| |
Back
to menu
Vol. 10 No. 1
Treatment of Hyperemesis Gravidarum Y Hypnosis
Karl Fuchs, M.D.
Faculty of Medicine Technion-Israel Institute
of Technology Haifa, Israel. Nausea and
vomiting are the most common complaints in the first fourteen to
sixteen weeks of pregnancy. The term hyperemesis gravidarum should
be reserved for the most severe forms of intractable vomiting (Taylor,
1962) when it is associated with signs of disturbed nutritional
status-such as dehydration, loss in body weight, elevated temperature,
irregular pulse rate, and jaundice (Adams, Gordon, & Combes, 1968).
Several cases of death due to hyperemesis gravidarum
were reported by Tillman (1934), Merger and Levy (1955), Sheehan
(1961), and Von Bayer (1965). On the other hand, Brandes (1967)
observed that the absence of vomiting in the first trimester of
pregnancy is associated with a higher abortion rate. This finding
suggests that the emesis gravidarum (as opposed to hyperemesis gravidarum)
is organic in nature. Thus, in most cases of nausea, there is no
need for any special treatment. In sever cases, however, the patient
needs medical care and sometimes hospitalisation is required.
According to Hellman and Pritchard (1971), between
one to five patients per 1000 suffering from gravidas vomit so severely
that they require hospitalisation. In these sever cases, many different
methods of treatment such as vitamins (C, B1, B6, K); steroids;
glucose; insulin; antihistamines; chlorpromazine; phenothiazine;
meclesine; A.C.T.H.; intravenous administration of calcium; placebo;
and gastric tube feeding (Weinfield, Dibay, Burchel, Millerick &
Kennedy, 1977) have been advised (Hart, McConnell & Picket, 1944;
Kotz & 'Kaufman, 1940; Schoeneck, 1942; Shute, 1941; Sussman, 1937;
Weinstein, Mitchell & Sustendal, 1943).
Since these treatments have not always given satisfactory
results, the present authors decided to use hypnosis, which has
been highly recommended (Von Bayer, 1965; Giorlando & Mascola, 1957)
in the treatment of severe hyperemesis cases. This method of treatment
was introduced in cases where conventional treatment (that is, drug
therapy, isolation by hospitalisation, intravenous administration
of fluids, and the use of placebo) had failed in the hope of bringing
satisfactory results (Fuchs, Brandes, & Peretz, 1963; 1967).
Etiology
The etiology of hyperemesis is still obscure, but
it is interesting to note that in primitive cultures, excessive
morning sickness is unknown. It is only after civilization reaches
these people that pregnant women start suffering from this complaint
(Peretz, 1958). There is little doubt that, in hyperemesis gravidarum,
emotional factors may play and important role.
According to psychoanalytic theories, hyperemesis
gravidarum is an exaggeration of the "oral symptom" in pregnancy.
Fairweather (1968), in an excellent review of different
theories, discussed the "Reflex-theory" due to uterine displacement;
or abnormalities of the ovum such as hydramnion, mole, and twins;
or a reflex to inflammation in the cervix. In conclusion he stated
that "There seems little doubt that psychiatric factors must be
impoicated in at least a proportion of cases of hyperemesis gravidarum,
and in the author's opinion the proportion is quite high-even as
much as 75-80 per cent of all cases". (p. 164).
Copeman (1875) treated severe hypermemesis by cervix
dilation. Kaltenbach (1891) concluded that the "vomiting of pregnancy
is usually a manifestation of neurosis, somewhat allied to hysteria
and readily amenable to suggestive treatment" (Kaltenbach, 1891,
cited in Fairweather, 1968, p140).
Different explanations were given as background to
the psychic reasons for hyperemesis gravidarum. One explanation
is derived from the theory of "oral impregnantion". A second explanation
is from another analytical theory that explains vomiting as "subconscious
suicide." The accepted belief in the Western culture is that expression
of disgust and rejection is situated in the digestive tract-therefore,
the antagonism to pregnancy is expressed by vomiting. This is also
reflected in idioms of everday use such as, "You disgust me," "You
make me sick," etc.
Confirmation of the existence of a psychic factor
can also be found by empirical clinical observation and experience.
It is sufficient to admit the patient to the hospital, change her
surroundings, and give her any kind of medication causing cessation
of nausea and vomiting. As soon as she returns home, however, vomiting
will often re-occur (Peretz, 1958). The importance of the psychological
factors in the causation of hyperemesis gravidarum is indicated
by the disappearance of symptoms when the patient is separated from
the family and its influences and the frequent relapses caused by
her returning to this environment.
While emesis in pregnancy is regarded primarily as
organic-physiologic in background, many authors point out the role
of psychic factors involved in severe vomiting in pregnancy. According
to Hellman and Pritchard (1971), the etiology of hyperemesis is
based on the continuous flow of chorionic gonadotropin into the
bloodstream combined with the metabolic and endocrinological changes
in normal pregnancy. These authors also observe, however, that most
cases of severe nausea and vomiting in pregnancy are neuroses as
a result of emotional imbalance.
Chertok (1965) publishes an excellent paper of historical
importance on placebo effects in the vomiting of pregnancy (Chertok,
Mondzain & Bonnau, 1963). Heineman (1965) connected vomiting in
pregnancy to an oral symptom and regression.
According to Willson, Beecham and Carrington (1963),
the etiology is not clear. The symptoms appear at a time when the
trophoblastic tissue activity reaches its peak and are severe, while
the level of gonadotropins is highest-in normal pregnancy-and will
increase with higher gonadotropin activity in hydatiform mole. It
is possible that "several substances appearing during growth and
destruction" (p. 343) are responsible for the vomiting. At the same
time, Willson et al (1963) think that severe hyperemesis may develop
as a result of emotional involvements that intensify ordinary nausea.
G. Farkas and G. Farkas, Jr. (1972) summarize their
views on the etiology as follows:
- Hyperemesis gravidarum represents a psychogenic disease and
not a somatogenic one. The toxic-metabolic symptoms occur as a
result of vomiting.
- Hyperemesis gravidarum represents a "protest reaction against"
(Roemer) pregnancy, as a result of psychical conflicts, especially
from familial and home environments.
- Modern psychotropic drugs may influence to a certain extent
the psychical condition of the pregnant woman but they are not
able to eliminate the causes of the surrounding environment determinant
for hyperemesis gravidarum (p. 177).
METHODS
Subjects
During the years 1965 to 1977, 204 patients with severe
hyperemesis gravidarum were referred to the present authors for
treatment. Of the 204 patients, 201 patients started on conventional
medical therapy. (The pregnancy of three patient was terminated
prior to treatment because of psychotic disease).
The criteria for admission for treatment were as follows:
(a) sever vomiting (fifteen to twenty times per day); (b) fluid
and electrolytes imbalance expressed by increased hematocrit, alkalosis,
hypokalemia, urine ketosis (2 + acetone), and/or clinical dehydration;
and (c) loss of weight (5-10kg.)
Out of 201 patients treated by drugs, 36 were cured,
5 improved significantly, while 160 failed to respond adequately.
Thus, the favourable response to drugs was 20.4 percent.
Out of the 160 patients where conventional medical
treatment failed, 22 patients (13.7%) refused hypnotherapy and the
pregnancy was terminated in 4 of the 22 cases because of severity
of symptoms.
The remaining 138 patients (86.3%) up to gestational
age of sixteen weeks were treated with hypnotherapy. Out of 138
patients, 64 women were primipara and 74 multipara. Out of 138 patients,
87 were treated in groups together with women preparing for natural
childbirth.
Out of the fifty-one patients treated by hypnosis
individually, twenty-four patients were primiparas and twenty-seven
patients were multiparas. In the group hypnotherapy, eighty-seven
patients were treated; out of these, forty patients were primparas
and forty-seven were multiparas. Twenty-five patients were under
twenty years of age; forty-six patients were between ages of twenty-one
and twenty-five; forty-eight patients were between the ages of twenty-six
and thirty; and only nineteen were over the age of thirty.
The selection of patients for hypnotherapy was based
on (a) exclusion of psychotic patients, (b) the agreement or refusal
of the patient of hypnotherapy, and (c) a simple suggestions test
like the postural sway test or the semaphore arm test (imagination
of one arm being light and lifting up while the other arm is heavy
and dropping down). In this clinical study, standard suggestibility
scales were not used.
Procedure
Trance was induced by permissive approaches, such
as relaxation, arm levitation or eye fixation, suggesting relaxation,
comfort, and general well being. Negative ideas, i.e. pain, vomiting,
nausea, were never mentioned during the hypnotic sessions. In most
cases, one to three sessions lasting 45 to 60 minutes each brought
the desired results. In very rare cases, a more authoritative approach
was used. There were cases in which the patient was suffering with
severe vomiting, depression and despair, and only after a single
session the patient improved considerably. Several patients continued
ambulatory hypnotherapy after a successful first treatment in the
hospital.
Group treatment was used for patients who admitted
while the present authors were working with a group. If the patient
was admitted at a time when the present authors were not working
with a group, individual therapy was used. The severity of the case
played no role in deciding whether group or individual hypnotherapy
was needed.
The following three cases illustrate the different
hypnotic methods used-hypnotic relaxation, hypnotic imagination,
and group hypnotherapy.
CASE HISTORIES
Case 1 (Hypnotic Relaxation Method)
The patient, aged thirty-five, had two normal deliveries,
the last one occurring twelve years earlier, followed by five therapeutic
abortions because of severe hyperemesis. Upon admission at eight
weeks pregnant, she was again suffering from severe hyperemesis
and had lost 11 kg during the previous three to four weeks. According
to the patient, "no treatment had brought any relief," and she was
not prepared to continue with the pregnancy. In the hope to gain
time and delay the patient's final decision for an abortion, the
present authors explained to her that in her present condition there
was no possibility of performing a therapeutic abortion. Treatment
by hypnosis was suggested for one week in order to give her time
to regain her strength and enable her at a later stage to decide
to undergo a D and C. Because the patient had no hypnotherapy in
the past, it was decided to try this approach in order to dissuade
her from the course of abortion. She had three hypnotic sessions
during that one week. The induction was passive-permissive relaxation
method by arm levitation and the suggestion given to the patient
was only relaxation, calm and well-being. At the end of one week
her physical condition improved and she stated that, since she was
feeling well, she wishes to continue the pregnancy. The patient
had a normal delivery under self-hypnosis.
Case 2(Group Hypnotherapy)
A patient, aged twenty-one, primigravida, was sent
to the hospital because of abdominal pain, vomiting, and fainting
and was referred to the present authors as a suspected ectopic pregnancy.
Upon examination, the patient was found to be in a very bad general
condition, weighing 40kg. From her past history, it was learned
that she had been married for one year and had suffered from dyspareunia.
Her last menstrual period was two months prior to admission. She
had been unwell for the last month, and, ten days before her admission,
low abdominal pain had occurred and had worsened. Upon examination,
a normal intrauterine pregnancy of seven weeks was found. No acute
abdominal pathology was found. Ambulatory treatment by hypnosis
was decided upon, and the patient took part, on the same day, in
a group session of pregnant women being prepared for natural childbirth.
She integrated easily into the group, entered a medium trance, and
received the same positive suggestions as the other members of the
group. The induction was performed by the eye fixation method. The
suggestions given were the same as those given for natural childbirth:
You are happy to be pregnant…..your pregnancy is progressing well…….watch
your breathing…..in and out………relax……count your breathing………that
is right…………you are going deeper and deeper…………you are looking forward
to your delivery……….it will be a beautiful experience……….
The next day she reported considerable improvement
and after one more session, one week later, she was completely free
of vomiting and abdominal pain. At the beginning of week fifteen
of gestation, slight vomiting re-occurred. At her request, she participated
in one more group session. This time vomiting ceased immediately
and she felt well up to the time of delivery. She was delivered
of a boy weighing 3900 gms. Delivery was by forceps because of a
prolonged second stage.
RESULTS
The hypnotherapeutic response was graded on a four-point
scale as (a) excellent: no vomiting, no nausea; (b) good: no vomiting,
nausea present; (c) poor: vomiting less than six times a day, nausea
improvement; or (d) failure: no improvement. The results are summarized
in Table 1.
Out of fifty-one gravidas patients treated individually,
thirty-five (68.5%) showed excellent and two (3.9%) good response
to treatment by hypnosis. Fourteen (25.5%) patients showed poor
response to treatment and one patient (2.3%) could not be hypnotized
in spite of repeated trial sessions. Out of eighty-seven gravida
patients treated in groups, excellent results were obtained with
sixty-one patients (70.1%), good with twenty-four patients (27.6%),
and poor with two patients (2.3%).
It is obvious from these results that there is no
significant influence of parity, age, or number of sessions upon
the therapeutic effect.
The Psychodynamics of Hyperemesis Gravidarum
The psychological processes of pregnancy take place
on three levels: the biological level, the emotional level, and
within the boundaries of the outside world surrounding the expectant
mother.
The psychic mechanism uses the organic processes of
pregnancy to give an outlet to emotional tensions existing in the
woman before her pregnancy. Each woman brings into pregnancy certain
emotional factors and conflicts related to her condition as a whole
and with the organic manifestations characteristic of pregnancy.
On the other hand, various typical groups of organic pregnancy processes
also mobilize definite emotional attitudes that now emerges openly.
table 1. RESULTS OF THERAPY
Individual Therapy 51 patients |
Excellent |
35 patients |
= 68.6% |
| |
Good |
2 " |
=3.9% |
| |
|
|
-------------- |
| |
|
|
72.5% |
Group therapy 87 patients |
Excellent |
61 patients |
=70.1% |
| |
Good |
24 " |
=27.6% |
| |
|
|
-------------- |
| |
|
|
97.7% |
| |
Poor |
2 " |
=2.3% |
| Explanation of data: |
|
|
|
|
| |
Excellent: |
No vomiting, no nausea |
| |
Good: |
No vomiting, nausea present |
| |
Poor: |
Vomiting, less than 6 times a day, nausea, improvement |
| |
Failure: |
No improvement |
Pregnancy phantasies fill the psychic life of children from earliest childhood. These phantasies in pregnancy, generated from ideas in childhood and puberty that are connected with oral intake and expulsion, can be revived through the psychologically determined proneness to nausea which is, in certain cases, pathologically exaggerated.
This exaggeration of the "oral symptom" in pregnancy (hyperemesis) may appear in cases where there are overt or covert negative feelings towards the husband, parents, the pregnancy as a whole, or the fetus specifically. Together and as a result of these hostile feelings, the patient will also form deep-seated guilt feelings with tendencies toward self-punishment. If the unconscious tendencies are accompanied by a conscious counter-wish to keep the child, there develops an inner conflict that transforms the psychosomatic process into neurosis, usually hysterical (Deutsch, 1945).
The other oral symptoms-excessive intake of food (which usually alternates with complete lack of appetite), heart-burn, extreme sensitivity to disgust to certain food and on the other hand, the craving of the pregnant woman for special dishes (Thretowan, 1972)-also express the same inner ambivalent conflict between her wish to destroy and her wish to preserve her child. The excessive eating of food such as fruit, cucumbers, fish etc., in pregnancy is a symbolic unconscious repetition of the act of fruition with the reserve aim of the wish for cannibalistic destruction. In some women, the conflict between the aims of rejection and preservation is postponed to a later phase of pregnancy and takes place in different organs (anal, genital). Constipation and diarrhea in pregnancy, as well as prolonged second stage delivery are part of this conflict. On the other hand, if the rejection symptoms increase, they may bring about premature birth or abortion.
In her subconscious, the woman identifies her child as a parasite-"endoparasite" as quoted by Ferenczi (1952)-using her body as host, and she refuses to be exploited by its existence. As long as the mother is not willing to give-in a positive masochistic sense-out of love and identification with the fetus, she is not yet capable of cancelling the parasitic conception of the fetus (the "masochistic giving" is here a typical sign of femininity and motherhood in all phases of fruition).
If the pregnant woman is deprived of love and unfulfilled, her willingness to give might deteriorate to the extent that her somatic feelings will take on the form of rejection. Her early engrams will decide whether the rejection will be oral, anal, or genital.
The protest against biological" giving" may take many different forms. If it is accompanied by aggressive aims, rejection will be of a severe aggressive character and will threaten the lives of both the foetus and the mother.
DISCUSSION
Analyzing the age influence on the present results, it was found that there was no pattern in hypnotherapeutic response that could be attributed to a specific age group. Analyzing the influence of parity, and equal distribution of positive and negative results was found. It was expected that the primipara patients would be more susceptible to treatment because of no previous negative experiences and memories. Surprisingly, this point could not be proved from the data.
The number of sessions per patient had no significant influence on the hypnotherapeutic results. Patients were observed who were almost cured in their first two sessions while other patients showed a poor response to treatment even after three or four sessions.
The most significant single result found in the analysis of the present data appears to be the surprising difference in group therapy success rate versus individual treatment. Of patients who received individual hypnotherapy, 25.5 percent showed poor response as compared to 2.3 percent of patients who received group hypnotherapy. Some procedural details should be kept in mind: (a) the group and individual hypnotherapy was done in all cases by the same therapist; (b) the decision for individual or group hypnotherapy was made only by the therapist; (c) the patient chosen for group hypnotherapy was never told of the possibility of individual hypnotherapy, and vice versa; and (d) in both kinds of treatment, the patient was given the same introduction and explanation about the nature of hypnosis, and the same induction method was used. This uniform introduction and induction given to all patients, in both kinds of treatment, prevented the shaping of patients' preference to one or the other possibility. These facts support the present authors' presumption that the only reason for the differences was group therapy versus individual therapy.
King (1955) suggests the following treatment formula, which also points to the emotional factor:
Cure = t + u+ x
ph + ps
t = time (spent by physician) (it is always time-consuming for the doctor, but it is his most effective weapon to date).
u = understanding (of the patient by the physician, sympathy and support).
x = medication (one of the many drugs, inclusive placebos).
ph = physiological factor (nature as yet unknown).
ps = psychic factor (adverse psychological factors).
Theoretically, the best treatment for hyperemesis could be psychotherapy by an experienced psychiatrist, which would require many sessions extending over weeks or even months. Practically, however, the patient suffering from severe hyperemesis requires instant treatment and should be treated as an emergency and helped in a matter of days or even hours to avoid complications which might endanger her well-being or even her life.
Treatment by medication presents a certain danger, and warnings are voiced, more and more often, about possible drug related teratogenic influence in the first trimester of pregnancy (Sadusk, 1966; as opposed by Yerushalmy & Milkovich, 1965). Hypnosis, on the other hand, is a treatment that brings the desired results in a very short time, and contrary to treatment by medication, presents no danger to the pregnant woman or to her foetus. Naturally, treatment with hypnosis will relieve the symptoms only, but symptom substitution rarely, if ever, occurs (Kline, 1956; Shaffer, 1956).
Remy, Wolff, Gillet, Ritter and Muller (1972) conclude that "Hyperemesis gravidarum constitutes one of the most frequently encountered symptoms in the first three months of pregnancy. A psychological method of approach, more specifically, hypnosis is worth attempting….. The action of the treatment is relatively rapid" (p. 170).
According to Giorlando (1962), the suggestions given in hypnosis last for a period of a month or two or even longer, He mentioned as disadvantage of this method, the time required for treatment (a session lasts for about an hour or more), as opposed to treatment by medication which is administered in a matter of minutes, sometimes by nurses or other auxiliary personnel. He also stated that hypnosis may cause apprehension in the pregnant women.
During recent years, by including these women suffering from hyperemesis gravidarum in ambulatory group hypnotherapy sessions, the present authors were able to overcome this and other disadvantages since (a) very often hospitalisation was not necessary; (b) treatment was given to a number of patients simultaneously; (c) the women feels safer, less lonely, and the common motivation of the patients consolidated the psychotherapeutic effects, making treatment easier and more efficient.
In conclusion, the present authors believe that hypnotherapy should be regarded as the treatment of choice in hyperemesis gravidarum. The method can be easily practiced by any skilled physician who has been trained in medical hypnosis.
REFERENCES
Adams, R.H., Gordon, J., & Combs, B. (1968). Hyperemesis gravidarum: I. Evidence of
Hepatic dysfunction. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 31, 659-664.
Brandes, J.M. (1967). First-trimester nausea and vomiting as related to outcome of
Pregnancy. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 30, 427-431.
Chertok, L.A. (1965). A historical note on placebo effects in vomiting of pregnancy.
Journal of the American Medical Association, 194. 473.
Chertok, L., Mondzain, M.L., & Bonnaud, M. (1963). Vomiting and the wish to have a child,
Psychosomatic Medicine, 24, 13-18.
Copeman, E.A. (1875). A novel treatment of obstinate vomiting in pregnancy. British
Medical Journal, May, 637-638.
Deutsch, E. (1945).
Psychology of women (vol. II). New York: Grune & Stratton Inc.,
126-201.
Fairweather, D.V.I. (1968). Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy.
American Journal of
Obstetrics and Gynecology, 102, 135-175.
Farkas, G., & Farkas, G. Jr (1972). The psychogenic etiology of the hyperemesis gravidarum.
In N. Morris (Ed.)
Psychosomatic medicine in obstetrics and gynaecology. Third
International Congress, London. 1971. Basel: S Karger, 175-177.
Ferenczi, S. (1952). First contribution to psychoanalysis. Hogarth Press.
Fuchs, K., Brandes, J., & Peretz, A (1967).
Treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum by
Hypnosis. Harefuah, 72, 374-378.
Fuchs, K., Brandes, J., & Peretz, A. (1962). The use of hypnosis in obstetrics.
Harefuah,
64, 4-8.
Giorlando, S.W. (1962). The use of hypnotherapy in hyperemesis gravidarum. In W.S.
Kroger (Ed.)
Psychosomatic obstetrics, gynecology and endocrinology.
Springfield IL; Charles Thomas, 127-130.
Giorlando, S.W. & Mascola, R.F. (1957). The treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum with
hypnotherapy.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 73, 444-447.
Hart, B.F., McConnell, W.T., & Pickett, A.N. (1944). Vitamin and endocrine therapy in
nausea and vomiting of pregnancy.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology,
48, 251-253.
Heiman, M.A., (1965). A psychoanalytic view of pregnancy. In J.J. Rovinsky & A.F.
Guttmacher (Eds.) Medical, surgical and gynaecologic complications of
Pregnancy (2nd. Ed.), Baltimore: Willimas & Wilkins, 473-511.
Hellman, L.M., & Pritchard, J.A. (1971). (with collaboration of R.M. Wynnn) William's
Obstetrics (14th ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Kline, M.V. (1956). Symptom control by direct suggestion including the control of pain.
In R.M. Dorcus (Ed.) Hypnosis and its therapeutic applications. New York;
McGraw-Hill, 8/1-8/22.
Kotz, J., & Kaufman, M.S. (1940). Adrenal cortex in the treatment of nausea and vomiting in
Pregnancy.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 39, 449-452.
Kroger, W.S. & Fezler, W.D.(1976). Hypnosis and behavior modification: Imagery
Conditioning. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
Merger, R., & Levy, J. (1955). Pathogenie et traitement de la maldie gravidique precoce.
Bulletin of the Federal Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 7, 234-270.
Peretz, A. (1958). Psychosomatic aspects of gravidity and labour. Harefuah, 54, 1-5.
Remy, R., Wolff, F., Gillet, J.L., Ritter, M., & Muller, P. (1972). Hyperemesis gravidarum
Therapy; From medical therapeutics to hypnosis. In N. Morris (Ed.),
Psychosomatic medicine in obstetrics and gynecology. Third International Congress,
London, 1972. Basel: S. Karger, 169-171.
Sadusk.J.F., Jr. (1966). Warning on nausea drugs. Briefs, 30, 7.
Schoeneck. F.J. (1942). Gonadotropic hormone concentration in emesis gravidarum.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 43, 308-312.
Shaffer. G.W. (1956). Hypnosis in supportive therapy. In R.M. Dorcus (Ed.) Hypnosis and
Its therapeutic applications. New York: McGraw-Hill, 9/1-9/24.
Sheehan, H.L. (1961). Jaundice in pregnancy.
American Journal of Obstetrics and
Gynecology, 81, 427-440.
Shute, E. Hormone (1944). Management of the nausea and vomiting of early pregnancy.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 42, 490-492.
Sussman, W. (1962). The use of parathyroid extract in the control of early nausea and
vomiting of pregnancy.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 33.
761-771.
Taylor, H.P. (1962). Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: Hyperemesis gravidarum. In
W.S. Kroger (Ed.), Psychosomatic obstetrics, gynecology and endocrinology.
Springfield. IL: Charles C. Thomas, 117-127.
Tillman, A.J.B. (1934) Two fatal cases of hyperemesis gravidarum with retinal
Hemorrhages.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 27, 240-247.
Thretowan, H., & Dickens, G. (1972). Psychosomatic medicine in obstetrics and
Gynecology, 3rd International Congress, London, 1971. Basel: S. Karger, 126-129.
Von Bayer, H. (1965). Psychosomatische faktoren bei der hyperemesis gravidarum und
Bei der fehlgeburt. In Gauthier-Villars (Ed.) 1er Congress International de
Medicine Psychosomatique et Maternite, Paris, 461-463.
Weinfield, R.H., Dubay, M., Burchell, R.C. , Millerick, J.D., & Kennedy. A.T. (1977).
Pregnancy associated with anorexia and starvation.
American Journal of Obstetrics
And Gynecology, 129, 698-699.
Weinstein, B.B., Mitchell, G.J., & Sustendal, G.F,. (1943). Clinical experiences with
Pyridoxine hydrochloride in treatment of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 46, 283-285
Wilson, J.R., Beecham, C.T., & Carrington, E.R. (1963). Obstetrics and gynecology
(2nd ed.). St Louis: C.V.Mosby.
Yerushalmy, J., & Milkovich. L. (1965). Evaluation of the teratogenic effect.
Back
to menu
|