Advertisement

Observations on Body Image in Renal Patients

  • Samuel Basch
  • Fred Brown
  • Wendy Cantor

Abstract

The impact that renal disease, its sequelae and complications, and its modern technological treatments have on people so afflicted is protean and pervasive.1–4 The individual is affected in his internal or psychological being, in his external or social-behavioral being, and in his body or physical being.5 Although these factors are intertwined, this article will concentrate on the physical being, and more specifically on the body image. For the purposes of this chapter, the body image will be considered as the sum of the mental representations of the body and its organs. The body image does not necessarily coincide with the objective body, e.g., a phantom kidney or the dialysis machine could be experienced as an extension of the body and could be included in it.

Keywords

Body Image Psychosomatic Medicine Dialysis Unit Mount Sinai School Renal Patient 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abram, H. S. The psychiatrist, the treatment of chronic renal failure, and the prolongation of life. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1968, 124, 10.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Basch, S. H. The intrapsychic integration of a new organ. A clinical study of organ transplantation. Psychoanalitical Quarterly, 1973, 42 (3), 364–384.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Levy, N. B. (Ed.), Living or dying: adaptation to hemodialysis. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 1974.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Levy, N. B. The effect of psychosocial factors in the rehabilitation of “The Artificial Man.” Dialysis and Transplantation, 1979, 8 (3), 213–216.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Basch, S. H. Adaptation to dialysis and body image. Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on Nephrology. Krager, Basel, 1974, Vol. 3, 211–215.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Basch, S. H. Damaged self-esteem and depression in organ transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings, 1973, 5, 1125–1127.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tait, C. D., and Ascher, R. C. Inside-of-the-Body test. Psychosomatic Medicine, 1955 17, 139.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jolles, I. A catalogue for the qualitative interpretation of the H-T-P. Western Psychological Services, 1952, 7-9.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buck, J. N. The house-tree-person technique: a qualitative and quantitative scoring manual. International Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1948, 4, 397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buck, J. M. The house-tree-person technique: a qualitative and quantitative scoring manual. Part II. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1949, 5, 37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meyer, B. C., Brown, F., and Levine, A. Observations of the house-tree-person drawing before and after surgery. Psychosomatic Medicine, 1955, 17, 428.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meyer, B. C., Blacher, R., and Brown, F. A clinical study of psychiatric and psychological aspects of mitral surgery. Psychosomatic Medicine, 1961, 23, 3.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levy, S., Projective figure drawing. In: E. F. Hammer (Ed.), Clinical application of projective drawings. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 1967, pp. 91–95.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Samuel Basch
    • 1
  • Fred Brown
    • 2
  • Wendy Cantor
    • 3
  1. 1.The Mount Sinai School of MedicineCity University of New YorkUSA
  2. 2.The Mount Sinai School of MedicineCity University of New YorkUSA
  3. 3.New York University Medical CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations