Advertisement

Douleur et Analgésie

, Volume 2, Issue 2, pp 61–67 | Cite as

La sinistrose: un concept à réviser

  • P. Rosatti
Article

Résumé

La sinistrose, ou névrose de compensation, est un concept pas toujours très clair, malgré qu'il ait été décrit depuis de nombreuses années. Dans cet article, l'auteur cherche à le définir, à le mettre en relation avec la notion d'invalidité. Une revue de la littérature est faite, ce qui permet la description d'un certain nombre de variables prémorbides et aussi une définition plus claire du syndrome. Partant de là, un dépistage précoce pourrait être possible, ce qui est en effet indispensable, car il apparaît bien, une fois que l'accident a eu lieu, que tout se joue très vite. Les interventions médicales semblent d'ailleurs plutôt jouer un rôle de renforcement de la sinistrose. Un certain nombre d'idées personnelles sont avancées, en tenant compte notamment de la réalité en Suisse, où la sinistrose n'a pas valeur de maladie auprès des assurances sociales.

Summary

Compensation neurosis is not a clearly defined concept, despite the fact that it was recognised and described many years ago. In this paper, the author tries to define it and to relate it to the notion of disability. A review of the literature is made, so it is possible to specify a certain number of premorbid factors and to define more clearly the concept of compensation neurosis. Thus, an early screening should be possible, which is very important, for it seems that once the accident has happened, the process of the neurosis follows very quickly. The medical interventions probably produce a strengthening of the neurosis. Personal ideas are proposed, taking into account the law in Switzerland, where compensation neurosis is not seen as an illness by the social insurance.

Key words

Chronic illness neurosis disability accident process chronic pain review 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliographie

  1. 1.
    Alaranta H., Hurme M. andMiettinen M.L.: Handicap 1 year following surgery for lumbar disc herniation: special reference to social and vocational factors.Int. Rehabil. Med. 8, 39–43, 1986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balla J.I. andMoraitis S.: Knights in armour. A follow-up study of injuries after legal settlement.Med. J. Austr. 2, 355–361, 1970.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Behan R.C. andHirschfeld A.H.: The accident process. II. Toward more rational treatment of industrial injuries.JAMA 186, 300–306, 1963.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Behan R.C. andHirschfeld A.H.: Disability without disease or accident.Arch. Environ. Health 12, 655–659, 1966.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brena S.F. andChapman S.L.: Pain and litigation.In: Textbook of pain. P. Well, R. Melzack ed., Churchill Livingstone, p. 832–839, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brissaud E.: La sinistrose.Conc. Med. 30, 114–117, 1908.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brodsky C.M.: Social psychiatric consequences of job incompetence.Compreh. Psychiatry 12, 526–536, 1971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cole E.S.: Psychiatric aspects of compensable injury.Med. J. Austr. 1, 93–100, 1970.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Delaloye R.: Contribution à l'étude des surcharges psychogènes chez les assurés. Publications Universitaires Européennes, 1973.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    DSM-III. Manuel diagnostique et statistique des troubles mentaux. Masson, 1986.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dvorak J., Valach L. undSchmid S.: Verletzungen der Halswirbelsäule in der Schweiz.Orthopäde 16, 2–12, 1987.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Enterline P.E.: Social causes of sick absence.Arch. Environ. Health 12, 466–473, 1966.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Foerster K.: Die Sogenannte «Unfallneurose»—ein umstrittener Begriff?Akt. Traumatol. 17, 219–223, 1987.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gore D.R. andSepic S.B.: Anterior cervical fusion for degenerated or proruted discs: a review of one hundred forty-six patients.Spine 9, 667–671, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hammonds W., Brena S.F. andUnikel I.P.: Compensation for work-related injuries and rehabilitation of patients with chronic pain.South. Med. J. 71, 664–666, 1978.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hirschfeld A.H. andBehan R.C.: The accident process. I. Etiological considerations of industrial injuries.JAMA 186, 193–199, 1963.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hirschfeld A.H. andBehan R.C.: The accident process. III. Disability: acceptable and unacceptable.JAMA 197, 85–89, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kind H.: Neurose und Unfallversicherung.Schweizer Arch. Neurol. Psychiat. 139, 31–41, 1988.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Krusen E.M. andFord D.E.: Compensation factor in low, back injuries.JAMA 166, 1128–1133, 1958.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leavitt F., Garron D.C., McNeill T.W. andWhisler W.W.: Organic status, psychological disturbance, and pain report characteristics in low-back-pain patients on compensation.Spine 7, 398–402, 1982.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ludwig A.M.: The disabled Society?Am. J. Psychother. 35, 5–15, 1981.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Melzack R., Katz J. andJeans M.E.: The role of compensation in chronic pain: analysis using a new method of scoring the McGill Pain Questionnaire.Pain 23, 101–112, 1985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mendelson G.: Compensation, pain complaints, and psychological disturbance.Pain 20, 169–177, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mendelson G.: Chronic pain and compensation: a review.J. Pain Sympt. Manag. 1, 135–144, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Miller H.: Accident neurosis. Lecture II.Br Méd. J. 1, 992–998, 1961.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moeri R.: Lombalgies chroniques et réinsertion professionnelle: facteurs pronostiqués. Conférence lors de la 10e journée des médecins des COMAI, St-Gall, 1988.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nelson D.: A practical approach to workers' compensation in chronic pain: analysis using a new method of scoring the McGill Pain Questionnaire.Pain 23, 101–112, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Office Fédéral des assurances sociales: Statistiques de l'invalidité, 1987.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Peck C.J., Fordyce W.E. andBlack R.G.: The effect of the pendency of claims for compensation upon behavior indicative of pain.Washington Law Review 53, 251–278, 1978.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tarsh M.J. andRoyston C.: A follow-up study of accident neurosis.Br. J. Psychiat. 146, 18–25, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Teusch L.: Ein katamnestischer Nachtrag zur Rentenneurose-studie.Fortschr. Neurol. Psychiat. 52, 113–115, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tilmann W.A. andHobbs L.E.: The accident prone automobile driver.Am. J. Psychiatry 106, 321, 1949.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Verbrugge L.M.: Females and illness: recent trends in sex differences in the United States.J. Health Soc. Behav. 17, 387–403, 1976.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Weighill V.E.: Compensation neurosis: a review of the literature.J. Psychosom. Res. 27, 97–104, 1983.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weinstein M.R.: The illness process. Psychological hazards of disability programs.JAMA 204, 209–213, 1968.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weinstein M.R.: The disability process: contribution of service agencies to client disability.Compr. Psychiatry 10, 398–405, 1969.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weinstein M.R.: The concept of the disability process.Psychosomatics 19, 94–97, 1978.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Rosatti
    • 1
  1. 1.Consultation de la douleur, Service de Psychiatrie et Psychologie MédicaleHôpital Cantonal UniversitaireGenève

Personalised recommendations