4.7 Editorial Material

Historical underpinnings of the term essential tremor in the late 19th century

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 71, 期 11, 页码 856-859

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000325564.38165.d1

关键词

-

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS039422] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The term essential tremor has been in regular use since the second half of the 20th century. To modern neurologists, the word essential may seem cryptic. The historical underpinnings of this term have not been examined. Objectives: To bring to attention early medical reports using the term essential tremor and examine the characteristics of the disorder that contributed to the proposed use of the term. Methods: Review of 19th and early 20th century medical literature on essential tremor. Results: The term tremore semplice essenziale (simple essential tremor) was first used by Burresi (Italy, 1874) to describe an 18-year-old man with severe, isolated action tremor. Several years later, Maragliano (Italy, 1879), Nagy (Austria, 1890), and Raymond (France, 1892) described similar cases and proposed the terms tremore essenziale congenito (essential congenital tremor), essentieller Tremor (essential tremor), and tremblement essentiel hereditaire (hereditary essential tremor) to define the illness. Mirroring contemporaneous views of constitutional and inherited disease, the key ingredients of the disorder were viewed as the constant presence of tremor in the absence of other neurologic signs and its heritable nature. By the early 20th century, the term began to appear in the medical literature with greater frequency. Conclusions: Toward the end of the 19th century, several clinicians attempted to provide a nosologic separation for a tremor diathesis that was often familial and occurred in isolation of other neurologic signs. This disorder, which was termed essential tremor, was later recognized as one of the most common neurologic disorders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据