The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department

Sinan Yıldırım; Behçet Varışlı

doi:10.22391/fppc.1228105

Araştırma Makalesi

The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3, 65 - 71, 29.05.2023

Sinan Yıldırım , Behçet Varışlı

https://doi.org/10.22391/fppc.1228105

Cited By: 1

Öz

Introduction: Forensic cases are a significant problem in our country as in all over the world. This study aimed to examine the demographic characteristics, prognosis and related factors of forensic cases.
Methods: A total of 46,732 patients aged 0-97 years who presented to our hospital due to forensic events were enrolled in the study. Patients’ demographics such as age and gender, the reason for admission, the time of admission, the clinics the patients were admitted to, the prognosis of the patients in the emergency department (ED) or in the clinics they were hospitalized were recorded. Patient information was obtained from ED patient records, hospital information management system and forensic reports, retrospectively.
Results: The mean age of the 46,732 patients was 31.77±16.68 years. Mortality occurred in 246 (0.5%) patients. The admissions were higher in July and August compared to other months. The most frequent presentations were in the evening hours. The cases between the ages of 20-29 were much higher than other age groups. The most common type of forensic cases was traffic accidents in 23,177 (49.6%) patients followed by assault in 8,521 (18.2%) patients, occupational accidents in 5,680 (12.2%), and 5,576 (11.9%) drug intoxication.
Conclusion: Traffic accidents take the first place in order of frequency in forensic incidents, which are observed 2.08 times more in men than in women. There is a need for further similar studies in order to develop standards, protocols and policies in prevention and management of forensic cases.
Keywords: Forensic cases, traffic accidents, occupational accidents, emergency department, poisoning

Anahtar Kelimeler

Forensic cases, traffic accidents, occupational accidents, emergency department, poisoning

Kaynakça

1. Arslan I, Demir KI. Evaluation of forensic cases presented to the pediatric emergency department. Turk J Emerg Med. 2022;22(3):137-42. https://doi.org/0.4103/2452-2473.348432
2. Saka NE. Overview of clinical applications in forensic medicine and forensic sciences. In: Sahin Y, editor. Preparations of forensic reports in forensic cases. Ankara: Akademisyen Publishing; 2019;1-14.
3. Sharma BR. Clinical forensic medicine in the present day trauma-care system—An overview. Injury. 2006;37(7):595-601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2005.07.038
4. Sari Dogan F, Ozturk TC. The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on forensic cases admitted to an emergency department. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2022;1-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-022-00565-3
5. Yavuz MF, Basturk P, Yavuz MS, Yorulmaz C. Evaluation of the forensic cases admitted to the emergency department of the Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty. Turk J Forensic Sci. 2002;1(2):21-6.
6. Cetin Erdogan Z, Teyin A, Birben B, Cetin B, Sahiner GG, Hamamci M. Evaluation of judical reports prepared in the emergency department. Bozok Med J. 2018;8(4):34-40. https://doi.org/10.16919/bozoktip.413858
7. Hakkoymaz H, Keten HS, Artuc S, Ucer H, Bozkurt S, Okumus M, et al. Evaluation of medico-legal reports in respect of the Turkish penalcode. J Kartal Tr. 2014;25(3):177-80. https://doi.org/10.5505/jkartaltr.2014.36693
8. Celik Y, Kiliboz T, Dogan B, Garbioglu A, Simsek U. Karbeyaz K. Evaluation of forensic reports in terms of life-threatining criteria. Osmangazi J Med. 2021;43(4):308-17. https://doi.org/10.20515/otd.821087
9. Guven FMK, Butun C, Beyaztas FY, Eren SH, Korkmaz I. Evaluation of forensic cases admitted to Cumhuriyet University hospital. Meandros Med Dental J. 2009;10(3):23-8. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/meandrosmdj/issue/44139/544405
10. Yilmaz G, Alemdar DK. Evaluation of pediatric forensic cases admitted to the emergency department in Turkey: a retrospective analysis. J Forensic Nurs. 2021;17(1):E1-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/JFN.0000000000000309
11. Freeman MD, Zeegers M. Principle sand applications of forensic epidemiology in the medicolegal setting. Law Probability Risk. 2015;14(4):269-78. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgv010
12. Akgun FS. Evaluation of the admitted forensic cases to the emergency department. Med Sci 2019;8(1):166-8. https://doi.org/10.5455/medscience. 2018.07.8971
13. Turkmen N, Akgoz S, Coltu A, Ergin N. Evaluation of legal cases admitted to Uludag University medical school emergency department. Uludag Uni Med J.[in Turkish] 2005;31(1):25-9. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/uutfd/issue/35260/391240
14. Demircan A, Keles A, Gurbuz N, Bildik F, Aygencel SG, Dogan NO, et al. Forensic emergency medicine-six-year experience of 13823 cases in a university emergency department. Turk J Med Sci. 2008;38(6):567-75. https://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/medical/vol38/iss6/11
15. Seviner M, Kozaci N, Ay M, Acikalin A, Cokuk A, Gulen M, et al. Analysis of judicial cases at emergency department. Cukurova Med J. 2013;38(2):250-60.
16. Weng TI, Chen LY, Chen JY, Chen PS, Hwa HL, Fang CC, et al. Characteristics of analytically confirmed illicit substance-using patients in the Emergency Department. J Formos Med Assoc. 2020;119(12):1827-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2020.01.005
17. Korkmaz T, Kahramansoy N, Erkol Z, Saricil F, Kilic A. Evaluation of the forensic patients presenting to the emergency department and legal reports. Med Bull Haseki. 2012;50(1):14-21.
18. Global Status Report on Road Safety. 2018. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789241565684 (Access Date: January 05, 2023).
19. Kok AN, Ozturk S, Tunali I. The retrospective evaluation of 959 patients involved in judicial facts. Turk J Forensic Med. 1992;8(1-4):93-8.
20. Turkcuer I, Gozlukaya A, Serinken M, Ozen M, Aydin B. Application times of forensic cases to emergency department. Eurasian J Emerg Med 2010;9(2):89-92. https://doi.org/10.4170/jaem.2010.04696
21. Altun G, Azmak D, Yilmaz A, Yilmaz G. The characteristics of the cases which admitted to Emergency Department of Trakya University Medical Faculty. Bull Legal Med. 1997;2(2):62-6.
22. Ural G, Gun I. Epidemiological analysis of accidents which applied to emergency services of Dr. Nafiz Korez Sincan Government Hospital and Private Bayindir Hospital. J Health Sci. 2008;17(1):31-9. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/eujhs/issue/44530/552296
23. Gunduz A, Kesen J, Topbas M, Narci H, Yandi M. Analysis of suicidal poisoning patients presented to emergency department. TAF Prev Med Bull. 2004;3(10):234-42.

Acil servise başvuran 46.732 adli vakanın retrospektif analizi

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3, 65 - 71, 29.05.2023

Sinan Yıldırım , Behçet Varışlı

https://doi.org/10.22391/fppc.1228105

Cited By: 1

Öz

Giriş: Adli olgular tüm dünyada olduğu gibi ülkemizde de önemli bir sorundur. Bu çalışma, adli vakaların demografik özelliklerini, prognozunu ve ilişkili faktörleri incelemeyi amaçlamıştır.
Yöntem: Hastanemize adli olay nedeniyle başvuran 0-97 yaş arası toplam 46.732 hasta çalışmaya alındı. Hastaların yaş ve cinsiyet gibi demografik bilgileri, başvuru nedenleri, başvuru zamanları, hastaların başvurdukları klinikler, hastaların acil serviste (AS) veya yattıkları kliniklerdeki prognozu kaydedildi. Hasta bilgileri geriye dönük olarak acil servis hasta kayıtlarından, hastane bilgi yönetim sisteminden ve adli tıp raporlarından elde edildi.
Bulgular: 46.732 hastanın yaş ortalaması 31,77±16.68 idi. 246 (%0,5) hastada mortalite meydana geldi. Temmuz ve Ağustos aylarında başvurular diğer aylara göre daha yüksekti. En sık sunumlar akşam saatlerindeydi. 20-29 yaş arasındaki vakalar diğer yaş gruplarına göre çok daha yüksekti. En sık görülen adli vaka türü 23.177 (%49,6) ile trafik kazası, bunu 8.521 (%18,2) ile darp, 5.680 (%12,2) ile iş kazası ve 5.576 (%11,9) ile ilaç zehirlenmesi izledi.
Sonuç: Erkeklerde kadınlara göre 2,08 kat daha fazla görülen adli olaylarda sıklık sırasına göre trafik kazaları ilk sırada yer almaktadır. Adli vakaların önlenmesi ve yönetimine yönelik standart, protokol ve politikaların geliştirilmesi için benzer çalışmalara ihtiyaç vardır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Adli vakalar, trafik kazaları, iş kazaları, darp, acil servis, zehirlenme

Anahtar Kelimeler

Adli vakalar, trafik kazaları, iş kazaları, darp, acil servis, zehirlenme

Kaynakça

1. Arslan I, Demir KI. Evaluation of forensic cases presented to the pediatric emergency department. Turk J Emerg Med. 2022;22(3):137-42. https://doi.org/0.4103/2452-2473.348432
2. Saka NE. Overview of clinical applications in forensic medicine and forensic sciences. In: Sahin Y, editor. Preparations of forensic reports in forensic cases. Ankara: Akademisyen Publishing; 2019;1-14.
3. Sharma BR. Clinical forensic medicine in the present day trauma-care system—An overview. Injury. 2006;37(7):595-601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2005.07.038
4. Sari Dogan F, Ozturk TC. The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on forensic cases admitted to an emergency department. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2022;1-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-022-00565-3
5. Yavuz MF, Basturk P, Yavuz MS, Yorulmaz C. Evaluation of the forensic cases admitted to the emergency department of the Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty. Turk J Forensic Sci. 2002;1(2):21-6.
6. Cetin Erdogan Z, Teyin A, Birben B, Cetin B, Sahiner GG, Hamamci M. Evaluation of judical reports prepared in the emergency department. Bozok Med J. 2018;8(4):34-40. https://doi.org/10.16919/bozoktip.413858
7. Hakkoymaz H, Keten HS, Artuc S, Ucer H, Bozkurt S, Okumus M, et al. Evaluation of medico-legal reports in respect of the Turkish penalcode. J Kartal Tr. 2014;25(3):177-80. https://doi.org/10.5505/jkartaltr.2014.36693
8. Celik Y, Kiliboz T, Dogan B, Garbioglu A, Simsek U. Karbeyaz K. Evaluation of forensic reports in terms of life-threatining criteria. Osmangazi J Med. 2021;43(4):308-17. https://doi.org/10.20515/otd.821087
9. Guven FMK, Butun C, Beyaztas FY, Eren SH, Korkmaz I. Evaluation of forensic cases admitted to Cumhuriyet University hospital. Meandros Med Dental J. 2009;10(3):23-8. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/meandrosmdj/issue/44139/544405
10. Yilmaz G, Alemdar DK. Evaluation of pediatric forensic cases admitted to the emergency department in Turkey: a retrospective analysis. J Forensic Nurs. 2021;17(1):E1-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/JFN.0000000000000309
11. Freeman MD, Zeegers M. Principle sand applications of forensic epidemiology in the medicolegal setting. Law Probability Risk. 2015;14(4):269-78. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgv010
12. Akgun FS. Evaluation of the admitted forensic cases to the emergency department. Med Sci 2019;8(1):166-8. https://doi.org/10.5455/medscience. 2018.07.8971
13. Turkmen N, Akgoz S, Coltu A, Ergin N. Evaluation of legal cases admitted to Uludag University medical school emergency department. Uludag Uni Med J.[in Turkish] 2005;31(1):25-9. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/uutfd/issue/35260/391240
14. Demircan A, Keles A, Gurbuz N, Bildik F, Aygencel SG, Dogan NO, et al. Forensic emergency medicine-six-year experience of 13823 cases in a university emergency department. Turk J Med Sci. 2008;38(6):567-75. https://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/medical/vol38/iss6/11
15. Seviner M, Kozaci N, Ay M, Acikalin A, Cokuk A, Gulen M, et al. Analysis of judicial cases at emergency department. Cukurova Med J. 2013;38(2):250-60.
16. Weng TI, Chen LY, Chen JY, Chen PS, Hwa HL, Fang CC, et al. Characteristics of analytically confirmed illicit substance-using patients in the Emergency Department. J Formos Med Assoc. 2020;119(12):1827-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2020.01.005
17. Korkmaz T, Kahramansoy N, Erkol Z, Saricil F, Kilic A. Evaluation of the forensic patients presenting to the emergency department and legal reports. Med Bull Haseki. 2012;50(1):14-21.
18. Global Status Report on Road Safety. 2018. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789241565684 (Access Date: January 05, 2023).
19. Kok AN, Ozturk S, Tunali I. The retrospective evaluation of 959 patients involved in judicial facts. Turk J Forensic Med. 1992;8(1-4):93-8.
20. Turkcuer I, Gozlukaya A, Serinken M, Ozen M, Aydin B. Application times of forensic cases to emergency department. Eurasian J Emerg Med 2010;9(2):89-92. https://doi.org/10.4170/jaem.2010.04696
21. Altun G, Azmak D, Yilmaz A, Yilmaz G. The characteristics of the cases which admitted to Emergency Department of Trakya University Medical Faculty. Bull Legal Med. 1997;2(2):62-6.
22. Ural G, Gun I. Epidemiological analysis of accidents which applied to emergency services of Dr. Nafiz Korez Sincan Government Hospital and Private Bayindir Hospital. J Health Sci. 2008;17(1):31-9. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/eujhs/issue/44530/552296
23. Gunduz A, Kesen J, Topbas M, Narci H, Yandi M. Analysis of suicidal poisoning patients presented to emergency department. TAF Prev Med Bull. 2004;3(10):234-42.

Toplam 23 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil	İngilizce
Konular	Acil Tıp
Bölüm	Araştırma Makalesi (Original Article)
Yazarlar	Sinan Yıldırım 0000-0001-8191-168X Behçet Varışlı 0000-0002-2346-1112
Yayımlanma Tarihi	29 Mayıs 2023
Gönderilme Tarihi	2 Ocak 2023
Kabul Tarihi	29 Mart 2023
Yayımlandığı Sayı	Yıl 2023 Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA	Yıldırım, S., & Varışlı, B. (2023). The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department. Family Practice and Palliative Care, 8(3), 65-71. https://doi.org/10.22391/fppc.1228105
AMA	Yıldırım S, Varışlı B. The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department. Fam Pract Palliat Care. Mayıs 2023;8(3):65-71. doi:10.22391/fppc.1228105
Chicago	Yıldırım, Sinan, ve Behçet Varışlı. “The Retrospective Analysis of 46,732 Forensic Cases Admitted to an Emergency Department”. Family Practice and Palliative Care 8, sy. 3 (Mayıs 2023): 65-71. https://doi.org/10.22391/fppc.1228105.
EndNote	Yıldırım S, Varışlı B (01 Mayıs 2023) The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department. Family Practice and Palliative Care 8 3 65–71.
IEEE	S. Yıldırım ve B. Varışlı, “The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department”, Fam Pract Palliat Care, c. 8, sy. 3, ss. 65–71, 2023, doi: 10.22391/fppc.1228105.
ISNAD	Yıldırım, Sinan - Varışlı, Behçet. “The Retrospective Analysis of 46,732 Forensic Cases Admitted to an Emergency Department”. Family Practice and Palliative Care 8/3 (Mayıs 2023), 65-71. https://doi.org/10.22391/fppc.1228105.
JAMA	Yıldırım S, Varışlı B. The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department. Fam Pract Palliat Care. 2023;8:65–71.
MLA	Yıldırım, Sinan ve Behçet Varışlı. “The Retrospective Analysis of 46,732 Forensic Cases Admitted to an Emergency Department”. Family Practice and Palliative Care, c. 8, sy. 3, 2023, ss. 65-71, doi:10.22391/fppc.1228105.
Vancouver	Yıldırım S, Varışlı B. The retrospective analysis of 46,732 forensic cases admitted to an emergency department. Fam Pract Palliat Care. 2023;8(3):65-71.