SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Adli Tıp Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 29 Sayı: 2

DEMOGRAPHIC EVALUATION OF FORENSIC INVESTIGATION IN EMERGENCY SERVICE

ACİL SERVİSTE DEĞERLENDİRİLEN ADLİ OLGULARIN DEMOGRAFİK İNCELENMESİ

Mücahit Kapçı(Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Acil Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Aydın, Türkiye)
Kenan Ahmet Türkdoğan(Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Acil Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Aydın, Türkiye)
Orhan Akpınar(Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Mikrobiyoloji Departmanı, Isparta, Türkiye)
Ali Duman(Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Acil Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Aydın, Türkiye)
Gülçin Bacakoğlu(Isparta Devlet Hastanesi, Acil Servis Bölümü, Isparta, Türkiye)
Pages
67–74
Publication Date
2015-08-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Most of the forensic cases were admitted to the hospital in September 9.9%; p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Forensic cases have an important place in emergency practice.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: Forensic cases of patients admitted to the emergency service in 2011 and recorded in the system were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Most of the forensic cases were admitted to the hospital in September 9.9%; p
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:acil servis · adli olgular · demografik analiz

Abstract

Objective: Forensic cases have an important place in emergency practice. The purpose of this study is to review the sociodemographic characteristics of forensic cases in an emergency service and to present solution suggestions. Methods: Forensic cases of patients admitted to the emergency service in 2011 and recorded in the system were included in the study. Patient files were collected from computer-based patient recording systems. Results: Of the 115.185 patients who were admitted to the emergency service during the study, 2.094 1.82% were determined to be forensic cases. The male-to-female ratio of the cases was 2.0. Most of the forensic cases were admitted to the hospital in September 9.9%; p

Özet

Amaç: Acil pratiğinde, adli olgular önemli bir yer tutmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, acil serviste karşılaşılan adli nitelikteki olguların sosyo-demografik özelliklerinin incelenmesi, konu ile ilgili aksaklıklar ve çözüm önerilerinin ortaya konması amaçlanmıştır. Yöntemler: Isparta Devlet Hastanesi Acil Servisi’ne 2011 yılında başvuran sisteme kayıtlı adli olgular çalışmaya alındı. Hasta dosyaları bilgisayar tabanlı hasta kayıt sistemlerinden toplandı. Bulgular: Çalışma süresince acil servise başvuran toplam 115.185 hastanın 2.094’ü %1,82 adli olgu olarak tespit edildi. Olguların erkek-kadın oranı 2,0 bulundu. Adli olguların en fazla Eylül %9,9 ayında p

🔖

Cite This Article

Kapçı, M., Türkdoğan, K. A., Akpınar, O., Duman, A., Bacakoğlu, G. (2015). DEMOGRAPHIC EVALUATION OF FORENSIC INVESTIGATION IN EMERGENCY SERVICE. Adli Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 29 Sayı: 2, 67–74. https://ajindex.com/articles/1352630

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Beyaztas FY. Responsibilities of the physicians about forensic report. Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry 2000;1 4:231-4.
  2. Tugcu H, Yorulmaz C, Ceylan S, Baykal B, Celasun B, Koç S. The knowledge and ideas of the physicians who participate in emergency services about physician responsibility in emergency cases and forensic medicine problems. Gulhane Med J 2003;45 2:175-9.
  3. Yavuz MF, Yavuz MS. Standardization and deficiencies of forensic reports. Turkiye Klinikleri J Surg Med Sci 2006;2 50:28-33.
  4. Koç S, Çetin G, Kolusayın Ö. Acil olgularda hekimin sorumluluğu ve adli tıp sorunları. Sendrom 1994;6 5:54-9.
  5. Turkçuer İ, Gozlukaya A, Serinken M, Ozen M, Aydin B. Application times of forensic cases to emergency department. JAEM 2010;2:89- 92.
  6. Sunay YM, Faruk Ozguner IF. Evaluation of forensic cases applied to Emergency Department of Suleyman Demirel University Medical School Hospital between 1999-2001. J Forensic Med 2003;17 1:47-53.
  7. Altun G, Azmak D, Yilmaz A, Yilmaz G. The characteristics of the cases which admitted to Emergency Department of Trakya University Medical Faculty. The Bulletin of Legal Medicine 1997;2:62-6.
  8. Guven FM, Butun C, Beyaztaş FY, Eren SH, Korkmaz İ. Evaluation of forensic cases admitted to Cumhuriyet University Hospital. Journal of ADU Medical Faculty 2009;10 3:23- 8.
  9. Bozkurt S, Daraoğlu V, Okumuş M, Savrun A, Karanfil R, Gök A. Evaluation of judicial reports which executing on emergency service and fixed deficiencies. J Clin Anal Med 2015;6 3:331-4.
  10. Turkmen N, Akgoz S, Çoltu A, Ergin N. Evaluation of Legal cases admitted to Uludağ University Medical School Emergency Department. Uludağ Medical Journal 2005;31 1:25-9.
  11. Ural G, Gün I. Epidemiological analysis of accidents which applied to emergency services of Dr. Nafiz Körez Sincan Government Hospital and Private Bayındır Hospital. Journal of Health Sciences 2008;17:31-9.
  12. Arslanoğlu A, Ilhan MN, Bumin MA. The Features of forensic cases treated in the Van Military Hospital Emergency Room. Gazi Medical Journal 2007;18 1:22-5.
  13. Tokdemir M, Kucuker H, Aksu A. F.Ü. Tıp Fakültesi Hastanesi’ne Başvuran olguların retrospektif olarak değerlendirilmesi. Fırat Medical Journal 2000;2 2:151-5.
  14. Polat SA, Açık Y. General Evaluation of forensic cases applied to the forensic medicine department of Elazığ Health Authority between October-December 2000. J Forensic Med 2001;15 4:7-11.
  15. Beyaztas FY. Responsibilities of the physicians about forensic report. Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry 2000;1 4:231-4.
  16. Tugcu H, Yorulmaz C, Ceylan S, Baykal B, Celasun B, Koç S. The knowledge and ideas of the physicians who participate in emergency services about physician responsibility in emergency cases and forensic medicine problems. Gulhane Med J 2003;45 2:175-9.
  17. Yavuz MF, Yavuz MS. Standardization and deficiencies of forensic reports. Turkiye Klinikleri J Surg Med Sci 2006;2 50:28-33.
  18. Koç S, Çetin G, Kolusayın Ö. Acil olgularda hekimin sorumluluğu ve adli tıp sorunları. Sendrom 1994;6 5:54-9.
  19. Sunay YM, Faruk Ozguner IF. Evaluation of forensic cases applied to Emergency Department of Suleyman Demirel University Medical School Hospital between 1999-2001. J Forensic Med 2003;17 1:47-53.
  20. Guven FM, Butun C, Beyaztaş FY, Eren SH, Korkmaz İ. Evaluation of forensic cases admitted to Cumhuriyet University Hospital. Journal of ADU Medical Faculty 2009;10 3:23- 8.
  21. Bozkurt S, Daraoğlu V, Okumuş M, Savrun A, Karanfil R, Gök A. Evaluation of judicial reports which executing on emergency service and fixed deficiencies. J Clin Anal Med 2015;6 3:331-4.
  22. Turkmen N, Akgoz S, Çoltu A, Ergin N. Evaluation of Legal cases admitted to Uludağ University Medical School Emergency Department. Uludağ Medical Journal 2005;31 1:25-9.
  23. Arslanoğlu A, Ilhan MN, Bumin MA. The Features of forensic cases treated in the Van Military Hospital Emergency Room. Gazi Medical Journal 2007;18 1:22-5.
  24. Tokdemir M, Kucuker H, Aksu A. F.Ü. Tıp Fakültesi Hastanesi’ne Başvuran olguların retrospektif olarak değerlendirilmesi. Fırat Medical Journal 2000;2 2:151-5.
  25. Polat SA, Açık Y. General Evaluation of forensic cases applied to the forensic medicine department of Elazığ Health Authority between October-December 2000. J Forensic Med 2001;15 4:7-11.