Practice with mock tests, learn from structured notes, and get your questions answered by a global forensic community, all in one place.
How a dental chart is constructed, what features are recorded (restorations, prosthetics, anomalies, pathology), the specific challenges of the postmortem dental examination, and the INTERPOL DVI dental form process.
Last updated:
A dental chart is, in essence, a map of a person's dental history rendered in a format that a stranger can read. The stranger in forensic odontology is the examiner who, months or years after the chart was made, must decide whether the pattern of restorations, missing teeth, and morphological features it describes matches the pattern found in remains. The quality of that match depends entirely on the quality of both records: the ante-mortem chart that captured the clinical state, and the postmortem record that captured what the teeth show now.
Dental charting has a clinical life and a forensic life. In clinical practice it is a running record of treatment, updated at each visit, used to plan future work and bill accurately. In forensic practice it is a snapshot meant to be compared against another snapshot taken at a different time under very different conditions. The postmortem examination may take place on charred bone, on material submerged for weeks, or on a body in early decomposition in a mortuary. The chart produced under those conditions must still speak the same language as the clinical chart made at a routine checkup.
This topic walks through how a dental chart is built, surface by surface and tooth by tooth. It covers the recording of restorations, prosthetics, anomalies, and pathology. It then describes the specific conditions and challenges of postmortem dental recording. It closes with the INTERPOL DVI dental form process, which is the international standard for translating those records into a comparison framework used when multiple unidentified persons and multiple missing-persons files must be matched in parallel.
A chart is a grid; every cell carries a tooth, and every tooth carries its history.
A dental chart organises the dentition into a spatial representation. The most common format is a two-row diagram, upper arch on top and lower arch below, each tooth represented either as a schematic crown view (occlusal for posterior, labial for anterior) or as a box assigned to a quadrant-and-position number. Examiners annotate each tooth position with codes, colours, and symbols that encode its current state.
A two-surface restoration is not just a restoration. It is a shape on a specific tooth that no other person has.
The forensic value of a restoration is proportional to its specificity. A simple single-surface occlusal amalgam on a molar is common enough to be a class-level feature: many people have one. A four-surface gold inlay with a specific outline on a specific tooth in a dentition where all other molars are unrestored is approaching individual-level evidence. The chart must capture both dimensions, the surface locations and the material, precisely.
| Surface code | Location | Common notation |
|---|---|---|
| M | Mesial (toward midline) | Used in compound labels: MO, MOD |
| D | Distal (away from midline) | Used in compound labels: DO, MOD |
| O | Occlusal (biting surface, posterior) | Single or compound: O, MO, OB |
| B or Bu | Buccal (cheek side) | Used for anterior/posterior buccal surface restorations |
| L | Lingual (tongue side) | Upper teeth; equivalent to 'palatal' for palate-facing surfaces |
| F or La | Facial/labial (lip side, anterior) | Used for anterior teeth facing the lips |
Material type matters because it has different radiographic appearance and different durability. Amalgam (silver-mercury alloy) appears radiopaque (bright white) on radiographs and is highly durable. Composite resin is radiolucent or only slightly opaque, depending on filler content, and its presence may not be obvious on a film without additional clinical notes. Gold restorations are distinctively radiopaque and often have a distinctive marginal adaptation visible on radiographs. Tooth-coloured ceramic crowns appear similar to natural tooth structure unless they have a metal coping.
A prosthetic is individually crafted. It is also, often, recoverable after death.
Prosthetic dental appliances are sometimes the single most distinctive feature in an identification. Partial and full dentures are fabricated to fit a specific patient's ridges and may carry the patient's name or a laboratory case number embedded in the acrylic base. Bridges are precision-cemented to specific teeth. Implants are placed surgically at specific bone positions and are recoverable from calcined bone. Each of these features is charted and, when present postmortem, compared against the ante-mortem record.
The mortuary is not the clinic. The record produced must still pass comparison.
The postmortem dental examination follows a structured protocol regardless of the condition of the remains. The two main references are the INTERPOL DVI Guide and national protocols such as those of the American Board of Forensic Odontology (ABFO), the British Association for Forensic Odontology (BAFO), and equivalent bodies in Australia, Canada, and Europe. The core steps are broadly shared across these frameworks.
Pink for the dead, yellow for the missing: a shared format that makes the comparison possible.
The INTERPOL DVI dental form is the international standard for recording and comparing dental data in mass-casualty identification. The form comes in two versions used at the comparison table: the postmortem form (printed on pink paper) completed by the forensic odontologist at examination of the unidentified remains, and the ante-mortem form (printed on yellow paper) completed by a dentist or an INTERPOL liaison using records supplied by the missing person's family or treating dentist.
Both forms use FDI notation and share an identical tooth grid layout. The comparison examiner places a pink form alongside the matching yellow form and works tooth by tooth through the grid, noting: concordant features (same tooth, same state in both records), discrepancies that require explanation, and features present in one record but absent in the other because the record predates a later procedure.
The DVI form also records orthodontic appliances, implants, and dentures. Special features such as an unusual root morphology, a rare anomaly, or a distinctive crown shape are captured in a free-text box. These special features often accelerate the comparison: an examiner who spots an ante-mortem note for a dens in dente on tooth 22 and finds the same feature on the postmortem form has a strong candidate before looking at any restoration.
The unusual features are often the fastest path to identification.
Standard charting captures the expected states of a dentition. Anomalies are the exceptions, and in forensic comparison they often carry disproportionate weight. An anomaly present in the ante-mortem record that is also present in the postmortem record at the same tooth position constitutes strong corroborating evidence. Conversely, an anomaly present ante-mortem that is absent postmortem requires explanation before the comparison can proceed.
On an INTERPOL DVI dental form, which colour indicates the postmortem record?
Test yourself on Forensic Odontology with free, timed mocks.
Practice Forensic Odontology questionsSpotted an error in this page? Report a correction or read our editorial standards.