PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P E Børdahl

Publications and source records attributed to P E Børdahl.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

[A "need not possible to describe by words"--physician refugees 1939-40].

From 1938 onwards, the predicament of Central European Jews was desperate. Norway was one of the most restrictive countries in terms of granting sanctuary to Jewish refugees; in 1939, however, director general of the Norwegian Board of Health Karl Evang (1902-81) proposed that entry permits be issued to a limited number of foreign physicians. This set off a fierce debate in newspaper, journals and medical associations. This article gives an account of that debate. The main arguments against allowing entry were fear of unemployment among Norwegian physicians and the contention that there was no need for foreign physicians in Norway. Anti-Semitic sentiments were hardly expressed. There was, however, almost no realization in Norway of the plight of the Jews, neither among the public at large nor in the medical profession. As it turned out, nine foreign physicians were allowed in, most of them from Czechoslovakia, four of them of professorial rank. Soon after the German occupation of Norway in 1940, Nazi authorities revoked their medical licenses.

Foreign Medical Graduates↗
PubMed2001

[From Problemata Aristotelis to the handbooks of Döderlein. The old book collection of the Rikshospitalet, a center of knowledge and a research tool].

The collection of old medical and scientific books from the National Hospital in Oslo is a valuable library for education and research. Most of the books are from the collections of the obstetric, paediatric and dermatological departments. The oldest date from the mid-sixteenth century, but the collection also reflects systematic purchases of medical literature after 1800. This library offers an exceptional opportunity in Norway for studying the development of medical knowledge and practice over two centuries.

Dermatology↗
PubMed2001

[Løvseth's manoeuvre in breech presentation--"best and safest"].

During the first half of 20th century, the most important goal in obstetrics was to make vaginal deliveries safer. Two Norwegian gynaecologists put their mark on this development: Christian Kielland's (1871-1941) obstetric forceps and Jørgen Løvset's (1896-1981) manoeuvre in breech presentation. Løvset made several other contributions to Norwegian and international obstetrics, in particular a series of innovations. In his old age he advocated obstetrics as a form of art and underlined the importance of learning "what is necessary to be worthy of the name of obstetrician". He experienced the dramatic change in attitude to and frequency of caesarean section.

Breech Presentation↗
PubMed2001

[With forceps all over the world--Christian Kielland and his forceps].

The history of the obstetric forceps is a colourful chapter in the history of medicine. Several hundred obstetric forceps have been described in detail, but most of them were minor modifications of the prototypes. However, the forceps invented by the Norwegian gynaecologist Christian Kielland (1871-1941) had a considerable impact upon the obstetric world during most of the 20th century. This ingenious instrument was demonstrated in Munich in 1915 and was gradually quite extensively used nearly all over the world. However, a great deal of controversy has surrounded his forceps, also in Norway.

History, 19th Century↗
PubMed2000

["Now I am humble. Indeed." From Germany to Norway in 1934].

A huge refugee problem arose when the Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933. The most acute stages were just after 1933 and from the summer of 1938. This refugee drama involved all the western countries, including Norway. This paper describes the fate of the German gynaecologist Hans Saenger (1884-1943), professor in Munich, who in 1933 was dispelled by the Nazis because of his Jewish descent. He fled to Norway in 1934 and settled in Fredrikstad. However, the attitude in Norway to refugees in general and Jews in particular was hostile, mainly because of fear of unemployment. Prejudice and xenophobia were of importance, also in the medical profession.

Foreign Medical Graduates↗
PubMed1999

[Obstetrics--a women's discipline for men].

In recent years there has been a considerable increase in the number of female gynaecologists in Norway. This contrasts sharply with the difficulties pioneering Norwegian female physicians had in entering this specialty. Three generations ago, leading Norwegian physicians argued against female gynaecologists. This article describes the controversy in 1914 when Dr. Louise Isachsen (1875-1932) claimed discrimination when she was not appointed senior registrar at the National Hospital's Midwifery Clinic. Her case was fiercely debated, not only in the medical profession, but also in newspapers and in Parliament. The clinic's director, Professor Kristian Brandt (1859-1932), found women unsuited for operative gynaecology and emergency obstetrics. We compare his arguments against female physicians with the requirements for Norwegian midwives, all female at the time. Brandt himself played a crucial role in formulating these requirements through his teaching and textbooks.

Female↗
PubMed1998

[The first cesarean section in Norway].

The first reported caesarean section in Norway was performed on 20 August 1843 by a general practitioner, Lars Thalian Backer (1812-84). The operation took place in Lardal, Vestfold County, on a 27 year old woman who had been in labour for six days. The outcome was disastrous; she was delivered of stillborn twins and died 2 1/2 days after the operation. In the 19th century, infection, bleeding and thromboembolic disease made caesarean section a dangerous operation, and only 26 such operations are known in Norway, most of them performed outside hospitals. The first caesarean section in Norway resulting in a living child was performed in 1849, but no mother survived the operation before 1890. We recapitulate the caesarean section of 1843; Dr Backer and his qualifications for operative obstetrics; and the state of instrumental and surgical obstetrics in Norway at that time.

Cesarean Section↗
PubMed1998

[The introduction of obstetric forceps in Norway--a 250-year anniversary].

Johan Gottfried Erichsen (1713-68), born in Germany and chief medical officer in Bergen from 1747, was probably the first to perform a forceps delivery in Norway, on 14 February 1748. The mother, who had been in labour for five days, survived; the child, however, did not. The obstetric forceps had been a secret in the Chamberlen family and had become more widely known only a few decades earlier. Erichsen, who was the first man-midwife in Norway, had learned obstetrics in Paris by the younger Grégoire. He mastered both the techniques of internal version and forceps delivery. This article describes Erichsen's medical and obstetric background and his qualifications for operative obstetrics. He worked in the period when the obstetric forceps changed obstetrics, birth delivery became an arena also for men, and a part of medicine. Obstetrics was established as a science and physicians had a tool whereby also children could be saved during complicated delivery.

Female↗
PubMed1998

["An appropriate forceps"--150-year anniversary of Simpson's forceps].

Despite the increasing use of caesarean section and vacuum extraction, obstetric forceps is still in frequent use in obstetric wards. There has, in fact, been an increase due to more active management of births. More than 600 obstetric forceps have been described in detail, but only three of them are in use in Norway today: Simpson's and Kielland's forceps for vertex presentation and Piper's forceps for aftercoming head in breech presentation. This year it is 150 years since James Young Simpson (1811-70) of Edinburgh presented his forceps for the first time. Simpson's forceps has been the most widely used forceps in Norway over the last 120 years. This article describes James Young Simpson, his long forceps, and its use in Norwegian obstetrics.

Female↗
PubMed1998

Strenuous working conditions and birthweight, Norway 1989.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether strenuous working conditions in pregnancy are associated with reduced birthweight. METHOD: Cross-sectional, population based study. Retrospective data collection by questionnaire to parturients in all maternity wards in Norway 16.10-26.11.89, completed before discharge from hospital, with response rate 87.2%. The study population consists of the 5388 women with singleton births, of whom 3321 were in paid work beyond the third month of pregnancy. Main outcome measures are prevalence of birthweight <2500 grams (LBW) and mean birthweight. RESULTS: Strenuous working conditions increased risk of LBW, but only for nullipara, particularly non-smoking nullipara. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for non-smoking nullipara, adjusted for age, education and income, were 0.3 (0.1,0.9) for influence on work pace, 2.8 (1.2,6.5) for exposure to heavy lifting and 2.2 (0.8,5.8) for twisting/bending. Four groups of occupations were defined according to exposure, solely based on reports from mothers with non-LBW children in order to avoid recall bias. Prevalence of LBW increased from 0.8% in the least exposed to 8.3% in the most exposed group. (Test for trend: p<0.05, after adjustment for age, education and income.) Strenuous working conditions had no independent effect on mean birthweight after adjustment for age, education, income and smoking. CONCLUSION: Strenuous work increased the risk of LBW in nulliparae, particularly in non-smokers. Lack of influence on work pace was the strongest risk factor. The preventive effect of job modification in pregnancy may parallel smoking cessation.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

[Sterilization of women. Waiting lists, surgical techniques and type of anesthesia].

The surgical and anaesthesiological techniques of tubal sterilization in Norway were studied by means of questionnaire. All hospitals returned the questionnaire. 94% of the operations were performed by gynaecologists, and in 99% of the cases by bipolar or endothermal laparoscopy. Local analgesia was used in one of the 60 hospitals. There were significant regional differences in sterilization rates and waiting time. We found no simple relation between sterilization technique and waiting lists.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

[Ambulatory laparoscopic sterilization--should local analgesia and intravenous sedation replace general anesthesia? A comparative clinical trial].

A prospective, randomized study comprised 125 outpatient laparoscopic sterilization patients who had received either general anaesthesia or local anaesthesia together with intravenous sedation. The patients who had received local anaesthesia suffered significantly less postoperative pain and sore throat. Recovery and discharge were similar in the two groups, but those given a general anaesthetic were more drowsy in the evening on the day of operation. The time spent in the operating theatre was significantly shorter for the group given local anaesthesia, and the costs were lower. The majority of patients from both groups would prefer local anaesthesia and sedation for a similar procedure in the future. We conclude that local anaesthesia by intravenous sedation is the method of choice for laparoscopic sterilization.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Laparoscopic sterilization under local or general anesthesia? A randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, acceptability, and economy of local anesthesia and intravenous (IV) sedation versus short-term general anesthesia for laparoscopic sterilization. METHODS: We randomly allocated 125 of 150 consecutively sterilized women to either local or general anesthesia. No women were excluded, but 25 chose not to participate. The women were interviewed before surgery, and they returned a standardized questionnaire after discharge from the hospital. All laparoscopic tubal sterilizations were performed by senior gynecologists. Midazolam was used as premedication. In the local-anesthesia group, lidocaine with adrenaline was infiltrated infraumbilically and bupivacaine was applied to each tube. Midazolam and alfentanil were used as IV sedation. In the general-anesthesia group, intubation anesthesia was accomplished with alfentanil and propofol; atracurium was used for muscle relaxation. RESULTS: In the local-anesthesia group, operation time was shorter, perioperative discomfort was modest, and the costs of equipment were lower than in the general-anesthesia group. There was less postoperative abdominal pain and less need of analgesics, and the patients were more awake in the evening. The rise in heart rate and blood pressure were higher in the local-anesthesia group, and external oxygen was necessary to avoid apnea. Anesthetic surveillance was therefore mandatory. CONCLUSIONS: Local analgesia was highly acceptable to the majority of patients as well as to the gynecologists. The operation time was less, postoperative recovery was quicker, and the women were less bothered by abdominal pain and sore throat. There was a substantial reduction in anesthesia costs. Anesthetic surveillance during surgery was necessary.

Adult↗