Annually, 14-41 per 100 000 infants get mildly to lethally injured or severely disabled through violent shaking. The incidence and mortality of inflicted head injury by shaking trauma (IHI-ST) are highest in the early months and decrease with age. This may partly be due to the age-related physical characteristics of infants. Younger, smaller infants are more vulnerable owing to their size and material properties. In addition, from basic biomechanics, it is expected that larger or heavier infants may be more difficult to fiercely shake and will exhibit different motion patterns when being shaken violently. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the kinematics of shaking a smaller versus a larger infant dummy. We recorded the kinematics of two dummies, representing a 6-week-old and a 1-year-old, while they were violently shaken by volunteers. We found that participants induced higher head and torso accelerations when shaking the 6-week-old, than with the 1-year-old dummy. Moreover, higher peak sagittal angular accelerations coincide with smaller radii of rotation in the 6-week-old than in the 1-year-old. Because it has been suggested in the literature that sagittal angular acceleration of the head is an important mechanism in inducing the injuries associated with IHI-ST; the results of this study show that shaking a smaller/younger infant is more likely to cause the kinematics possibly responsible for IHI-ST.

Inflicted shaking trauma can cause injury in infants, but exact injury mechanisms remain unclear. Controversy exists, particularly in courts, whether additional causes such as impact are required to produce injuries found in cases of (suspected) shaking. Publication rates of studies on animal and biomechanical models of inflicted head injury by shaking trauma (IHI-ST) in infants continue rising. Dissention on the topic, combined with its legal relevance, makes maintaining an up-to-date, clear and accessible overview of the current knowledge-base on IHI-ST essential. The current work reviews recent (2017–2023) studies using models of IHI-ST, serving as an update to two previously published reviews. A systematic review was conducted in Scopus and PubMed for articles using animal, physical and mathematical models for IHI-ST. Using the PRISMA methodology, two researchers independently screened the publications. Two, five, and ten publications were included on animal, physical, and mathematical models of IHI-ST, respectively. Both animal model studies used rodents. It is unknown to what degree these can accurately represent IHI-ST. Physical models were used mostly to investigate gross head-kinematics during shaking. Most mathematical models were used to study local effects on the eye and the head’s internal structures. All injury thresholds and material properties used were based on scaled adult or animal data. Shaking motions used as inputs for animal, physical and mathematical models were mostly greatly simplified. Future research should focus on using more accurate shaking inputs for models, and on developing or and validating accurate injury thresholds applicable for shaking.

Forensic reconstruction and scenario evaluation are crucial in investigations of suspicious deaths related to falls from a height. In such cases, distinguishing between accidental falls, being pushed or jumping is an important but difficult task, since objective methods to do so are currently lacking. This paper explores the possibility of repurposing a passive rigid body model of a human from commercially available crash simulation software for forensic reconstruction and scenario evaluation of humans dropping from heights. To use this approach, a prerequisite is that the human body model can produce realistic movements compared to those of a real human, given similar environmental conditions. Therefore, this study assessed the validity of the commercially available Simcenter Madymo Pedestrian Model (MPM) for simulating human fall movements. Experimental kinematic and kinetic data was collected from nine participants, who dropped from a height in three different ways: passively tilting over, getting pushed, and jumping. Next, the performance of the MPM in reproducing the kinematics of the experimental falls was assessed by comparing the orientation of the body 0.3 s after platform release. The results show that the MPM currently does not consistently reproduce the experimentally recorded falling movements across multiple falling conditions and outcome measures. The MPM must therefore be adapted if to be used for forensic reconstruction and scenario evaluation, for example by implementing active movement.