Abstract
In 1896 Kraepelin first introduced and defined his conception of the manic-depressive psychoses and dementia præcox. It has been fairly generally admitted that his was a brilliant piece of work, but since that time he has been led, in certain more or less minor respects, to modify his views. Briefly put, Kraepelin described in a very thorough and detailed way the symptomatology of these disorders, and then, according as the case was one of manic-depressive insanity or dementia præcox, the prognosis was held to be either good or bad respectively. Such a simple method of differentiation and of deciding on the prognosis seemed too good to be true, and although it must be admitted that in the main it holds good, yet in certain fundamental respects it fails. We all know that certain types of the manic-depressive psychosis do not get well, and on the other hand we all probably have seen cases which, symptomatologically, were cases of dementia præcox that recovered. In no group of cases has this been more clearly seen than in catatonia.
Publisher
Royal College of Psychiatrists
Reference9 articles.
1. Devine H. —“The Clinical Significance of Katatonic Symptoms,” Journ. Ment. Sci., 1914, April, p. 278.
2. Kirby G. H. —“The Catatonic Syndrome and its Relation to Manic-Depressive Insanity,” Nerv. and Ment. Dis., 1913, November, p. 694.
3. Kirby G. H. —“Prognostic Principles in the Biogenetic Psychoses, with Special Reference to the Catatonic Syndrome,” Am. Journ. Insan., Special Number, 1913, p. 1035.
4. Campbell C. Macfie .—“A Modern Conception of Dementia Præcox,” Rev. Neur. and Psych., 1909, October, p. 623.
5. The Dynamic Interpretation of Dementia Praecox
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献