Comparative Analysis of Two Methods for the Assessment of Aesthetic Impairment Involving Teeth

Objective: To analyze and compare the effectiveness of two methods designed for the assessment of esthetic impairment in patients with missing teeth. Material and Methods: Two methods were addressed in this study: 7-level scale (7LS) and AIPE-Odonto/Brasil. Both tools are designed to assess esthetic dental impairment in civil and criminal Courts. One-hundred and thirteen dentists used the tools to assess dental esthetic impairment in four mock cases (one male and three females). The outcomes of their analyses were compared with pre-established gold-standard scores. Chi-square test was used to investigate the influence of dentists’ sex, age, time of experience and forensic knowledge with their outcomes. Results: Dentists’ outcomes were closer to the expected gold-standard scores when AIPE-Odonto/Brasil was used compared to 7LS (p < 0.05). Dentists’ sex, time of experience and forensic knowledge were significantly associated with the scores obtained with both tools (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Comparatively, AIPE-Odonto/Brasil was more effective for the assessment of esthetic dental impairment involving missing teeth compared to the 7LS.

Recommendations for procedures related to the evidence chain of custody in forensic anthropology in Brazil

Forensic anthropologists perform specialised analysis,mainly involving skeletonised human remains,cadavers in advanced stages of decomposition,disassociated elements from the human body,and human remains in extreme carbonisation.The main objectives of the forensic anthropology expertise are human identification and assisting in determining the cause and manner of death.Estimating the time since death is also a priority for some cases,especially ones involving missing persons.This science works on individual cases,violent deaths,missing persons,mass disasters,suspected violations of human rights,and crimes against humanity.Forensic anthropological evidence is,in general,very sensitive.Thus,it is important to detail aspects relevant to the maintenance of the chain of custody at all phases of the investigation,as well as standardise the actions of the individuals involved.This aims to preserve the evidence integrity and sameness(Sameness:free translation of the Portuguese word“mesmidade”,derived from a Spanish word that does not possess a translation to Portuguese.Sameness of evidence is understood as the guarantee that the evidence under valuation(or under analysis of its probative value)is exactly and integrally the same one which was collected,corresponding,therefore,to“the same”(and not“part of”,“derived from”),safeguarding its value.Brazil Law No.13.964 of 14 December 2019 establishes and lists 10 phases related to the evidence chain of custody that must be followed.These newly introduced requirements resulted in the need for adaptation of the forensic,investigative,and legal actors involved in an investigation,and in the detailed description of the procedures for the different areas related to criminalistics,including forensic anthropology.The information provided in this article should be interpreted as recommendations,even though their non-compliance may weaken the investigative and forensic analysis processes in whole or in part.