In mass-disaster identifications, what is a typical approach?

• A. They rely exclusively on dental inventories
• B. They compile dental inventories, compare with antemortem data, and coordinate with authorities
• C. They use only DNA analysis
• D. They ignore antemortem data

Answer: (B)

A comprehensive, multi-source workflow is essential: compile a dental inventory from the remains, compare it with antemortem dental data (charts, radiographs, and treatment records), and coordinate the effort with authorities. This combination leverages the most durable and distinctive dental features—restorations, missing teeth, tooth morphology, and radiographic patterns—to establish identity even when soft tissues are compromised. Coordinating with authorities ensures proper chain of custody, ethical handling, and timely communication with investigators and families, while allowing integration with other evidence like DNA or anthropology as needed.

Relying solely on dental inventories misses the critical link to antemortem records and the legal framework that confirms identifications. Using DNA analysis alone can be limited by sample quality or lack of reference material. Ignoring antemortem data eliminates potential matches and reduces confidence in the result.