WeRead Powered by ReaderPub
Shell-shock and other neuropsychiatric problems cover

Shell-shock and other neuropsychiatric problems

Chapter 267: Case 242. (Souques, February, 1915.)
Open in WeRead

About This Book

The work assembles nearly six hundred clinical case histories drawn from wartime medical literature to document combat-related neuropsychiatric disorders. It presents concise case protocols illustrating varied symptom patterns, diagnostic dilemmas, malingering and simulation, therapeutic interventions, and treatment outcomes, and includes bibliographic references and introductory commentary. Sections juxtapose cases to illuminate contested diagnoses and to inform postwar rehabilitation and mental-hygiene efforts, aiming to provide clinicians and reconstruction workers with detailed clinical material for recognizing, classifying, and managing neuropsychiatric consequences of war.

Bullet wound of back: Hysterical bent-back—camptocormia.

Case 242. (Souques, February, 1915.)

A man was wounded September 6, 1914, by a bullet that entered along the axillary border of the scapula and emerged near the spine. He spat blood for several days; but the skin wounds quickly healed.

When he got up, his trunk and thighs were found to be in a state of moderate flexion upon the pelvis, the trunk being bent almost at a right angle; the legs were flexed somewhat upon the thighs. The man could not voluntarily extend his trunk, but he could extend his thighs to a moderate degree. He could bend his trunk still further forward than its habitual contractured position, being able to pick up an object from the ground. If the man was put in the ventral position, the trunk could be straightened to a considerable degree. Curiously enough, the man felt no pain, nor had there been any pain since the healing of the wound. No motor, sensory, reflex, trophic, vasomotor, electrical, visceral, or X-ray disorders could be found. It was evident that there was a contraction of the muscles of the abdominal wall and of the iliopsoas, yet it was also clear that these muscles were not contractured on account of the subject’s ability to flex his trunk and to extend his thighs.

Here, then, is a vicious attitude crystallized (in the phrase of Souques) in the form of a pseudocontracture.