Discrepancy of clinical symptoms and prognosis of a patient — forensic significance of “talk and die” head injury
| dc.contributor.author | Ng'walali, Paul M. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-11-16T06:24:55Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2023-11-16T06:24:55Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2000 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Deaths of patients who had talked after sustaining a head injury and were then assumed clinically to be recovering from the head trauma raise medicolegal questions about the precise causes of deaths. A forensic autopsy on a 77-year-old man who had been talking after a road traffic accident and died on the sixth day showed slight subdural hematoma, bifrontal cerebral contusions and diffuse axonal injury. No natural diseases or delayed complications of injury were found. The cause of death was certified as head injury due to a traffic accident. This is a case of “talk and die” head injury. Forensic autopsy is important in patients with “talk and die” to clarify the causal relation to the head trauma in relation to any further forensic dispute. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Kibayashi, K., Ng'Walali, P.M., Hamada, K., Honjyo, K. and Tsunenari, S., 2000. Discrepancy of clinical symptoms and prognosis of a patient—forensic significance of “talk and die” head injury. Legal medicine, 2(3), pp.175-180. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.other | https://doi.org/10.1016/S1344-6223(00)80021-8 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1257 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Legal medicine | en_US |
| dc.subject | Brain contusion | en_US |
| dc.subject | Head injuries | en_US |
| dc.subject | Neouropathology | en_US |
| dc.title | Discrepancy of clinical symptoms and prognosis of a patient — forensic significance of “talk and die” head injury | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |