Features of structuring a forensic veterinary diagnosis of injuries caused by sharp instruments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31073/onehealthjournal2026-II-05Keywords:
forensic veterinary examination, injuries, sharp instruments, diagnosisAbstract
The paper reveals the features of structuring a forensic veterinary diagnosis of injuries inflicted by sharp instruments. A definition of the term "forensic veterinary diagnosis" is formulated, the content of which lies in the determination of the essence of an injury (disease) compiled by a forensic veterinary expert based on the results of a detailed forensic veterinary examination of a live animal or an animal corpse. Such a diagnosis characterizes the essence of the trauma (disease), reflecting its nosology, etiology, and mechanism of formation in accordance with the classifications and terminology established in veterinary medicine.
It is substantiated that, when formulating a forensic veterinary diagnosis for injuries caused by the action of sharp instruments, a generally accepted three-part, rubricated structure is used, which includes the primary injury, its complications, and concomitant injuries or conditions. The rubrics of the forensic veterinary diagnosis are intended to document these components in the form of nosological forms (entities).
It was demonstrated that a nosological entity denotes a specific injury (disease) defined on the basis of established data on its etiology, pathogenesis, or mechanism. It is characterized by a set of clinical, laboratory, and instrumental diagnostic features that make it possible to clearly distinguish the injury and classify it into an appropriate group of conditions with similar etiology and pathogenesis.
An algorithm for describing the primary injury in animals traumatized by sharp instruments during the formulation of a forensic veterinary diagnosis has been developed. This will contribute to compliance with the principles of formulating a forensic veterinary diagnosis, which should fully reflect all pathological conditions and comply with the nosological, intranosological, pathogenetic, dynamic, and structural principles.
It has been proven that a unified structure of the forensic veterinary diagnosis ensures proper statistical recording in forensic veterinary expertise.
The main requirements for a forensic veterinary diagnosis are outlined as follows: nosological certainty (including the name of a specific injury in accordance with forensic veterinary or veterinary classifications); accurate reflection of the essence of the injury (disease); completeness, objectivity, validity, correctness, truthfulness, reliability, and specificity; as well as effectiveness in formulating final conclusions in the expert's report without the use of abbreviations or contractions.
References
Munro R. (2022). Viewpoint: Integrity and Limitations of Forensic Veterinary Evidence. J. Comp. Pathol., 199, 86-87. doi: 10.1016/j.jcpa.2022.10.003.
Monsalve S., de Souza P. V., Lopes A. S., Leite L. O., Polo G., Garcia R. (2021). Veterinary Forensics, Animal Welfare and Animal Abuse: Perceptions and Knowledge of Brazilian and Colombian Veterinary Students. J. Vet. Med. Educ., 48(6):640-648. doi: 10.3138/jvme-2019-0138.
Cooper J. E., Cooper M. (2021). Veterinary involvement in forensic medicine. Vet Rec.,189. 6, 249-250. doi: 10.1002/vetr.1004.
Parry N. M. A., Stoll A. (2020). The rise of veterinary forensics. Forensic. Sci. Int., 306:110069. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.110069.
Kozachok V. V., Yatsenko I. V. (2025). Zahalni orhanizatsiini polozhennia z pytan pryznachennia ta provedennia sudovo-veterynarnoi ekspertyzy za ushkodzhen tvaryn hostrymy znariaddiamy. Scientific Progress & Innovations., 28(3), 222–233. doi: 10.31210/spi2025.28.03.34.
Shkundia D., Serdioucov J. (2024). Determination of the time of death of a domestic cat by measuring the area of a wet spot. Ukrainian Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 15(1), 122-138. doi: 10.31548/veterinary1.2024.122.
Yatsenko I. (2024). Paradyhma sudovo-veterynarnoi ekspertyzy: monohrafiia. Kharkiv: NNTs «ISE im. Zasl. Prof. M.S. Bokariusa», 536. doi: 10Uo-4V1AozIxeRCv_SSoUnlX2sYlTYOH/view.
Kazantsev R., Yatsenko I. (2024). Forensic veterinary diagnosis of systemic hemostatic disorders and sudden death in cats and dogs: thanatogenetic aspect of critical conditions. Regulatory Mechanisms in Biosystems, 15(4), 808–820. doi: https://doi.org/10.15421/0224116.
Lemishevskyi V. M. (2021). Sudovo-veterynarna ekspertyza trupa sobaky z oznakamy nasylnytskoi smerti: ohliad vypadku. Naukovyi visnyk LNU veterynarnoi medytsyny ta biotekhnolohii. Seriia: Veterynarni nauky, 23(103), 136–140. doi: https://doi.org/10.32718/nvlvet10318
Lorsirigool A., Sudjaroen Y., Kulnides N., Pumipuntu N., Kullaya A., Santichat N., Tawinwang K. (2025). Veterinarians' perspectives on pet abuse, legal involvement, and forensic investigation in Thailand: A cross-sectional study. Open. Vet. J., 15(6):2806-2814. doi: 10.5455/OVJ.2025.v15.i6.49.
Caldwell S., Patterson-Kane E., Brandler E., Gupta M., Lockwood R. (2025). Animal Cruelty in New York City: Cruelty Cases Presented to the ASPCA in Partnership with the NYPD 2013-2022. Animals (Basel), 15(5):662. doi: 10.3390/ani15050662.
Oellig L., Lindsjö J., Röcklinsberg H. (2024). Exploring Swedish veterinarians' awareness of non-accidental-injuries, animal abuse and the Link to domestic violence, and their role in addressing this societal issue. Front. Vet. Sci., 11:1439106. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1439106.
Monsalve S., Hammerschmidt J., Ribeiro M., Caleme M. V. D., Marconcin S., Filius G. (2023) One Welfare approach to identify socioeconomic vulnerability in families during investigations into companion animal abuse in Pinhais, Brazil. Anim Welf., 32:e27. doi: 10.1017/awf.2023.18.
Bartelink E. J., Clinkinbeard S., Spessard C., Kilmartin A., Spangler W. L. (2022). Documenting non-accidental injury patterns in a dog abuse investigation: A collaborative approach between forensic anthropology and veterinary pathology. J. Forensic. Sci., 67(2):756-765. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14948.
Smith-Blackmore M., Bethard J. D. (2021). A multidisciplinary investigation of chronic animal abuse: Collaboration between veterinary forensics and forensic anthropology. J. Forensic. Sci., 66(1):389-392. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14576.
Rebollada-Merino A., Bárcena C., Mayoral-Alegre F. J., García-Real I., Domínguez L., Rodríguez-Bertos A. (2020). Forensic cases of suspected dog and cat abuse in the Community of Madrid (Spain), 2014-2019. Forensic Sci Int., 316:110522. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110522.
Stern A. W., McEwen B., McDonough S. P., Viner T., Brooks J. W., Kagan R., Brower A. (2021). Veterinary forensic pathology standards. J. Forensic. Sci., 66(3):1176. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14683.
Munro R. (2022). Viewpoint: Integrity and Limitations of Forensic Veterinary Evidence. J. Comp. Pathol., 199, 86-87. doi: 10.1016/j.jcpa.2022.10.003.
Schertenleib T. I., Pospischil A., Hässig M., Kircher P. R., & Hilbe M. (2017). Comparison of Clinical and Pathological Diagnoses in Cats and Dogs. J. Comp. Pathol., 156(2-3):217-234. doi: 10.1016/j.jcpa.2017.01.004.
Hugen S., Ankringa N., Robben J. H., Valtolina C. (2023). Assessment of misdiagnosis in small animal intensive care patients using the Modified Goldman criteria. Vet Q., 43(1):1-8. doi: 10.1080/01652176.2023.2233584.
Wolf C., Gerst K., Gerst S., Priemer G. (2021). Postmortale klinische Labordiagnostik beim Rind – ein Zusatzinstrument fur die Veterinarpathologie. Tierarztl Prax Ausg G Grosstiere Nutztiere., 49(6):403-412. doi: 10.1055/a-1593-6948.
Clarke L. L., Breuer R. M. (2022). Postmortem diagnoses in South American camelids and factors influencing diagnostic rate in the Upper Midwest USA, 2009-2019. J. Vet. Diagn. Invest., 34(4):727-732. doi: 10.1177/10406387221091733.
Heng H. G., Churgin S. M., Lee F. K., Graydon R., Martelli P. R. (2022). Post mortem computed tomography as a complementary tool for diagnosing cholangiohepatitis in a giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). J. Vet. Med. Sci., 10;84(7):1010-1014. doi: 10.1292/jvms.21-0349.
Grela M., Panasiuk-Flak K., Listos P., Gryzinska M., Buszewicz G., Chagowski W., Teresinski G. (2021). Post-mortem analysis of gunshot wounds to the head and thorax in dogs by computed tomography, radiography and forensic necropsy. Med. Sci. Law., 61(2):105-113. doi: 10.1177/0025802420971176.
van Bruggen L. W. L., Marrero J. P. D., Grinwis G. C. M., Endenburg N., Gerretsen R. (2022). Renal secondary hyperparathyroidism should be considered a differential diagnosis in forensic cases where animal abuse is suspected. Forensic. Sci. Med. Pathol., 18(4):491-496. doi: 10.1007/s12024-022-00501-5.
Kot B. C. W., Yeong J. W. Y., Kwan A. S. Y., Ho G. Y. H., Ho H. H. N., Tsui H. C. L., Chung T. Y. T., Gerussi T. (2024). Illustrated cross-sectional computed tomography of the cetacean abdomino-pelvic organs. Ann Anat., 256:152317. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2024.152317.
Yatsenko I. (2022). Problems of concluding an expert opinion based on the results of a forensic veterinary examination of a live animal and ways to solve them. Law. Human. Environment., 13(4), 71-88. doi: 10.31548/law2022.04.008.
Kazantsev R., Yatsenko I. (2024). Thanatognomonic substantiation of the forensic veterinary diagnosis in the death of dogs and cats due to haemodynamic disorders and hypoxaemia. Ukrainian Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 15(2), 66–101. doi: 10.31548/veterinary2.2024.66.
Yatsenko I. (2023). Theoretical justification and praxeological significance of the stages of expert research of a living animal. Law. Human. Environment., 14 (1), 107–131. doi: 10.31548/law/1.2023.107.
Daly M. L. (2023). The case for quality improvement in veterinary medicine. J. Vet. Emerg. Crit. Care. (San Antonio)., 33(1), 11-15. doi: 10.1111/vec.13264.
Cohen J., Fischetti A. J., Daverio H. (2023). Veterinary radiologic error rate as determined by necropsy. Vet. Radiol. Ultrasound., 64(4):573-584. doi: 10.1111/vru.13259.
Gartrell B., White B. (2021). Surviving clinical errors in practice. N. Z. Vet. J., 69. 1, 1-4. DOI: 10.1080/00480169.2021.1840740.
Rubini A., Di Via R., Pastore V. P., Del Signore F., Rosto M., De Bonis A., Odone F., Vignoli M. (2025). Artificial Intelligence in Chest Radiography-A Comparative Review of Human and Veterinary Medicine. Vet. Sci.. 12(5):404. doi: 10.3390/vetsci12050404.
Burti S., Banzato T., Coghlan S., Wodzinski M., Bendazzoli M., Zotti A. (2024). Artificial intelligence in veterinary diagnostic imaging: Perspectives and limitations. Res. Vet. Sci., 175:105317. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2024.105317.
Yatsenko I., Kozachok V. (2025). The procedure for describing injuries inflicted by sharp objects during a forensic veterinary examination. Directions for the development of science in the context of global transformations: Scientific monograph. Riga, Latvia : Baltija Publishing, 74-97. doi: https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-562-4-5.
Yatsenko I. V., Kozachok V. V. (2024). Praktyka sudovo-veterynarnoi ekspertyzy za ushkodzhen tvaryn hostrymy predmetamy. Visnyk Sumskoho natsionalnoho ahrarnoho universytetu. Seriia «Veterynarna medytsyna», 4(67), 116–130. doi: 10.32782/bsnau.vet.2024.4.17.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 One Health Journal

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

