16 FNN360062.indd

In the 20th century the term hysteria declined and the interest in the hysteria-related diseases decreased in comparison to the florid period of studies that was inspired by Charcot’s legacy in the second half of the 19th century. Scientific interest has once again increased in the 21st century, and dissociative and somatoform disorders (previously indicated as hysteria or hysterical neurosis) have come to be regarded as conditions that are known to be much more prevalent than formerly estimated. Available current epidemiological data from several countries on different continents (adopting DSM criteria for diagnosis) suggest not only that the prevalence is probably similar, but also that there is a consistency in their clinical manifestation around the world and across different cultures, social classes, and institutional settings. In line with this uniformity, and also with Charcot’s concept of hysteria as a functional disorder, neuroimaging studies suggest that for some of these disorders, there might be some changes of neural connectivity in specific pathways at the origin of the behavioral aspects. Only large-scale multidisciplinary transcultural studies can improve the research and the development of therapeutic interventions for these disorders. © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel Historical Notes In the 19th century, the science of hysteria had its center of reference in Charcot’s school in the Pitié-Salpetrière clinic in Paris, which is no wonder as Jean-Martin Charcot (1825–1893) was the first to consider hysteria as a ‘dynamic’ state of mind more than a structural disease of the brain. Fifty percent of the women in the Victorian era were believed to have suffered from hysteria, and a majority of them carried a bottle of smelling salts in their handbag (in case they were overwhelmed by emotions). However, the diagnosis of hysteria was almost entirely discredited or forgotten in the early 20th century. There were several reasons for the negative development of the scientific popularity of the hysterical disorders. The ‘Nancy quarrel’ (see Piechowski and Bogousslavsky [this vol., pp. 56– 64]) gave discredit to Charcot’s model of hysteria. In addition, malingering (also, at least partly, induced by medical suggestion) and the description of hysteric symptoms under the label ‘Briquet’s syndrome’ or ‘neurasthenia’ became an alternative diagnosis. Furthermore, the interest in hysteBogousslavsky J (ed): Hysteria: The Rise of an Enigma. Front Neurol Neurosci. Basel, Karger, 2014, vol 35, pp 169–180 DOI: 10.1159/000360062 Hysteria around the World Antonio Carota a, b · Pasquale Calabrese b a Center for Brain and Nervous System Diseases, GSMN Neurocenter, Genolier Clinic, Genolier Swiss Medical Network, Genolier , and b Department of Molecular and Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Basel, Basel ,