Forensic facial comparison in South Africa: State of the science.

Forensic facial comparison (FFC) is a scientific technique used to link suspects to a crime scene based on the analysis of photos or video recordings from that scene. While basic guidelines on practice and training are provided by the Facial Identification Scientific Working Group, details of how these are applied across the world are scarce. FFC is frequently used in South Africa, with more than 700 comparisons conducted in the last two years alone. In this paper the standards of practice are outlined, with new proposed levels of agreement/conclusions. We outline three levels of training that were established, with training in facial anatomy, terminology, principles of image comparison, image science, facial recognition and computer skills being aimed at developing general competency. Training in generating court charts and understanding court case proceedings are being specifically developed for the South African context. Various shortcomings still exist, specifically with regard to knowledge of the reliability of the technique. These need to be addressed in future research.

Women's crisis centers and shelters in Italy: working with battered women and with health care providers.

Results of working with battered women stress the necessity to develop practical innovations and create a supportive non-judgmental environment for female victims of violence.

Cumulative experience with 1,273 peripherally inserted central catheters at a single institution.

PURPOSE: To compare bedside insertion of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) by specially-trained nurses with insertion by cardiovascular and interventional radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nurses performed 327 bedside insertions with a palpatory, through-the-needle technique in 301 patients. Radiologists performed 542 insertions with a venographic-fluoroscopic direct puncture and sheath technique in 354 patients. RESULTS: A total of 869 PICCs were inserted in 655 patients. Compared with the first interval of the study (reported previously), bedside technical success improved from 74% to 82.6%, technical success decreased from 98.6% to 98.2%, and the service interval for a given PICC decreased from 72.7 to 28.1 days (because PICCs were used instead of peripheral intravenous lines). Rates of thrombophlebitis and infection remained low. Device failure continued to be a problem. About 25% of patients needed insertion of more than one PICC to complete therapy. CONCLUSION: Bedside insertion by specially trained nurses is less costly than insertion by radiologists, but radiologists are needed for difficult initial insertions, PICC salvage, and PICC exchange.