Literature DB >> 24776438

A simple safe, reliable and reproducible mechanism for producing experimental bite marks.

S Subramanyeswara Chinni1, Anas Al-Ibrahim2, Andrew H Forgie1.   

Abstract

With improving technology it should be possible to develop an objective, reliable and valid method that can be undertaken by most forensic Odontologists without recourse to expensive or bulky equipment. One of the main factors that affect the physical appearance of bitemark is the amount of force applied during biting. There is little evidence relating the appearance of a bite mark to the amount of force applied and how that force relates to the biters maximal biteforce. This paper describes simple apparatus that can be used to inflict experimental bites on living subjects reproducibly and with minimal risk. The aims of this study are to report on the development of a mechanical apparatus that produces experimental bitemarks on living human subjects with a known force in a safe, reliable and reproducible manner and to relate the force applied during production of the experimental bitemark to the maximum bite force of the biter. Maximum bite force of one of the authors was determined as 324 N. Experimental bitemarks were inflicted on living subjects with known weights. Weights of up to 10 kg were well tolerated by the subjects. The relation between forces used to inflict bites and the maximum bite force of the author is reported, with 10 kg being approximately one third of the maximum bite force. The apparatus was well tolerated and the results were reliable and reproducible. The results from this study could help in determining the severity of bitemarks. This apparatus could help researchers in developing objective based bitemark analysis techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24776438      PMCID: PMC5734834     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Forensic Odontostomatol        ISSN: 0258-414X


  18 in total

1.  Effects of ethnicity, gender and age on clenching force and load distribution.

Authors:  T Shinogaya; M Bakke; C E Thomsen; A Vilmann; A Sodeyama; M Matsumoto
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  A paradigm shift in the analysis of bitemarks.

Authors:  Iain A Pretty; David Sweet
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 2.395

3.  Is current bite mark analysis a misnomer?

Authors:  J G Clement; S A Blackwell
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 2.395

4.  A survey of the chewing ability of denture wearers.

Authors:  R S MANLY; P VINTON
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  1951-06       Impact factor: 6.116

5.  Clinical and histopathological examination of experimental bite marks in-vivo.

Authors:  S L Avon; J T Mayhall; R E Wood
Journal:  J Forensic Odontostomatol       Date:  2006-12

6.  The response of skin to applied stress: investigation of bitemark distortion in a cadaver model.

Authors:  Mary A Bush; Kyle Thorsrud; Raymond G Miller; Robert B J Dorion; Peter J Bush
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 1.832

7.  Weighing bitemark evidence : A postmodern perspective.

Authors:  Jules A Kieser
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.007

8.  Statistical evidence for the individuality of the human dentition.

Authors:  R D Rawson; R K Ommen; G Kinard; J Johnson; A Yfantis
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 1.832

9.  Bite force, endurance and masseter muscle fatigue in healthy edentulous subjects and those with TMD.

Authors:  D Tortopidis; M F Lyons; R H Baxendale
Journal:  J Oral Rehabil       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 3.837

Review 10.  The barriers to achieving an evidence base for bitemark analysis.

Authors:  Iain A Pretty
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2006-03-15       Impact factor: 2.395

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.