Historical Insights in Psychopharmacology

2018 ◽  
pp. 508-511
Author(s):  
S. Nassir Ghaemi

The writings of two classic thinkers in psychiatry in the 19th and 20th centuries, Emil Kraepelin and Aubrey Lewis, are provided and examined for insights they provided into continuing problems in the diagnostic and treatment of psychiatric conditions today. Kraepelin was the famed great late 19th-century psychiatric leader from Germany who identified the basic distinction between schizophrenia (dementia praecox) and manic-depressive illness. He laid the foundations of much of psychiatric diagnosis that remains relevant today, and he was a committed defender of the biological approach to psychiatry, although he was conservative with the use of drugs, which were ineffective in his day. Lewis (1900–1975) was the most prominent figure in British psychiatry through most of the 20th century. He was the leader of the Institute of Psychiatry at the Maudsley Hospital for much of the middle of the 20th century. That institution in London was the most influential educational center for psychiatry in the nation. Through his leadership there, Lewis was extremely influential. He tended to be skeptical about the use of psychotropic medications, and emphasized social aspects of psychiatric illness.

1985 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert D. Goldney ◽  
Sandro Positano ◽  
Neil D. Spence ◽  
Stephen J. Rosenman

A review of 46 subjects who suicided after having contact with a psychiatric hospital is presented. There were 33 men and 11 women, both with a mean age of 37 years. In comparison with a control group, those who suicided had a greater number of hospital admissions, a greater length of hospitalisation, were more often unemployed, had a history of more previous suicide attempts, more often received the diagnosis of schizophrenia or manic depressive illness (depressed phase), were more often overtly depressed at their last contact, and were more often prescribed neuroleptic medications. Although these differences emerged, suicide is an infrequent event, and these factors lack specificity in prediction. The important association of psychiatric illness with subsequent suicide is noted.


1983 ◽  
Vol 142 (4) ◽  
pp. 414-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sukdeb Mukherjee

At the turn of the century Kraepelin brought together the disparate syndromes of hebephrenia, dementia paranoides, and catatonia under the rubric of dementia praecox. At the same time he crystallized the concept of manic-depressive illness as an entity discrete and separate from the former syndrome. In the years since Kraepelin's classification first came to be adopted, the definitions and descriptions of these two major disorders have undergone many changes. In an attempt to comprehend the meaning and the mechanism of the psychoses, Bleuler was drawn by the emergent theories of psychoanalysis to extend Kraepelin's clinical observations into the realm of psychology. He renamed dementia praecox the schizophrenias, thus emphasizing his idea that the splitting of associative processes was a fundamental feature of the syndrome; and he added the subcategory of simple schizophrenia. American psychiatry, dominated until recently by psychoanalytic concepts, has been influenced more by Bleulerian than Kraepelinian contributions. However, it has not restricted itself to Bleulerian notions. As Kety (1980) remarked in his Maudsley Lecture, great liberties have been taken with the syndrome of schizophrenia; the essential features have been altered, primarily by an expansion of its boundaries.


2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ciaran Mulholland ◽  
Stephen Cooper

Depression is a frequently occurring symptom in schizophrenia. While today it is often underrecognised and under-treated, historically such symptoms were the focus of much attention. Affective symptoms were used by Kraepelin as an important criterion with which to separate dementia praecox from manic–depressive illness. Kraepelin also recognised the importance of depression as a symptom in schizophrenia and identified several depressive subtypes of the illness. Mayer-Gross emphasised the despair that often occurs as a psychological reaction to acute psychotic episodes and Bleuler considered depression to be one of the core symptoms of schizophrenia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S267-S267
Author(s):  
Julie Clauss ◽  
Anne Danion-Grilliat ◽  
Marianna Scarfone ◽  
Volker Hess ◽  
Christian Bonah

Abstract Background The diagnostic concept of Schizophrenia as defined by DSM and ICD is increasingly being questioned. It is criticized above all for its lack of validity. It refers to very heterogeneous disorders in terms of signs and symptoms but also in terms of evolution and heritability. Clinicians and researchers are therefore considering how to rethink this concept, in the absence of known physiopathological mechanisms and etiology, by integrating various advances in fields such as genetics, molecular biology, brain imaging and cognitive sciences. However, the renewal of the concept of schizophrenia has yet to be explored in terms of its potential impact on psychiatric practice. It is an essential point because this diagnostic concept does not correspond to a theoretical entity that exists for itself but it is a tool of psychiatrists’ daily practice when they seek to name the disorders presented by a patient. Thus, a renewal of the concept of schizophrenia would necessarily have an impact on the diagnoses made by psychiatrists and we know how important the diagnosis in psychiatry is: for the medical care but also for the personal history of the patient. This impact that a renewal of the concept of schizophrenia could have on the diagnostic practices of psychiatrists can be better understood through the analysis of a historical example: the introduction of the concept of Schizophrenia at the Psychiatric Clinic of Strasbourg in France during the period 1920–1930. The concept of Schizophrenia was first discussed in 1908 by the swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler at the Annual Meeting of the German Psychiatric Association in Berlin. At the Psychiatric Clinic of Strasbourg, it was first used by psychiatrists in 1922. How did this then new concept find its place among the other diagnostic concepts that had been used until then in this institution? Methods In an attempt to answer this question, we implemented a methodology that combined a quantitative and a qualitative approach. The first is a retrospective descriptive statistical study whose objective is to establish the evolution of the proportion of the different diagnoses made at the Psychiatric Clinic of Strasbourg during the period 1920–1930. This study includes all hospitalized patients and uses admission records for data collection. This quantitative approach was complemented by a qualitative approach that consists in reconstructing the diagnostic trajectory of some patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia after the period of introduction of this concept. The diagnoses made during their previous hospitalizations were systematically collected and analyzed, this time using the medical records of these patients as sources. Results The diagnostic concept of Schizophrenia seems to have replaced the one of Dementia praecox within the diagnostic practices: the latter was given extensively in 1924, but hardly any longer in 1928. However, in the same period of time, other diagnostic concepts of the field of psychosis like Manic-depressive Illness were less commonly used while others like Catatonia were increasingly employed. The reconstruction of patients’ diagnostic trajectories tends to show that the diagnostic of schizophrenia would have taken over from the diagnostic of Dementia Praecox but also from some of the diagnoses of Manic-depressive Illness, Hebephrenia and Psychopathy. Discussion This historical perspective makes it possible to understand the impact on psychiatrist’s diagnostic practices of a “nosological innovation” that is theoretical, such as the renewal of the concept of schizophrenia could be. In the diagnostic practices, one diagnostic concept would not simply replace another, but it’s introduction could induce a broader reshaping of diagnostic mapping.


CNS Spectrums ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 38-47
Author(s):  
Martha Manning

Driving to the symposium, the vague anxiety and discomfort I had heen experiencing for the past few days finally culminated in the realization that 7 years ago that day, I awoke from my first night as an inpatient at a psychiatric unit.Since then and because of that, I've learned a great deal about depressive and manic-depressive illness. I've learned about stigma and shame. I've learned about the devastation that the violence we benignly call “mood disorder” wreaks on families. I have been awed by the array of treatments we've found to ease the suffering, and humbled by the fact that we still have a long way to go. I have become painfully aware of how unenlightened the world still is about psychiatric illness, and saddened by the cruel irony that the only thing more stigmatizing than suffering from a psychiatric illness is seeking treatment for it.


1987 ◽  
Vol 151 (4) ◽  
pp. 554-555 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. M. Linter

Diagnosis of classic psychiatric illness in mentally handicapped individuals remains difficult. Manic-depressive illness has previously been reported in both pre-pubertal and pubertal children with a mental handicap and with a family history. This paper reports a case of manic-depressive psychosis in childhood, with no family history, short-cycle mood swings and good response to lithium therapy.


1986 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Moreau ◽  
B.D. Jones ◽  
V. Banno

Acute anticholinergic delirium has been reported to occur following ingestion of antidepressants, neuroleptics and antiparkinsonian drugs in toxic and therapeutic doses. A case is described of a chronic central anticholinergic syndrome in a patient receiving a combination of such drugs. This chronic anticholinergic toxicity was superimposed on manic depressive illness which resulted in incorrect diagnoses including schizophrenia and dementia and, accordingly, improper management. Diagnosis of central anticholinergic toxicity may be overlooked in psychiatric patients because the symptoms of toxicity can be incorrectly ascribed to psychiatric, illness. It may also be overlooked in elderly patients who are prone to demonstrate confusion and problems with memory. The recognition of this syndrome in the patient reported, at least nine years after it developed, led to appropriate management which ultimately resulted in a dramatic change in her ability to function.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document