approach is lacking. The objectives of this study are to: 1) determine the proportion of ano-genital examinations for sexual abuse concerns with findings diagnostic of trauma and/or sexual contact; 2) determine whether frequency of diagnostic findings varies by age, gender, timing of examination; and 3) characterize diagnostic findings. <br><br>METHODS: Retrospective records of children aged 0-18 years evaluated for sexual abuse/assault were reviewed. Case details of 3569 patients were extracted and ano-genital examination findings were re-interpreted using a published consensus approach(1). <br><br>RESULTS: Ano-genital examination findings diagnostic of trauma and/or sexual contact were present in 173 of 3569 patients (4.9%). The prevalence of diagnostic findings was significantly higher in adolescents than in children under 12 years of age (13.9% vs. 2.2%), in females versus males (5.7% vs. 1.5%) and in examinations within 72 hours for children under 12 (14.2% vs 4.5%). Acute injuries were the most common type of diagnostic finding. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic findings are present in a small proportion of children and adolescents examined for suspected sexual abuse/assault. It is essential that practitioners interpreting examination findings be adequately trained and familiar with the current consensus approach and aware of case characteristics associated with higher likelihood of findings.<br><br>Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1083-3188",
doi="10.1016/j.jpag.2017.10.006",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2017.10.006"
}