Berry's index: Adjuvant to bite marks

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Ettishree Sharma
Sonia Gupta
Vineeta Gupta
Nutan Tyagi
Sinthia Bhagat
Mohit Dadu

Abstract

Introduction: Bite-mark analysis has proven its advantage as an important forensic tool in the past but also has a few limitations to it. To enhance its utility in forensic odontology in this study we have coupled it with Berry's Index (BI) which is an index used to select anterior teeth in prosthetic practice. Aims and Objectives: This study was attempted to analyze the applicability of BI in identifying an individual. Materials and Methods: This study was directed among 300 individuals with ages ranging between 19 and 30 years. The study conducted at Institute of Dental Studies and Technology College, Kadrabad, Modinagar, Ghaziabad. Out of the total population studied, 149 were males and 151 were females. The analysis of the data obtained was done using SPSS version 19. Results: The results in our study indicated that the widths of both maxillary central incisors and the bizygomatic width were found to be higher in females when compared to males. A positive correlation was observed between both the widths of upper central incisors and the bizygomatic width. Conclusion: BI could be successfully used as an adjuvant to bite analysis and could be an aid in determining the facial proportions of an individual from the width of the central incisors. This could further be correlated with the forensic facial reconstruction.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Ettishree Sharma, Sonia Gupta, Vineeta Gupta, Nutan Tyagi, Sinthia Bhagat, & Mohit Dadu. (2018). Berry’s index: Adjuvant to bite marks. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 10(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfo.jfds_99_16

References

  1. Selvajothi P, Lavanya C, Joshua E, Rao UK, Ranganathan K. Awareness of forensic odontology among legal professionals, Chennai, India. N Am J Med Sci 2014;6:553‑7.
  2. Senn DR, Stimson PG. Forensic Dentistry. 2nd ed. Jammu: CRC Press; 2001.
  3. Bush MA, Thorsrud K, Miller RG, Dorion RB, Bush PJ. The response of skin to applied stress: Investigation of bitemark distortion in a cadaver model. J Forensic Sci 2010;55:71‑6.
  4. Sheets HD, Bush PJ, Bush MA. Bitemarks: Distortion and covariation of the maxillary and mandibular dentition as impressed in human skin. Forensic Sci Int 2012;223:202‑7.
  5. Sweet D, Pretty IA. A look at forensic dentistry – Part 2: Teeth as weapons of violence – Identification of bitemark perpetrators. Br Dent J 2001;190:415‑8.
  6. Antony PJ, Pillai KS, George GB, Varghese T, Puthalath MS, Arakkal LJ, et al. Applicability of berry’s index in bite mark analysis. J Forensic Dent Sci 2015;7:28‑31.
  7. Hinchliffe J. Forensic odontology, part 4. Human bite marks. Br Dent J 2011;210:363‑8.
  8. Shetty K, Kumar M, Palagiri K, Amanna S, Shetty S. Facial measurements as predictors of the length of the maxillary central incisor in a cross section of the Indian population – A clinical study. Oral Hyg Health 2013;1:1‑4.
  9. Berry FH. Study of prosthetic art. Dent Mag 1905;1:405‑6.
  10. Oksam CL, Premachandra IM, Dias GJ. Bizygomatic breadth determination in damaged skulls. Int J Osteoarchaeol 2010;20:540-8.
  11. Lee WJ, Wilkinson CM, Hwang HS. An accuracy assessment of forensic computerized facial reconstruction employing cone‑beam computed tomography from live subjects. J Forensic Sci 2012;57:318‑27.