The Practitioner. May, 1869.: A Monthly Journal of TherapeuticsVarious
Science
The Practitioner. May, 1869.: A Monthly Journal of Therapeutics
Various
Medicine -- Periodicals; Therapeutics -- Periodicals
_Case I._—A robust man, æt. 26, admitted on the sixth day with pneumonia
of lower half of right lung posteriorly. The treatment was confinement
to bed and low diet. On the thirteenth day there was debility, for which
quinine and ordinary diet was given. On the seventeenth day he was
discharged well.
Now I have little doubt, and the cases I have recorded prove, that if
this robust man had been well supported from the first he would have
recovered much sooner, and that the quinine was altogether unnecessary.
_Case II._—A healthy man, æt. 22, admitted on the seventh day with
double pneumonia at the bases, but to what extent is not stated: had
marked dyspnœa, and other apparently urgent symptoms. He was bled by
venesection to six ounces, and an acetate of ammonia mixture ordered,
containing 1/12 gr. of antim. tart. for a dose, to be taken every three
hours. On the following day there was great relief, and the disease was
“knocked down,” although it is stated that dulness over the bases
continued. He was dismissed cured “a few days” afterwards.
We have here the dyspnœa so commonly present in cases of double
pneumonia on the sixth or seventh day, which readily disappears by
itself, and is relieved by a warm poultice. It is supposed, however,
that a small bleeding of six ounces “knocked down,” or, as some call it,
jugulated or strangled the pneumonia. What really happened, however, was
that the dyspnœa and apparently urgent symptoms disappeared on the
eighth day, which is the usual occurrence. It is distinctly stated that
the lungs remained consolidated, so that no impression was made on the
disease. What is meant by being dismissed “in a few days” it is of
course impossible to tell.
_Case III._—A girl æt. 15, admitted on the eighth day, with double
pneumonia—the left side more affected than the right, but the extent on
neither side stated. She was ordered mist. ammon. acet. with small
quantities (?) of morphia. Two days afterwards articular rheumatism
appeared. On the following day six leeches were applied to the left side
with marked benefit, and a small quantity (?) of antimony was added to
the mixture. Dismissed cured on the thirty-second day.
Here was a case of double pneumonia and acute rheumatism running their
natural course in a weak subject. Is it to be supposed that six leeches
to one side modified the one, or that the “small quantities” of morphia
and other treatment influenced the other? Would not the course of both
have been shortened by a restorative treatment?
_Case IV._—A labourer, æt. 23, admitted on the eighth day, with
pneumonia below the fourth rib, anteriorly on the right side. “Six
leeches with saline mixture, containing 1/12 gr. of antim. tart.,
followed by a blister, appeared (!) to give temporary relief.” On the
twelfth day typhoid fever declared itself, with bronchitis. Brandy,
stimulants, and poultices were then ordered. Dismissed cured on the
thirty-fifth day.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account