Abstract
Claims that new science is changing accepted medical opinion about abusive head injury have been made frequently in the media, legal publications and in legal cases involving abusive head trauma (AHT). This review analyzes recently published scientific articles about AHT to determine whether this new information has led to significant changes in the understanding, evaluation and management of children with suspected AHT. Several specific topics are examined: serious or fatal injuries from short falls; specificity of subdural hematoma for severe trauma; biomechanical explanations for findings; the specificity of retinal hemorrhages; the possibility of cerebral sinus thrombosis presenting with signs similar to AHT; and whether vaccines can produce such findings. We conclude: a) that the overwhelming weight of recent data does not change the fundamental consensus b) that abusive head trauma is a significant source of morbidity and mortality in children c) that subdural hematomas and severe retinal hemorrhages are commonly the result of severe trauma d) that these injuries should prompt an evaluation for abuse when identified in young children without a history of such severe trauma and e) that short falls, cerebral sinus thrombosis and vaccinations are not plausible explanations for findings that raise concern for abusive head trauma.