The Difficult Task of Assessing Perimortem and Postmortem Fractures on the Skeleton: A Blind Text on 210 Fractures of Known Origin

Abstract

The distinction between perimortem and postmortem fractures is an important challenge for forensic anthropology. Such a crucial task is presently based on macro-morphological criteria widely accepted in the scientific community. However, several limits affect these parameters which have not yet been investigated thoroughly. This study aims at highlighting the pitfalls and errors in evaluating perimortem or postmortem fractures. Two trained forensic anthropologists were asked to classify 210 fractures of known origin in four skeletons (three victims of blunt force trauma and one natural death) as perimortem, postmortem, or dubious, twice in 6 months in order to assess intraobserver error also. Results show large errors, ranging from 14.8 to 37% for perimortem fractures and from 5.5 to 14.8% for postmortem ones; more than 80% of errors concerned trabecular bone. This supports the need for more objective and reliable criteria for a correct assessment of peri- and postmortem bone fractures.

Differentiating between rhinosinusitis and mastoiditis surgery from postmortem medical training: A study of two identified skulls and hospital records from early 20th century Coimbra, Portugal

“…Distinguishing among medical procedures performed ante-mortem, perimortem, or postmortem using dry bones can be very difficult, and this is frequently highlighted in forensic pathological studies on trauma (Cappella et al, 2014;Fleming-Farrell et al, 2013;SWGANTH, 2011;Ubelaker, 2015;Wheatley, 2008). In fact, in the last few years the 'perimortem concept' has been discussed within the anthropological sciences as determined on the basis of evidence of the biomechanical characteristics of the plastic response of fresh or green bone or through the detection of specific mechanisms causing injuries (blunt or sharp force), not taking into account the death event itself (SWGANTH, 2011;Ubelaker, 2015).…”

New insights in the analysis of blunt force trauma in human bones. Preliminary results

“…On both perimortem and postmortem trauma, there are no signs of healing. Although there are some known morphological or possible colour differences, the differentiation between perimortem trauma and postmortem taphonomic factors such as geological, biological or (un)intentional human alterations remains difficult [4,[8][9][10][11].…”

Mummified remains from the Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, Croatia – Reviewing peculiarities and limitations of human and non-human radiological identification and analysis in mummified remains

“…Radiology can help to analyse fractures in detail and reconstruct the mechanism of injury in cases where these are not available for external examination or soft tissue processing 46 . The implementation of radiology into the study of animal mummies allowed to uncover the premature and violent death of many mummified animals and, in case of ancient remains, confirmed the late Egyptian tradition of breeding and killing animals just for religious and mummification purposes 47 [51][52][53] . However, some of these (e.g.…”