Skip to Content
Canadian Paediatric Society

Practice Point

The medical assessment of bruising in suspected child maltreatment cases: A clinical perspective

Posted: Oct 3 2013 | Updated: Mar 24 2016 | Reaffirmed: Jan 30 2017

The Canadian Paediatric Society gives permission to print single copies of this document from our website. For permission to reprint or reproduce multiple copies, please see our copyright policy.

Principal author(s)

Michelle GK Ward, Amy Ornstein, Anne Niec, C Louise Murray; Canadian Paediatric Society, Child and Youth Maltreatment Section

Paediatr Child Health 2013;18(8):433-7


Bruises commonly occur in children and are most often the result of a minor accidental injury. However, bruises can also signal an underlying medical illness or an inflicted injury (maltreatment). Although bruising is the most common manifestation of child physical maltreatment, knowing when to be concerned about maltreatment and how to assess bruises in this context can be challenging for clinicians. Based on current literature and published recommendations, this practice point will help clinicians to distinguish between accidental and inflicted bruises, to evaluate and manage bruising in the context of suspected child maltreatment, and to evaluate for an underlying medical predisposition to bruising.

Key Words: Bruise; Bruising; Child abuse; Children; Coagulopathy; Maltreatment


Bruises are common childhood injuries that usually result from minor accidental trauma, such as a bump or fall, sustained during routine active play. For the present purposes, this type of injury will be referred to as ‘accidental’. When an underlying medical illness or bleeding disorder is present, bruising may occur from minimal or no recognized trauma. However, bruises can also occur as a result of maltreatment; these injuries are referred to as ‘inflicted’. In the field of injury prevention, the terms ‘unintentional’ and ‘intentional’ are frequently used to describe injuries. Because intentionality cannot be determined from an objective medical assessment, and both terms may carry unintended meaning for the justice system, they should be avoided in the discussion of injuries related to possible maltreatment.

Skin injuries are the most common manifestation of physical harm in substantiated child maltreatment cases in Canada.[1] When evaluating bruises, clinicians must first identify that the lesions are true bruises and exclude skin findings that mimic bruising such as slate-grey nevi (Mongolian blue spots), hemangiomas, skin staining from dyes or other skin discolourations. Once bruising is identified, it becomes important that clinicians distinguish between accidental and inflicted bruises, when possible, and that concerns about maltreatment are appropriately recognized and communicated to a child welfare authority. Both over- and underidentification of abusive injuries can cause harm. Failing to recognize physical abuse can predispose to further injury or even death[2][3] and identifying abuse where it has not occurred may lead to unnecessary child protection or legal interventions, stress for the family and/or a delay in diagnosing an underlying medical disorder.

This practice point addresses two key questions for clinicians in the context of current published recommendations and relevant Canadian data on child and youth maltreatment.

  • What factors should raise concern about inflicted injury (maltreatment) when clinicians observe bruising?
  • What assessments should be performed to evaluate for other possible medical causes or predispositions to bruising?

Differentiating bruising from accidental and inflicted trauma

Bruises indicate bleeding beneath the skin. They are usually caused by an impact between a part of the body and another object or surface. Affected tissue is compressed or crushed, leading to blood vessel damage and bleeding into subcutaneous tissue layers.

Bruises resulting from common accidental childhood trauma tend to be relatively small, oval to round in shape with nondistinct borders, located above or near bony prominences on the front of the body (often the forehead, knees or shins), and do not have a recognizable shape or pattern (eg, a handprint or loop-shaped mark).[4]-[12]

Bruising must be evaluated in the context of a child’s developmental abilities and the explanation for injury that is provided. No one specific location on the body or bruise characteristic is diagnostic of inflicted injury, but some bruises raise greater concern for maltreatment than others (Box 1). Coagulation disorders such as hemophilia, von Willebrand disease and platelet abnormalities may present only with bruising, including bruises that – judging by appearance only – could raise suspicion for abuse.[13] Although bruises on the face and head are frequently nonspecific in ambulatory children, they should prompt questioning as to how they happened in a child of any age, because of the potential for associated injury to the head and neck.

Box 1: Red flags for inflicted injury in a child with bruising

  • Bruises in babies who are not yet cruising
  • Bruises on the ears, neck, feet, buttocks or torso (torso includes chest, back, abdomen, genitalia)
  • Bruises not on the front of the body and/or overlying bone
  • Bruises that are unusually large or numerous
  • Bruises that are clustered or patterned (patterns may include handprints, loop or belt marks, bite marks)
  • Bruises that do not fit with the causal mechanism described

Adapted from references [4]-[6][9]-[11][15][41][42]

Special considerations

The following three factors require special consideration when evaluating a child’s bruises.

Bruises in babies

The likelihood of having bruises is highly correlated with a child’s level of mobility.[4][6]-[9][14][42] Babies who are not yet crawling or cruising rarely have bruises.[4][9][10][15][43] Most studies show that less than 1% of babies younger than nine months of age show bruising, compared with 40% to 90% of children nine months of age and older.[7][9][10][16][17] Clinicians should be aware that bruises or a history of bruising in babies may be a ‘sentinel’ injury for risk of current or future harm from maltreatment (eg, fractures or head injuries)[3][18][44]-[46] or may represent the first manifestation of a coagulopathy or medical illness.[18] Therefore, any unexplained bruising in a nonmobile child requires further evaluation for possible maltreatment and coagulopathy.

Patterned bruises

Unexplained bruises that have a pattern should raise concern for possible maltreatment. Patterned bruising is usually caused by impact with an object of the same or similar shape, and can reflect either a positive imprint (eg, of a shoe sole, from impact with a shoe) or a negative imprint (eg, parallel linear lines representing the spaces between fingers, from impact with a hand). Other common patterns of inflicted skin injuries include bite marks, loop marks from impact with a cord, and parallel linear lines from impact with a belt (for illustrated examples, see Hobbes and Wynne [19]).

Colour of bruises

The presence of injuries of different ages in a child is often considered to be a red flag for maltreatment. In the past, colour was used to estimate the age of bruises. However, the current literature indicates that neither the colour nor the progressive changes in colour as bruises heal are reliable indicators of the age of bruises.[4][10][20]-[24] There is wide variability in the appearance and healing of bruises, both among individuals and among injuries on the same individual; physicians’ ability to date bruises based on examination or photographs is now considered to be “highly inaccurate”.[10][21][25][26]

Bruises from a hematological or other medical cause

In some cases, children present with larger than expected bruises or with bruises from minor (or no) recognized trauma because of an underlying predisposition to bruising. This can occur with an inherited or acquired coagulopathy and with other medical conditions. The most common acquired disorder of coagulation is immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). The most common inherited coagulation disorder is von Willebrand disease, with an incidence of up to 1% in the general population. The next most common coagulation disorders are factor VIII deficiency (hemophilia A) and factor IX deficiency (hemophilia B), which occur in 0.02% and 0.005% of live male births, respectively.[27] Other specific factor deficiencies and platelet disorders are more rare but, as a group, platelet function disorders are relatively common. The Canadian prevalence (total number of cases in children and youth <18 years of age) of hemophilia and other inherited disorders of coagulation is shown in Table 1.[28] These data highlight that factor VIII deficiency is the most commonly diagnosed inherited disorder of coagulation in the Canadian paediatric population because of its relatively severe symptoms and earlier presentation. Von Willebrand disease is not diagnosed in childhood at a rate that matches its population incidence due to its more subtle presentation in many cases.

Medical conditions that are associated with bruising include: infections (eg, meningococcemia), malignancy (eg, leukemia, neuroblastoma), nutritional deficiencies (eg, vitamin K, vitamin C), severe systemic illness (eg, disseminated intravascular coagulation), connective tissue disorders (eg, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, osteogenesis imperfecta), and autoimmune or inflammatory disorders (eg, ITP, Henoch-Schönlein purpura, Gardner-Diamond syndrome).[27][29][30]

Other nontraumatic skin findings and diseases that have been mistaken for bruising include striae, Mongolian blue spots or slate-grey nevi, hemangiomas, nevi of Ito, erythema multiforme, eczema, incontinentia pigmenti, cultural practices such as coining and cupping, phytophotodermatitis, and skin staining from dye or ink.[27][29][30]

Coagulation disorders, whether acquired or inherited, need to be considered when evaluating bruises.[31] In the context of possible child maltreatment, it is important for the clinician to be able to differentiate between bruising caused by minimal (or no) recognized trauma but related to an underlying medical predisposition, and bruising caused by significant trauma with no underlying predisposition. It should also be noted that identifying a coagulation disorder or medical illness does not exclude the possibility of inflicted injury and, conversely, confirming inflicted trauma does not exclude the possibility of a coagulation disorder.

Table 1
Prevalence of hemophilia and inherited bleeding disorders in Canadian children <18 years of age





Most common

Factor VIII deficiency (hemophilia A)




von Willebrand disease (all types)




Factor IX deficiency (hemophilia B)




Rare inherited coagulation disorders (all types)




Factor XI deficiency




Factor VII deficiency




Factor XIII deficiency




Fibrinogen disorders




Rare inherited platelet disorders (all types)




Undefined platelet disorder




Glanzmann’s thrombasthenia




Familial thrombocytopenia undefined




Ehlers-Danlos syndrome




Data presented as n. *Total includes 13 cases with sex not reported. Adapted from reference [28]

Evaluating the child with bruising and suspected maltreatment

Recommendations on the evaluation of bleeding disorders as a cause of bruising in child maltreatment cases have been published by the British Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, by independent authors and, most recently, by the American Academy of Pediatrics.[29][32]-[35]

In Canada, paediatricians with expertise in child maltreatment have developed the unpublished National Guidelines for the Diagnostic Evaluation of Suspected Child Physical Abuse: Work in Progress, based on the literature and on expert review at the annual Canadian Symposium on Advanced Practices for Child Abuse Pediatrics (2010-2015). A survey of eligible child maltreatment experts has also identified current and recommended practices by this group[36] and input has been provided by Canadian paediatric hematologists. The following suggested clinical approach is based on the above sources, with references indicating agreement with other published recommendations.


A thorough history related to possible maltreatment, an underlying hematological condition or other predisposing medical condition should be obtained. This history should include details about the onset and progression of bruising, associated symptoms and any known injury events.

Medical history should include any previous bleeding or bruising, other injuries and the child’s response to previous challenges to hemostasis (eg, surgery, dental extractions, venipuncture, trauma). Platelet abnormalities generally present with mucocutaneous bleeding, while factor deficiencies generally result in ‘deep tissue’ bleeding, such as in the joints, soft tissues, gastrointestinal or genitourinary tracts, or in bleeding after surgical procedures. Specific questions to elicit signs or symptoms of a bleeding disorder should be asked (Box 2).[33][37] A medication and developmental history, with attention to gross motor abilities (to corroborate the described mechanism of injury), should also be included.

The family history should include similar information on challenges to hemostasis, as well as the diagnosis of any known bleeding disorder or other heritable medical disorder that may predispose to bruising (eg, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, osteogenesis imperfecta). A history of consanguinity may be a clue to an unrecognized autosomal recessive inherited bleeding disorder in the child. Special attention should be given to the mother’s menstrual and postpartum bleeding history, as well as to a history of postoperative bleeding, the need for transfusion or recurrent, severe epistaxis in any family member.

A review of the psychosocial history can help to identify risk and protective factors within the family. Questions about the child’s behaviour and the family’s methods of discipline may also be of value.

Box 2: Key points on history for a possible bleeding disorder


  • Postcircumcision bleeding
  • Birth cephalohematoma
  • Umbilical stump bleeding or delayed stump separation
  • Postvenipuncture bleeding
  • Macroscopic hematuria
  • Petechiae at clothing line pressure sites
  • Bruising at sites of object pressure, such as infant car seat fasteners

Index child or family members

  • Spontaneous, easy or excessive bruising
  • Mucocutaneous bleeding (eg, gingival bleeding)
  • Epistaxis that is spontaneous, lasts >10 min or requires medical treatment
  • Bleeding from minor wounds that lasts >15 min or recurs within seven days
  • Prolonged bleeding after surgical procedures
  • Bruises with palpable lumps beneath them
  • Joint swelling with minor injury
  • Blood in the stool or urine
  • Menorrhagia
  • Unexplained anemia
  • History of blood transfusion

Adapted from references [33][37]

Physical examination

The clinician should conduct a complete physical examination, giving special attention to general appearance, hydration, vital signs, and growth parameters (including head circumference) and dysmorphisms. The oropharynx should be examined for signs of bleeding, trauma or healing injury to the frenulae (inside the upper and lower lips and beneath the tongue), along with dentition. The entire skin surface should be examined, with special attention to the neck, trunk, buttocks, genitalia, anterior and posterior pinnae, hands and feet. The presence of hepatosplenomegaly and lymphadenopathy should be noted. The musculoskeletal system examination should include assessment for joint hypermobility, skin laxity and bony deformity. The neurological, developmental and behavioural status of the child should also be assessed. Examination of the parent for joint laxity may be indicated when assessing very young children (for Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and benign joint hypermobility syndrome).

Laboratory evaluation

The goal of laboratory testing is to exclude, with reasonable certainty, bleeding disorders or other medical conditions predisposing to bruising that are considered in the clinical context. Not all children require laboratory investigation. Testing is recommended when the results may impact the health and/or the child welfare outcome, when there is a clinical suspicion of an underlying predisposition to bleeding or bruising, or when there is unexplained bruising in a precruising baby (Box 3).

Box 3: Recommended first-line laboratory testing for bruising and suspected maltreatment

In the case of precruising babies with unexplained bruising, additional testing for occult bone, head and eye injury is often recommended, in consultation with clinicians with expertise in child maltreatment paediatrics. This should include a skeletal survey for all children younger than two years of age with injuries from suspected physical abuse (eg, bruises, fracture, head injuries). Consideration should also be given to head imaging and an ophthalmology assessment for occult head injuries in this group.

Von Willebrand disease, platelet function disorders and mild factor deficiencies can be difficult to diagnose. Therefore, second-line testing should be conducted if there is a personal or family history or a physical examination finding that raises suspicion of a bleeding disorder (even with normal first-line test results), or if first-line test results are abnormal. Second-line testing should be undertaken in consultation with a hematologist and may include additional factor levels, thrombin time, platelet disorder testing (eg, platelet aggregation studies or platelet function analyzer-100 testing) or other specialized tests. Bleeding time testing is no longer recommended because of its poor sensitivity and specificity, as well as the invasive nature of the test.[38] The test results should be compared with age-specific reference ranges, and preanalytic causes for abnormal results (eg, over- or underfilling phlebotomy tubes or drawing blood from a heparinized line) must be considered.

Documentation and consultation

All clinical information should be carefully and objectively documented. Recommendations for documentation are reviewed in Ornstein’s article entitled ‘An approach to child maltreatment documentation and participation in the court system’[39] and in a CPSP Highlight entitled ‘From bruises to brain injury: The physician’s role in the assessment of inflicted traumatic head injury’.[40]. Skin findings should be documented using a body diagram or drawing indicating their measured size, shape, colour, location and contour (flat or palpable). While this information cannot be used for dating a bruise, it is useful for confirming that a lesion is a bruise, for evaluating the injury mechanism and in formulating a differential diagnosis. Photographs, taken with a measuring tool and colour bar and stored securely as patient information, are also recommended.

Clinicians in child maltreatment paediatrics can provide support, guidance and expert opinion on the differential diagnosis, possible mechanisms of injury and the degree of certainty that maltreatment has occurred. A hematologist should be consulted if a bleeding disorder in the child or family is suspected or when there is a significant abnormal result on initial laboratory testing. A dermatologist can also help to clarify undifferentiated skin lesions. A child welfare authority should be consulted whenever there is concern for maltreatment as a cause of bruising.


Bruising occurs frequently in childhood from minor accidental injury and is also the most common finding in child physical maltreatment. The clinician’s role is to recognize bruising that may signal maltreatment or a medical disorder, to conduct a thorough medical assessment and initiate testing, to communicate maltreatment concerns to child welfare authorities and to document all information clearly. This practice point offers a practical, evidence-based approach to evaluating bruises in the context of suspected child maltreatment, consistent with other published recommendations.


Special thanks are due to three paediatric hematologist colleagues, Dr Robert Klaassen, Dr Vicky Price and Dr Georges-Étienne Rivard, for their significant contributions to this work. Thanks also to Dr Irwin Walker and the Canadian Hemophilia Registry group. This practice point has been reviewed by the Community Paediatrics Committee and by the Paediatric Emergency Medicine and Hospital Paediatrics Section Executives of the Canadian Paediatric Society.



Executive: Burke Baird MD; Laurel Chauvin-Kimoff MD (Past President); Jennifer R MacPherson MD; Amy Ornstein MD (Vice President); C Louise Murray MD; Michelle K Shouldice MD (President); Tanya Smith NP; Michelle GK Ward MD
Liaisons: Claire Allard-Dansereau MD, Association des médecins en protection de l’enfance du Québec; Jeffrey W Scott MD, CPS Injury Prevention Committee
Principal authors: Michelle GK Ward MD, Amy Ornstein MD, Anne Niec MD, C Louise Murray MD



  1. Public Health Agency of Canada, 2010. Canadian incidence study of reported child abuse and neglect – 2008: Major findings: (Accessed July 17, 2013).
  2. Jenny C, Hymel KP, Ritzen A, Reinert SE, Hay TC. Analysis of missed cases of abusive head trauma. JAMA 1999;281(7):621-6.
  3. Sheets LK, Leach ME, Koszewski IJ, Lessmeier AM, Nugent M, Simpson P. Sentinel injuires in infants evaluated for child physical abuse. Pediatrics 2013;131(4):701-7.
  4. Maguire S, Mann M. Systematic reviews of bruising in relation to child abuse – what have we learnt: An overview of review updates. Evid Based Child Health 2013;8(2):255-63.
  5. Maguire S, Mann MK, Sibert J, Kemp A. Are there patterns of bruising in childhood which are diagnostic or suggestive of abuse? A systematic review. Arch Dis Child 2005;90(2):182-6.
  6. Pierce MC, Kaczor K, Aldridge S, O’Flynn J, Lorenz DJ. Bruising characteristics discriminating physical child abuse from accidental trauma. Pediatrics 2010;125(1);67-74.
  7. Labbé J, Caouette G. Recent skin injuries in normal children. Pediatrics 2001;108(2):271-6.
  8. Lux AL. Prevalence of bruising in babies. Arch Dis Child 2000;82(3):266.
  9. Sugar NF, Taylor JA, Feldman KW. Bruises in infants and toddlers: Those who don’t cruise rarely bruise; Puget Sound Research Network. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1999;153(4):399-403.
  10. Carpenter RF. The prevalence and distribution of bruising in babies. Arch Dis Child 1999;80(4):363-6.
  11. Dunstan FD, Guildea ZE, Kontos K, Kemp AM, Sibert JR. A scoring system for bruise patterns: A tool for identifying abuse. Arch Dis Child 2002;86(5):330-3.
  12. Harris TL, Flaherty EG. Bruises and skin lesions. In: Jenny C, ed. Child Abuse and Neglect: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Evidence.St Louis: Elsevier-Saunders, 2011:239-51.
  13. Jackson J, Carpenter S, Anderst J. Challenges in the evaluation for possible abuse: Presentation of congenital bleeding disorders in childhood. Child Abuse Negl 2012;36(2):127-34.
  14. Newman CJ, Holenweg-Gross C, Vuillerot C, Jeannet PY, Roulet-Perez E. Recent skin injuries in children with motor disabilities. Arch Dis Child 2010;95(5):387-90.
  15. Wedgwood J. Childhood bruising. Practitioner 1990;234(1490):598-601.
  16. Tush BA. Bruising in healthy 3-year-old children. Matern Child Nurs J 1982;11(3):165-79.
  17. Mortimer PE, Freeman M. Are facial bruises in babies ever accidental? Arch Dis Child 1983;58(1):75-6.
  18. Feldman KW. The bruised premobile infant: Should you evaluate further? Pediatr Emerg Care 2009;25(1):37-9.
  19. Hobbs CJ, Wynne JM, eds. Physical Signs of Child Abuse: A Colour Atlas, 2nd edn. London: WB Saunders, 2001.
  20. Maguire S, Mann MK, Sibert J, Kemp A. Can you age bruises accurately in children? A systematic review. Arch Dis Child 2005;90(2):187-9.
  21. Stephenson T, Bialas Y. Estimation of the age of bruising. Arch Dis Child 1996;74(1):53-5.
  22. Grossman SE, Johnston A, Vanezis P, Perrett D. Can we assess the age of bruises? An attempt to develop an objective technique. Med Sci Law 2011;51(3):170-6.
  23. Schwartz AJ, Ricci LR. How accurately can bruises be aged in abused children? Literature review and synthesis. Pediatrics 1996;97(2):254-7.
  24. Langlois NE, Gresham GA. The ageing of bruises: A review and study of the colour changes with time. Forensic Sci Int 1991;50(2):227-38.
  25. Pilling ML, Vanezis P, Perrett D, Johnston A. Visual assessment of the timing of bruising by forensic experts. J Forensic Leg Med 2010;17(3):143-9.
  26. Bariciak ED, Plint AC, Gaboury I, Bennett S. Dating of bruises in children: An assessment of physician accuracy. Pediatrics 2003;112(4):804-7.
  27. Carpenter SL, Abshire TC, Anderst JD; American Academy of Pediatrics, Section on Hematology/Oncology and Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect. Technical Report: Evaluating for suspected child abuse: Conditions that predispose to bleeding. Pediatrics 2013;131(4):e1357-73.
  28. Association of Hemophilia Clinic Directors of Canada. Canadian Hemophilia Registry and Rare Inherited Bleeding Disorders Registry, May 2012: (Accessed July 18, 2013).
  29. Liesner R, Hann I, Khair K. Non-accidental injury and the haematologist: The causes and investigation of easy bruising. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2004;15(Suppl 1):S41-8.
  30. Makoroff, KL, McGraw ML. Skin conditions confused with child abuse. In: Jenny C, ed. Child Abuse and Neglect: Diagnosis, treatment, and evidence. St Louis: Elsevier-Saunders, 2011:252-9.
  31. Khair K, Liesner R. Bruising and bleeding in infants and children – a practical approach. Br J Haematol 2006;133(3):221-31.
  32. Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. Child Protection Companion, 2nd edn. London: RCPCH, 2006:18-21.
  33. Anderst JD, Carpenter SL, Abshire TC, Section on Hematology/Oncology and Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Clinical report: Evaluation for bleeding disorders in suspected child abuse. Pediatrics 2013;131(4):e1314-22.
  34. Minford AM, Richards EM. Excluding medical and haematological conditions as a cause of bruising in suspected non-accidental injury. Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed 2010;95(1):2-8.
  35. Thomas AE. The bleeding child: Is it NAI? Arch Dis Child 2004;89(12):1163-7.
  36. Ward M, Ornstein A, Murray L, Niec A. Medical Investigation of Bruising in Cases of Suspected Child Abuse. Paediatr Child Health 2013;18(SupplA):20A (Abstract)
  37. Bowman M, Riddel J, Rand ML, Tosetto A, Silva M, James PD. Evaluation of the diagnostic utility for von Willebrand disease of a pediatric bleeding questionnaire. J Thromb Haemost 2009;7(8):1418-21.
  38. Harrison P, Mackie I, Mumford A, et al. Guidelines for the laboratory investigation of heritable disorders of platelet function. Br J Haematol 2011;155(1):30-44.
  39. Ornstein A. An approach to child maltreatment documentation and participation in the court system. Paediatr Child Health 2013;18(8):e47-e50.
  40. Ward M, King WJ, Bennett S. From bruises to brain injury: The physician’s role in the assessment of inflicted traumatic head injury. Paediatr Child Health 2013;18(8):423-4.
  41. Kemp AM, Maguire SA, Nuttall D, Collins P, Dunstan F. Bruising in children who are assessed for suspected physical abuse. Arch Dis Child 2014;99(2):108-13.
  42. Kemp AM, Dunstan F, Nuttall D, Hamilton M, Collins P, Maguire S. Patterns of bruising in preschool children – a longitudinal study. Arch Dis Child 2015;100(5):426-31.
  43. Pierce MC, Magana JN, Kaczor K, et al. The prevalence of bruising among infants in pediatric emergency departments. Ann Emerg Med 2016;67(1):1-8.
  44. Petska HW, Sheets LK. Sentinel injuries: Subtle findings of physical abuse. Pediatr Clin N Am 2014;61(5):923-35.
  45. Harper NS, Feldman KW, Sugar NF, Anderst JD, Lindberg DM; Examining Siblings to Recognize Abuse Investigators. Additional injuries in young infants with concern for abuse and apparently isolated bruises. J Pediatr 2014;165(2):383-8.
  46. Thorpe EL, Zuckerbraun NS, Wolford JE, Berger RP. Missed opportunities to diagnose child physical abuse. Pediatr Emerg Care 2014;30(11):771-6.

Disclaimer: The recommendations in this position statement do not indicate an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed. Variations, taking into account individual circumstances, may be appropriate. Internet addresses are current at time of publication.

Last updated: Feb 15 2017