Watching football yesterday, I realized some of the injuries we see today must have happened a few hundred years ago as well. But, what would your life be like if this type of now 'common' injury were to occur a few hundred years ago.
As an addition to this because I've always been curious: how often would something like this happen in the middle of a battle? Would it be something a soldier would push through and continue fighting? What about during a long campaign?
I'd like to step this back even further. Would it be possible to even diagnose a tear like this at this point in history, without the ability to image the muscle, and if a muscle tear couldn't be diagnosed what would have the patient be told happened to them?
Another question, what was the state of surgery like back then? Id imagine quite terrible.
Doing just a bit of research I've come across "A treatise on the operations of surgery" by Samuel Sharp, written in 1740. Chapter 2 describes the partial or full tear of tendons. In the text the author disagrees with a popular method of treating tendons. He writes,
"To obviate this mischief, it has been hitherto an indisputable Maxim in Surgery, to cut the Tendon quite through, and immediately afterwards perform the Su ture; but I do not think this Practice ad vise- able, for though the division of the Tendon affords present ease, yet the Flexion only of the Joint will have the same effect, if it be a Wound of a Flexor Tendon;..."
Common practice it would seem for partial tears would be to cut the tendon completely sew it together and immobilize the joint for the period of time necessary for the tendon to heal. Our boy Sam disagrees with this practice and argues that it would be better to simply immobilize the joint and let it heal. This method would not require sutchers, and the threat of the tendon slipping (and thus failing to heal).
He goes on to describe methods of sewing completely torn Tendons.
He describes symptoms of inflammatory localized pain that would indicate a tear of a tendon.
Besides being extraordinarily painful if you were a laymen, obviously this would severely impact your ability to work. Time you would be out of work would be between 3 to 6 weeks. This is also talking specifically about tendons and not ligaments so the time to heal may be increased.
"During the Cure the Dressings must be superficial, and the parts kept steady with Paste-board and Bandage: The small Tendons re-unite in three weeks, but the 'tendo Achillis requires six at least."
I hope this helps. It helps mold the picture of how injuries like this were operated on but does not do a very good job of explaining quality of life afterwards. If the tendon didnt heal use of that particular limb would be significantly reduced. The source also doesn't go into depth about the extent of immobilization. A wealthy land owner could probably manage his land from his bedside but a layman would fare much worse at least in a rural setting.
Link to the source.
https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=y9FEAAAAcAAJ&rdid=book-y9FEAAAAcAAJ&rdot=1&pli=1
Hi, friends,
Welcome to /r/AskHistorians! This is a subreddit where people with questions about history can get answers about history from those with expert-level knowledge in the field.
We ask that answers be in-depth, comprehensive, and rooted in current historical scholarship in the topic at hand.
There are plenty of places on and off reddit to share information about your own injuries, your med school training, and your favorite sports movies. This thread is a place to answer what it would have been like to receive and deal with a major knee-ish injury in the 1700s.
While we wait for an answer from someone with that level of knowledge, you might be interested in some past AH answers on what it was like to live with various disabilities and health conditions in the past!
Thanks!