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

Shell-shock and other neuropsychiatric problems

Chapter 411: Case 382. (Guillain and Barré, November, 1917.)
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.

Retention of urine after shell-shock.

Case 382. (Guillain and Barré, November, 1917.)

An infantryman underwent shell-shock December 19, 1915, from the explosion of a torpedo nearby. He arrived at the ambulance, unable to speak, and next day had a confusional crisis of convulsions with contractures. He had not urinated since the accident, and two liters of clear urine were withdrawn by catheter; after which, the patient rested quietly and gradually regained consciousness. He was catheterized again in the evening and clear urine withdrawn. He remained unable to urinate spontaneously until December 25, and was catheterized accordingly.

There was no motor, sensory, or reflex disorder in this patient. Lumbar puncture yielded a normal fluid; the pupils were normal, and the only appearance was that of a marked asthenia.

Three months after his shell-shock, in March, 1916, the soldier was once more examined and still complained of headache, weakness, and inability to walk more than four or five hundred meters without a certain trembling of the legs. The reflexes remained normal and no further bladder trouble had supervened.

Re anuria, Babinski remarks that, in days of yore, hysteria was supposed to be able to produce anuria as well as albuminuria, and even such organic changes as vesicles of the skin, ulceration, hemorrhages in the skin or of the viscera, fever, and even gangrene. He remarks that of late years no single identifiable case of this sort proved to be hysterical, has been reported. This is aside, of course, from such superficial and quickly passing vasomotor disorders as erythema and dermatographia. Anuria and albuminuria have consequently passed from the textbooks on hysteria, just as Babinski believes that hysterical edema and hysterical exaggeration of the reflexes are bound to pass. Hysteria cannot imitate everything; it cannot reproduce the characteristic phenomena of organic paralysis.