Department of Psychological Science, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, Texas, USA.
J Hist Neurosci. 2020 Apr-Jun;29(2):234-245. doi: 10.1080/0964704X.2019.1711350. Epub 2020 Jan 27.
The introduction of railway transportation in Great Britain in the early-nineteenth century saw an increased frequency of trauma cases involving persisting symptoms without objective evidence of injury. In 1866, a prominent surgeon, Sir John Eric Erichsen, attributed such symptoms to concussion of the spine (popularized as "railway spine") that involved an organic pathology, inflammation of the spinal cord in the absence of spinal fracture, with potential psychological overlay. This was widely accepted within the medico-legal context throughout the 1870s, whereby passengers sought compensation for collision-related injuries. In 1883, a railway surgeon named Herbert William Page countered the assertion that many of Erichsen's cases likely had sustained direct physical injury to the spine, the cord, and/or the spinal nerves; and in cases without such injury, the symptoms were psychogenic, as in traumatic neurasthenia and/or hysteria. Similarities between Erichsen's and Page's medico-legal positions, such as conscious and unconscious forms of symptom exaggeration that would both resolve upon settlement of the case, ushered in the era of medical injury compensation.
19 世纪初,英国铁路运输的引入导致创伤案例的频率增加,这些案例涉及持续存在的症状,但没有客观的损伤证据。1866 年,一位杰出的外科医生约翰·埃里克森爵士(Sir John Eric Erichsen)将这些症状归因于脊柱震荡(俗称“铁路脊柱”),即脊柱的有机病理学,脊髓炎症而没有脊柱骨折,可能伴有潜在的心理因素。在整个 19 世纪 70 年代,这在医学法律背景下得到了广泛认可,在此期间,乘客因与碰撞相关的受伤而寻求赔偿。1883 年,一位名叫赫伯特·威廉·佩奇(Herbert William Page)的铁路外科医生反驳了埃里希森(Erichsen)的许多案例可能对脊柱、脊髓和/或脊神经造成直接物理损伤的说法;在没有这种损伤的情况下,症状是心因性的,如创伤性神经衰弱和/或歇斯底里。埃里希森(Erichsen)和佩奇(Page)在医学法律立场上的相似之处,如症状夸大的有意识和无意识形式,都会在案件解决后得到解决,这标志着医疗伤害赔偿时代的到来。