CHAPTER XIX
ETIOLOGICAL AND CLINICAL DIAGNOSIS
Articular Gout
The intimate cause of gout is unknown—a humiliating reflection, albeit salutary, if it but engender a more catholic attitude on our part when seeking to unravel the nature of this obscure joint affection. For, to secure ideal ends, diagnosis must be, not only clinical, but etiological. This is the more likely to be attained if we shed all preconceived ideas and prejudices.
Etiological Diagnosis
Confronted, then, with a suspected case of gout, whether acute or chronic, what shall be our way of approach? Not the easy and hazardous path of lightning diagnosis affected by those who plume themselves on their so-called clinical “instinct,” but the slow, laborious route of clinical “observation,” that leads more surely to the vantage ground of truth, this assuredly in all diseases, but in none more so than in joint disorders, whose outward resemblances so oft hark back to inward disparities.
First, as to the manner of man, while one would not decry the hints obtainable from physiognomical peculiarities, it is often hard, if not impossible, to fit the subject to the so-called “gouty diathesis.” They are not all of the John Bull type; not a few are spare in build. Hence the danger of too ready inference from so-called “gouty” traits, to be regarded rather as ancillary to, but not substitutes for, more exact criteria.
Now, as to heritage, for, despite the fallacies that surround inquiries into family predispositions, they often furnish valuable hints as to the metabolic trend of the stock. True, ancestral stories often prove indefinite, but fortunately less so in the “gouty” than in those of “rheumatic” tendency. For, as Sir Dyce Duckworth points out, even the laity are quick to recognise what they term “chalky” gout, and so “if a history be given of ancestors or relatives thus affected, there need be no hesitation in pronouncing for true gout amongst them, and for the probably gouty nature of such arthritic ailments as may be complained of by the patients under examination.”
Turning to the individual himself—for the subjects of regular gout are rarely women—what is his age? If he is over thirty-five and has never previously had an arthritic disorder, it is much more likely to be gout than rheumatism, this only as a broad generalisation.