Tenderness, Juiciness, and Flavor Contribute to the Overall Consumer Beef Eating Experience

Overall beef palatability can be attributed to three primary traits, tenderness, juiciness, and flavor, as well as the interaction among these traits (Smith and Carpenter, 1974). Multiple authors have worked to identify which of these palatability traits contributes the most to overall eating satisfaction and have historically identified tenderness as the most important palatability trait (Savell et al., 1987; Miller et al., 1995a; Savell et al., 1999; Egan et al., 2001). Overall eating quality of beef steaks may excel at one or even two of these traits, yet fail to meet consumer eating expectations due to the unsatisfactory level of another trait. Conversely, a steak may be deemed acceptable by consumers primarily due to the outstanding level of a single trait despite the lower and even unacceptable levels of one or both of the other traits. To date, no comprehensive study has evaluated this interaction among palatability traits and assessed the relative risk of an unacceptable overall eating experience associated with the failure of a single or combination of palatability traits. It was the objective of this report to combine consumer palatability data collected during the past five years as a result of a series of trials that have evaluated the palatability traits of a diverse set of treatments in order to evaluate the relative contribution of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor to overall consumer eating satisfaction

Evaluation of the Quality Characteristics of Premium Pork Loins

The objective of this study was to determine shear force, pH, marbling, color characteristics, percentage of intramuscular fat, and purge loss of pork loins from various premium brands in comparison to commodity products. Pork loins (n = 30/brand; Institutional Meat Purchasing Specifications #414) from five premium (PRE A, B, C, D, and E) and two commodity brands (COM A and B) were purchased from food service purveyors and commercial abattoirs. Loins were transported to the Kansas State University Meat Laboratory, Manhattan, KS, and allowed to age 14 to 15 days under refrigerated conditions (36 to 39°F) before fabrication. All PRE brands were similar (P \u3e 0.05) with lesser (P \u3c 0.05) slice shear force values than COM A, with the exception of PRE C, which had greater (P \u3c 0.05) slice shear force values than all other brands evaluated. Similar results were found for Warner-Bratzler shear force, with PRE C having greater (P \u3c 0.05) Warner-Bratzler shear force values than all other treatments, and no difference (P \u3e 0.05) found among the other PRE products. Commodity A was also tougher (P \u3c 0.05) than all PRE brands, except PRE C for Warner-Bratzler shear force. For subjective loin color evaluations, all PRE brands were similar (P \u3e 0.05), with only PRE C having a greater (P \u3c 0.05) color score than PRE B. Commodity B had a lesser (P \u3c 0.05) loin subjective color than all PRE products except PRE B and D. Also, COM B had a greater (P \u3c 0.05) L* value (lighter) and lesser (P \u3c 0.05) a* value (less red) than all of the other brands. No difference (P \u3e 0.05) in a* was found among the PRE brands and only PRE D and E differed (P \u3c 0.05) for L*. The two COM products had a similar (P \u3e 0.05) chop color score, however COM B was lighter (P \u3c 0.05) than all PRE brands. Premium A and E had greater loin visual marbling than all other brands, with no difference (P \u3e 0.05) found among the two COM brands and the other 3 PRE brands. However, for chop visual marbling, the two COM brands had less (P \u3c 0.05) marbling than all PRE brands, except PRE B and C. For fat percentage, all brands had between 2 to 3% fat, with COM A having less (P \u3c 0.05) fat than all PRE brands other than PRE B and D. Little variation was found among brands for pH, but COM B had a lower (P \u3c 0.05) pH than all of the other brands. Premium A, C, and D had less (P \u3c 0.05) weight lost as purge than any of the other brands. The differences observed within the quality traits evaluated show variation among different premium pork loin brands. This provides evidence that consumers and retailers will receive different levels of pork quality and eating satisfaction dependent upon the premium brand purchased

Mental health professionals' perceived barriers and enablers to shared decision-making in risk assessment and risk management: a qualitative systematic review

Background: Risk assessment and risk management are fundamental processes in the delivery of safe and effective mental health care, yet studies have shown that service users are often not directly involved or are unaware that an assessment has taken place. Shared decision-making in mental health systems is supported by research and advocated in policy. This systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42016050457) aimed to explore the perceived barriers and enablers to implementing shared decision-making in risk assessment and risk management from mental health professionals’ perspectives. Methods: PRISMA guidelines were followed in the conduct and reporting of this review. Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED and Internurse were systematically searched from inception to December 2019. Data were mapped directly into the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), a psychological framework that includes 14 domains relevant to behaviour change. Thematic synthesis was used to identify potential barriers and enablers within each domain. Data were then matched to the three components of the COM-B model: Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation. Results: Twenty studies met the eligibility criteria. The findings of this review indicate that shared decision-making is not a concept commonly used in mental health services when exploring processes of risk assessment and risk management. The key barriers identified were 'power and best interest' (social influences) and 'my professional role and responsibility' (social/professional role and identity). Key enablers were 'therapeutic relationship' (social influences) and 'value collaboration' (reinforcement). The salient barriers, enablers and linked TDF domains matched COM-B components ‘opportunity’ and ‘motivation’. Conclusion: The review highlights the need for further empirical research to better understand current practice and mental health professionals’ experiences and attitudes towards shared decision-making in risk assessment and risk management

Angus Ground Beef Has Higher Overall Consumer Acceptability than Grass-Fed Ground Beef

Ground beef is considered one of the major sources of animal protein in the U.S., accounting for approximately 40% of beef consumption per capita (USDA, 2011). Consumers’ concern about animal welfare, sustainable production, and low fat products has influenced purchasing decisions, resulting in an increased demand for grass-fed ground beef (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 2007). Grass-fed cattle are fed natural based forages or grass-hay, thus resulting in a higher deposition of omega-3 fatty acids in meat. Meat from grain-fed cattle has a lower omega-3 content due to the saturated and monounsaturated fatty acid profile found in a grain based diet. Additionally, grass-fed ground beef contains three times more omega-3 fatty acids than traditional grain-fed ground beef; however, there is no evidence to support that grass-fed ground beef is a healthier choice for consumers than traditional ground beef (Smith, 2013). Several studies have looked at the flavor profile between grass-fed and grain-fed beef in order to identify whether the omega-3 fatty acids found in grass-fed ground beef play a key role on consumer flavor acceptability. A high content of omega-3 fatty acids accelerates oxidization of meat, and consequently causes potential adverse effects on meat palatability traits. Consumer sensory evaluation was conducted to evaluate consumer palatability ratings of grass-fed ground beef in comparison to Angus and commodity ground beef

Hand hygiene compliance monitoring in anaesthetics: Feasibility and validity

Background: Hand hygiene compliance scores in the anaesthetic department of an acute NHS hospital were persistently low. Aims: To determine the feasibility and validity of regular accurate measurement of HHC in anaesthetics and understand the context of care delivery, barriers and opportunities to improve compliance. Methods: The hand hygiene compliance of one anaesthetist was observed and noted by a senior infection control practitioner (ICP). This was compared to the World Health Organization five moments of hand hygiene and the organisation hand hygiene tool. Findings: In one sequence of 55 min, there were approximately 58 hand hygiene opportunities. The hand hygiene compliance rate was 16%. The frequency and speed of actions in certain periods of care delivery made compliance measurement difficult and potentially unreliable. During several activities, taking time to apply alcohol gel or wash hands would have put the patients at significant risk. Discussion: We concluded that hand hygiene compliance monitoring by direct observation was invalid and unreliable in this specialty. It is important that hand hygiene compliance is optimal in anaesthetics particularly before patient contact. Interventions which reduce environmental and patient contamination, such as cleaning the patient and environment, could ensure anaesthetists encounter fewer micro-organisms in this specialty

Consumer Juiciness Acceptability Supports the Beef Marbling Insurance Theory

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine whether increased marbling reduces the negative impact that increased degree of doneness has on consumer palatability scores. Study Description: Beef strip loins were collected to represent five quality treatments [Prime, Top choice, Low choice, Select, and Select enhanced; n = 12 pairs/quality grade] and fabricated to 1-in steaks. Steaks were cooked to one of six degrees of doneness: very-rare (130°F), rare (140°F), medium-rare (145°F), medium (160°F), well-done (170°F), or very well-done (180°F). Consumers (n = 360) rated each steak for juiciness, tenderness, flavor, and overall liking on 100 The Bottom Line: Marbling could play a role in compensating for the negative effects of advanced degrees of doneness on juiciness acceptability, providing insight into the quality grade needed for consumers to be satisfied with juiciness based on their preferred degree of doneness

Consumer Evaluation of the Degree of Doneness of Beef Strip Loin Steaks Cooked to Six End-Point Temperatures

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess consumers’ degree of doneness practices in addition to their ability to identify beef steak degrees of doneness. Study Description: Beef strip loins (n = 24) from 12 animals representing five quality treatments [Prime, Top Choice, Low Choice, Select, and Select Enhanced (108%)] were collected. Steaks were cooked to an end-point temperature of very-rare (130°F), rare (140°F), medium-rare (145°F), medium (160°F), well-done (170°F), or very well-done (180°F). Cooked steaks were cut in half, perpendicular to the long axis of the steak, and photographs were taken immediately on the internal face of the lateral side. A digital survey for consumers was developed for electronic evaluation of the cooked steak images. Consumers (n = 1,134) answered a demographics questionnaire, followed by questions pertaining to temperature and determining degree of doneness. Next, 10 steak images depicting varying degrees of doneness were randomly selected by Qualtrics Software for each consumer to identify the degree of doneness of the steak pictured. The Bottom Line: Consumers do not have a good understanding of beef degrees of doneness, and are unable to consistently and accurately identify degrees of doneness of steaks cooked to specified end-point temperatures. This can create challenges when consumers communicate their degree of doneness preferences at foodservice establishments

Chef Evaluation of the Degree of Doneness of Beef Strip Loin Steaks Cooked to Six End-Point Temperatures

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess foodservice steak preparation practices and chefs’ abilities to identify degrees of doneness of beef strip loin steaks. Study Description: Beef strip loins (n = 24) from 12 animals representing five quality treatments (Prime, Top Choice, Low Choice, Select, and Select Enhanced) were collected. Steaks were cooked to an end-point temperature of very-rare (130°F), rare (140°F), medium-rare (145°F), medium (160°F), well-done (170°F), or very well-done (180°F). Each cooked steak was cut in half, perpendicular to the long axis of the steak, and photographs were taken immediately of the internal face of the lateral side. A digital survey was developed for chefs for the electronic evaluation of the images of the cooked steaks. Chefs (n = 83) were recruited via email from around the U.S. using an established database of chefs from all segments of the industry. The Bottom Line: Chefs did not report they use the current published degree of doneness temperatures. Additionally, chefs commonly rated steaks one degree of doneness above the degree of doneness category commonly associated with the end-point temperature