Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Rest of injured parts and of diseased bodies is probably the oldest and most valuable of all methods of treatment, with the possible exception of psychotherapy. Nevertheless we seem from time to time to forget that this therapeutic method—like all others—may lead to untoward results when utilized either injudiciously or excessively. Within the past three decades there has developed a tendency to regard prolonged rest in bed and complete abstinence from normal economic activity as the sine qua non of the proper management of the more serious forms of heart disease. My purpose in the present report is to review certain experimental and clinical observations which seem to indicate that this concept may be unsound. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, while the basic framework for our present understanding of heart disease was being fashioned, little emphasis was placed on the desirability of rest as it is now employed. Such
Tinsley R. Harrison (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: