Search

Your search keyword '"Scott, T. L."' showing total 4 results
Start Over Author "Scott, T. L." Publication Year Range Last 10 years
4 results on '"Scott, T. L."'

3. Managing the transition to non-driving in patients with dementia in primary care settings: facilitators and barriers reported by primary care physicians.

Author

Scott, T. L., Liddle, J., Pachana, N. A., Beattie, E., Mitchell, G. K., and Pachana, Nancy

Abstract

Objectives: This research addresses dementia and driving cessation, a major life event for affected individuals, and an immense challenge in primary care. In Australia, as with many other countries, it is primarily general practitioners (GPs) who identify changes in cognitive functioning and monitor driving issues with their patients with dementia. Qualitative evidence from studies with family members and other health professionals shows it is a complicated area of practice. However we still know little from GPs about how they manage the challenges with their patients and the strategies that they use to facilitate driving cessation.Methods: Data were collected through five focus groups with 29 GPs at their primary care practices in metropolitan and regional Queensland, Australia. A semi-structured topic guide was used to direct questions addressing decision factors and management strategies. Discussions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed.Results: Regarding the challenges of raising driving cessation, four key themes emerged. These included: (i) Considering the individual; (ii) GP-patient relationships may hinder or help; (iii) Resources to support raising driver retirement; and (iv) Ethical dilemmas and ethical considerations. The impact of discussing driving cessation on GPs is discussed.Conclusions: The findings of this study contribute to further understanding the experiences and needs of primary care physicians related to managing driving retirement with their patients with dementia. Results support a need for programs regarding identification and assessment of fitness to drive, to upskill health professionals and particularly GPs to manage the complex issues around dementia and driving cessation, and explore cost-effective and timely delivery of such support to patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. Effect of increasing initial implant dosage on feedlot performance and carcass characteristics of long-fed steer and heifer calves1,2

Author

Hilscher, F. H., Streeter, M. N., Vander Pol, K. J., Dicke, B. D., Cooper, R. J., Jordon, D. J., Scott, T. L., Vogstad, A. R., Peterson, R. E., Depenbusch, B. E., Erickson, G. E., Hilscher, F. H., Streeter, M. N., Vander Pol, K. J., Dicke, B. D., Cooper, R. J., Jordon, D. J., Scott, T. L., Vogstad, A. R., Peterson, R. E., Depenbusch, B. E., and Erickson, G. E.

Abstract

Three experiments evaluated initial implant strategies for finishing cattle. In Exp. 1, heifers (n = 1,405; initial BW = 282 kg) were given (1) Revalor-IH followed by Revalor-200 (REV-IH/200), (2) Revalor-H followed by Revalor-200 (REV-H/200), or (3) Revalor-200 followed by Revalor-200 (REV-200/200). Intake, ADG, and G:F were not affected (P ≥ 0.14) by implant strategies, nor were HCW and LM area (P ≥ 0.16). Percent USDA Choice was greater (P < 0.01) for Rev-IH/200 compared with Rev-H/200 and Rev-200/200. Experiment 2 used steers (n = 1,858; initial BW = 250 kg) given (1) Revalor-IS reimplanted with Revalor-200 (Rev-IS/200), (2) Revalor-XS followed by Revalor-IS (Rev-XS/IS), (3) Revalor-XS followed by Revalor-S (Rev-XS/S), or (4) Revalor-XS followed by Revalor-200 (Rev-XS/200). Implanting strategies did not affect (P ≥ 0.32) DMI or G:F. Carcass traits were not different (P ≥ 0.18) among treatments, except steers implanted with Rev-XS/200 had greater (P < 0.01) LM area. In Exp. 3, steers (n = 1,408; initial BW = 305 kg) were given (1) Rev-IS/200, (2) Rev-200/200, or (3) Rev-XS/200. Gain and G:F did not differ (P ≥ 0.36) among the 3 implant strategies, nor did HCW or marbling score (P ≥ 0.15). Steers given Rev-XS/200 had greater (P < 0.01) LM area and decreased (P ≤ 0.05) 12th-rib fat and YG compared with Rev-200/200 and Rev-IS/200. Using Rev-200/200 and Rev-XS/200 increased (P = 0.03) USDA Select compared with Rev-IS/200. Using greater-initial-dose implant strategies may not affect ADG or G:F but appears to increase leanness.

Published
2016

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results