BACKGROUND: In most developed countries, survivors of physical torture inflicted for political, religious, or ethnic reasons face ever more stringent review when seeking asylum. In Austria, asylum seekers are required by immigration authorities to undergo medical examination as part of the review. Bone scintigraphy can detect bone lesions that are not detectable clinically or radiologically. We assessed the value of bone scintigraphy as corroboration of alleged injuries. METHODS: Human-rights organisations referred 25 asylum seekers to us from countries where torture is practised. We included patients who claimed to have been beaten by the security forces in their home country because of political or religious conviction or ethnic origin. Injuries had been inflicted 4 months to 5 years earlier. The patients (three women, 22 men) from 12 countries were categorised retrospectively into two groups: group A (n=12), tortured with blows from hard objects, and group B (n=13), tortured with blows from fists and kicks. We also used a control group of 25 individuals with the same age and sex distribution from the same countries who had no history of torture. FINDINGS: In group A, bone scans showed abnormalities in the area of alleged injury in all patients, whereas radiography was positive in only five patients. In group B, bone scans in the alleged areas of damage were positive in seven patients, but radiography yielded no positive outcomes. Among the controls there was one abnormal scan due to a known coxarthrosis. INTERPRETATION: Our preliminary results suggest that bone scintigraphy is a sensitive, non-invasive tool to document trauma some years after the actual injury.
BACKGROUND: In most developed countries, survivors of physical torture inflicted for political, religious, or ethnic reasons face ever more stringent review when seeking asylum. In Austria, asylum seekers are required by immigration authorities to undergo medical examination as part of the review. Bone scintigraphy can detect bone lesions that are not detectable clinically or radiologically. We assessed the value of bone scintigraphy as corroboration of alleged injuries. METHODS:Human-rights organisations referred 25 asylum seekers to us from countries where torture is practised. We included patients who claimed to have been beaten by the security forces in their home country because of political or religious conviction or ethnic origin. Injuries had been inflicted 4 months to 5 years earlier. The patients (three women, 22 men) from 12 countries were categorised retrospectively into two groups: group A (n=12), tortured with blows from hard objects, and group B (n=13), tortured with blows from fists and kicks. We also used a control group of 25 individuals with the same age and sex distribution from the same countries who had no history of torture. FINDINGS: In group A, bone scans showed abnormalities in the area of alleged injury in all patients, whereas radiography was positive in only five patients. In group B, bone scans in the alleged areas of damage were positive in seven patients, but radiography yielded no positive outcomes. Among the controls there was one abnormal scan due to a known coxarthrosis. INTERPRETATION: Our preliminary results suggest that bone scintigraphy is a sensitive, non-invasive tool to document trauma some years after the actual injury.