28 For details concerning the health-resorts of the Riviera, Hyères, Cannes, Nice, Mentone, and others which are much esteemed in Europe, the reader is referred to a work entitled The Riviera, by Edward I. Sparks, London, 1879.
A mistake often made by those who find benefit from a change of climate is to continue the change for too short a period. The benefit speedily obtained may be speedily lost when the patient is again placed under the climatic and other circumstances attending the development of the disease. It is to be borne in mind that the benefit from a change of climate does not depend on any special remedial agency, but on a combination of favorable circumstances, and that the salutary influences connected with climate are exerted not so much directly upon the lungs as upon the general system. It follows that the beneficial effect may be manifested more by increase of appetite, better digestion, greater endurance of muscular exercise, and especially gain in weight, than by immediate improvement in the pulmonary symptoms. Many patients cannot afford the loss of time and the expense of lengthened absence, and therefore are unable to make trial of change of climate. These may be consoled by the fact that not a few cases of phthisis do well without any climatic treatment. In some of the most striking of the instances of arrest of the disease which have come under my observation change of climate did not enter into the treatment. Important as is this fact, it does not conflict with the belief that additional chances of arrest and the prospect of more or less improvement are often secured by climatic treatment. It is a wise precaution for patients to reside permanently in a climate in which an arrest of the disease has taken place. Of course this is not always practicable. Its importance is attested by reason and experience, and it is the duty of the physician, according to his discretion, to suggest it. The many obstacles which are often in the way of its adoption are sufficiently obvious.
Sanitaria for phthisical patients at health-resorts are doubtless serviceable in many cases, because hygienic measures are enforced which would not under other circumstances be thoroughly carried out. An offset to this advantage is the depressing effect upon some minds of association with other patients. Owing to this moral effect it is sometimes judicious to advise patients not to go to places which, for the nonce, are especially popular, in order that they may not have before their eyes cases exemplifying all the phases of the disease, and be led to talk over symptoms with other patients affected with phthisis. As regards sanitaria, those in which the chief object is to enforce measures of hygiene are perhaps most likely to be serviceable. If these measures be secondary to some system of medication, there is room for distrust.
It is hardly necessary to say that the treatment of patients in such institutions should be under the charge of competent physicians who have not originated or adopted any peculiar notions respecting the pathology and therapeutics of the disease. As a matter of course, there cannot and should not be any restriction in either originating or adopting ideas and methods of practice, however much they may be at variance with commonly-received opinions; but a physician who appreciates his obligation to his patients will hardly feel willing that they should be made subjects for testing pathological and therapeutical novelties in behalf of which his own belief is not committed.
Dietetic and Regiminal Treatment.—The dietetic treatment resolves itself into a few simple principles. It may be assumed that as much assimilation of aliment as is possible is desirable. No one probably will contend for the propriety of any restriction of diet with a view to limiting the amount of the nutritive constituents of the blood. The difficulty in this part of the treatment lies in the impairment or loss of appetite and in lack of digestive or assimilative ability. It is useless to consider whether such or such articles of food are suitable or not for phthisical patients. All wholesome articles which can be taken with any relish and digested are suitable. Nothing could be more ill advised than to direct kinds of nutriment which a patient does not like, and to enjoin avoidance of those which the patient's appetite would dictate. Pains should be taken to ascertain the articles of diet most acceptable or against which there is the least repugnance, and to excite the appetite by variety and culinary attractions. It is important not to judge too hastily of the ability to digest the food which can be ingested. The evidences of indigestion are nausea, vomiting, flatulence, acidity, and diarrhoea: whenever these symptoms are wanting it is fair to assume digestive ability. Nor should evidence of indigestion deter at once from continuing articles which appear to have occasioned it. The processes of digestion are so apt to be disturbed by extrinsic accidental circumstances that a meal which will occasion indigestion to-day may not do so to-morrow. In short, so far as regulation of the diet is concerned the patient is to be encouraged to take all kinds of wholesome food according to appetite and taste, giving to each and all a fair trial as regards digestibility. Fully aware that these views may not commend themselves to the approval of many who think that the diet should be regulated on scientific principles rather than by the instincts of the patient, I do not any the less adhere to them, believing that they are based on experience and common sense. As regards the liability, where the instincts are followed, to the over-ingestion of food and to the ingestion of food indigestible from its quality or modes of preparation, it is far better to incur whatever inconvenience may therefrom arise than the evils of inadequate nourishment. In short, the dietetic instructions to a phthisical patient may be summed up as follows: Eat of wholesome articles of food whatever the appetite may dictate; endeavor to maintain and develop appetite and relish for food by the excitement of variety in kind and in preparation; eat whenever hungry; satisfy the appetite; eat without any expectation of harm; do not hastily attribute an indigestion to any particular articles of diet; incur the risk of over-feeding rather than of the greater evil of under-feeding.
Anorexia in a degree which I have characterized as invincible—that is, an almost complete inability to take food—is one of the most discouraging of symptoms in cases of phthisis. Of course if the symptom continue the duration of life is simply a question of time and tolerance. Milk is an invaluable form of food when appetite is completely lost. The advantage sometimes of substituting for simple cow's milk buttermilk, koumiss, or milk made sour by fermentation with yeast is due wholly to these being taken more readily and more easily digested. The same is true of the substitution for the milk of the cow that of other animals—the goat, the ass, and the mare. Eggs may be given in a liquid form with milk or other fluids. Very little reliance is to be placed on the various meat-extracts (Liebig's, Valentine's, and others) as representing any considerable amount of nutriment. Meats artificially digested—that is, in the form of peptones, as in Leube's meat solution—form a valuable addition to beef-tea. Rectal alimentation may be resorted to. A. H. Smith has reported marked benefit from defibrinated blood as a form of rectal diet.29 A French writer, Debove, has lately reported notable benefit from forced alimentation, food being injected through a tube introduced into the stomach.30 If in any way food can be introduced, in spite of the anorexia, and assimilated, there may be room to hope that a return of appetite will be among the beneficial effects. Cod-liver oil and alcoholics will be considered in connection with the medicinal treatment.
29 Vide N.Y. Med. Record, 1881, No. xix.
30 Vide Bullétin générale Report, Paris, 1881. Another French writer more recently in the same journal, Desnos, has pointed out a source of danger in forced alimentation—namely, the occurrence of violent acts of vomiting, during which portions of food ejected from the stomach are inhaled. The danger is from asphyxia and pneumonic inflammation excited by the presence of particles of food within the smaller bronchi. In order to avoid this source of danger, food should be introduced slowly and not in too large a quantity at a time. Intolerance of the presence of the tube within the stomach is an obstacle which may be overcome by use, but in some cases it is insuperable (vide article in Philadelphia Med. Times, March, 1882).
The regiminal treatment embraces changes relating to out-of-door life, exercise, occupation, clothing, etc.
Of all the changes in this category, those relating to out-of-door life and exercise are of greatest importance. In-door life and sedentary habits, if not factors in an acquired cachexia, undoubtedly favor it. This is shown by the place which these hold in the etiology and by their agency in the arrest of the disease. With respect to the latter point, the result of my analysis of recorded cases has much significance. In 44 cases change of habits from those more or less sedentary and confining within doors to those involving out-of-door life and activity entered into the treatment. In all but 4 of these cases the hygienic treatment consisted chiefly or exclusively of the change of habits mentioned. Of the 4 excepted cases, in 1 the patient passed several months in Europe; in 1 the patient passed a summer in Minnesota; in 1 the patient made several voyages to Europe; and in 1 the patient travelled in Europe. Of these 44 cases, 15 are in the list of cases of unknown duration and termination. Deducting these, the remaining number is 29. Now, of these 29 cases, 11 are in the list of cases ending in recovery; 7 are in the list of cases in which the disease was arrested or became non-progressive; and 3 are in the list of cases of slowly-progressive phthisis. Thus, only 8 out of the 29 cases were not included among those in which the course of the disease was favorable in the three aspects just named, and in more than one-third of the cases recovery took place. Of the 8 fatal cases, in all save 1 case the change of habits appeared to be beneficial. The benefit was marked in 2 of the cases, there being in 1 of them no evidence of progress of the disease for several months.31 Moreover, the majority of the histories of the 15 cases of uncertain duration and termination show more or less improvement. In 7 of the 11 cases ending in recovery the change in habits constituted all the treatment. Making the fullest allowances for an intrinsic tendency in the disease to end in recovery, and in some instances purely from self-limitation, the foregoing facts afford ample proof that changes of habits from those more or less sedentary and confining within doors to those involving out-of-door life and activity have considerable agency in the arrest of phthisis and exert a favorable influence upon the disease when it is not arrested. There is reason to believe that the favorable influence is greater than any other class of hygienic measures, and it is probable that to this source much of the benefit derived from change of climate is to be referred.