Most sexually abused children will not have signs of genital or anal injury, especially when examined nonacutely. A recent study reported that only 2.2% (26 of 1160) of sexually abused girls examined nonacutely had diagnostic physical findings, whereas among those examined acutely, the prevalence of injuries was 21.4% (73 of 340). It is important for health care professionals who examine children who might have been sexually abused to be able to recognize and interpret any physical signs or laboratory results that might be found. In this review we summarize new data and recommendations concerning documentation of medical examinations, testing for sexually transmitted infections, interpretation of lesions caused by human papillomavirus and herpes simplex virus in children, and interpretation of physical examination findings. Updates to a table listing an approach to the interpretation of medical findings is presented, and reasons for changes are discussed.

The medical evaluation is an important part of the clinical and legal process when child sexual abuse is suspected. Practitioners who examine children need to be up to date on current recommendations regarding when, how, and by whom these evaluations should be conducted, as well as how the medical findings should be interpreted. A previously published article on guidelines for medical care for sexually abused children has been widely used by physicians, nurses, and nurse practitioners to inform practice guidelines in this field. Since 2007, when the article was published, new research has suggested changes in some of the guidelines and in the table that lists medical and laboratory findings in children evaluated for suspected sexual abuse and suggests how these findings should be interpreted with respect to sexual abuse. A group of specialists in child abuse pediatrics met in person and via online communication from 2011 through 2014 to review published research as well as recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics and to reach consensus on if and how the guidelines and approach to interpretation table should be updated. The revisions are based, when possible, on data from well-designed, unbiased studies published in high-ranking, peer-reviewed, scientific journals that were reviewed and vetted by the authors. When such studies were not available, recommendations were based on expert consensus.

No abstract

This article presents a revision of a system for classifying examination findings, laboratory findings, and children's statements and behaviors as to their possible relationship to sexual abuse. The revisions are based on published research studies and current recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect, and the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children. Part 1 of the classification system lists genital and anal findings that can be considered normal or nonrelated to abuse, nonspecific for abuse, concerning for abuse, and clear evidence of blunt force or penetrating trauma. Under Part 2, the overall classification of the likelihood of abuse is broken into four categories: no evidence of abuse, possible abuse, probable abuse, and definite evidence of abuse or penetrating trauma. Cautions in the use of the classification system, as well as controversies concerning a few medical findings, are discussed.

The recommendations for the timing and type of examinations for prepubertal children, in contrast to adolescent sexual assault victims, may need to be changed. Studies showing that partial tears of the hymen, as well as abrasions and contusions, may heal to leave very little or no sign of previous injury emphasize the importance of urgent evaluations. There is a need for standardization of the training of medical professionals who perform child sexual abuse evaluations to ensure continuing competence.