Skip header and navigation

Refine By

3 records – page 1 of 1.

A brief history of the discovery of tick-borne encephalitis virus in the late 1930s (based on reminiscences of members of the expeditions, their colleagues, and relatives).

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature291898
Source
Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2017 10; 8(6):813-820
Publication Type
Biography
Historical Article
Journal Article
Portraits
Review
Date
10-2017
Author
Vladimir I Zlobin
Vanda V Pogodina
Olaf Kahl
Author Affiliation
Irkutsk State Medical University, Ministry of Public Health of Russian Federation, Irkutsk, Krasnogo Vosstaniya Str. 1, 664003, Russian Federation.
Source
Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2017 10; 8(6):813-820
Date
10-2017
Language
English
Publication Type
Biography
Historical Article
Journal Article
Portraits
Review
Keywords
Animals
Encephalitis Viruses, Tick-Borne - physiology
Encephalitis, Tick-Borne - history - transmission
Entomology - history
Expeditions - history
History, 20th Century
Humans
Ixodes - virology
Siberia
USSR
Virology - history
Abstract
Tick-borne encephalitis virus is the etiological agent of a severe human disease transmitted by hard ticks. It occurs in large parts of eastern, central, and western Asia and in Europe with thousands of human cases each year. Here, the discovery of the virus by Soviet scientists in the late 1930s in the Far East is described. The pioneering work involved with this discovery, which resulted in great scientific and epidemiological achievement, was undertaken under the most difficult conditions, and some of the scientists and their technical assistants paid for it with their health and even their lives. This paper briefly outlines the steps on the way that elucidated the basic etiology and eco-epidemiology of the disease, and does not omit that, as one result of the expeditions and the political situation in the former Soviet Union at that time, some scientists were sent to prison.
PubMed ID
28526419 View in PubMed
Less detail

[Emil Kraepelin's time in Dorpat - Did this stay made marks in Russian and Soviet psychiatry?]

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature293465
Source
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2017 Nov; 85(11):675-682
Publication Type
Biography
Historical Article
Journal Article
Portraits
Date
Nov-2017
Author
Birk Engmann
Holger Steinberg
Author Affiliation
Fachklinikum Brandis, Abt. für Psychosomatik und Neurologie.
Source
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2017 Nov; 85(11):675-682
Date
Nov-2017
Language
German
Publication Type
Biography
Historical Article
Journal Article
Portraits
Keywords
History, 20th Century
Humans
Psychiatry - history
Psychology, Experimental - history
Russia
USSR
Abstract
In Russia, German psychiatrist Emil Kraepelin (1856-1926) is regarded as an influential and famous personality in the history of the field. This study discusses whether it was his period in the Russian Empire in the years 1886 to 1891 when he worked at Dorpat University (today Tartu, Estonia) that raised his popularity in Russia. Our research shows that all of his writings which had been translated into Russian language derive from a period much later than Dorpat. Moreover, none of his students has ever reached a scientific position which would have enabled him to become a proponent of Kraepelin's ideas in Russia. Despite his stay at Dorpat was important for Kraepelin's scientific development, it had no major impact on Russian psychiatry.The later perception of Kraepelin in Russia and in the Soviet Union is quite inconsistent. At some point of time, his works on experimental psychology were appreciated, which was probably connected with the rise of reflexology in Russian and, especially, Soviet psychiatry. On the other hand, it was Kraepelin's merits in the classification of psychiatric diseases that have mainly been acknowledged.
Emil Kraepelin (1856–1926) gilt auch in Russland als bedeutender Psychiater. Hinzukommt, dass Kraepelin selbst im Russischen Reich tätig war – und zwar in den Jahren 1886 bis 1891 in Dorpat, dem heutigen Tartu in Estland. Wir gingen der Frage nach, ob die Popularität auf genau dieser Dorpater Zeit beruht. Es konnte gezeigt werden, dass – obwohl jene Jahre für das Schaffen Kraepelins von Bedeutung waren – sie nicht wesentlich zu seiner Popularität in Russland beitrugen. Übersetzungen von Kraepelins Schriften ins Russische liegen erst aus dem Zeitraum vor, in dem Kraepelin die Lehrstühle in Heidelberg bzw. in München innehatte. Zudem war es keinem seiner Dorpater Studenten und Doktoranden vergönnt, eine Position zu erreichen, die es ihm ermöglicht hätte, zu einem einflussreichen Protagonisten Kraepelinscher Lehren zu werden.Die Kraepelin-Rezeption war im Russischen Reich und in der Sowjetunion höchst uneinheitlich. Zeitweise wurden rückblickend seine Dorpater experimentalpsychologischen Arbeiten gewürdigt – vor allem im Zusammenhang mit dem Aufstieg der Reflexologie in der russischen und vor allem frühen sowjetischen Psychiatrie, später wurden vor allem Kraepelins Verdienste um die Klassifikation psychiatrischer Erkrankungen herausgestellt.
PubMed ID
29166691 View in PubMed
Less detail

Surgical treatment improves survival of elderly with axis fracture-a national population-based multiregistry cohort study.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature299503
Source
Spine J. 2018 10; 18(10):1853-1860
Publication Type
Clinical Study
Journal Article
Date
10-2018
Author
Anna-Lena Robinson
Claes Olerud
Yohan Robinson
Author Affiliation
Stockholm Spine Center, Löwenströmska Sjukhuset, 194 89 Upplands-Väsby, Sweden; Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Hospital, 751 85 Uppsala, Sweden. Electronic address: anna-lena.robinson@spinecenter.se.
Source
Spine J. 2018 10; 18(10):1853-1860
Date
10-2018
Language
English
Publication Type
Clinical Study
Journal Article
Keywords
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Cervical Vertebrae - injuries - surgery
Cohort Studies
Female
Hospitalization - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Male
Orthopedic Procedures - methods - mortality
Orthotic Devices
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Registries
Spinal Fractures - mortality - surgery
Survival Analysis
Sweden
Treatment Outcome
Abstract
Fractures of the axis (C2) are the most common cervical spinal injuries in the elderly population. Several authors have reported improved survival among elderly patients with C2 fractures when treated surgically.
We aimed to analyze whether surgery improves survival of elderly with C2 fractures.
An observational population-based longitudinal multi-registry study was carried out.
Swedish Patient Registry 1997 to 2014 and Swedish Cause of Death Registry 1997 to 2014 served as source of patient sample.
Survival after C2 fracture according to non-surgical and surgical treatment was the outcome measure.
We included all patients treated for the primary diagnosis of C2 fracture (10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems or ICD-10: S12.1) at an age =70 years and receiving treatment at a health-care facility. Non-surgical treatment comprises cervical collar or halo-vest treatment. Surgical treatment was identified in the Swedish patient registry extract using the Swedish classification of procedural codes. Survival was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comorbidity was determined using the Charlson Comorbidity Index.
Of the included 3,375 elderly patients with C2 fractures (43% men, aged 83±7 years), 22% were treated surgically. Surgical treatment was assigned based on age, gender, and year of treatment. The 1-year survival of 2,618 non-surgically treated patients was 72% (n=1,856), and 81% (n=614) for the 757 surgically treated (p
PubMed ID
29649609 View in PubMed
Less detail