Yielding Behaviour of Electron Beam Lithography and Focused Ion Beam Made Nanocrystalline Micro/Nanopillars

Electron beam lithography (EBL) and focused ion beam (FIB) methods were developed in house to fabricate nanocrystalline nickel micro/nanopillars so to compare the effect of fabrication on plastic yielding. EBL was used to fabricate 3 μm and 5 μm thick poly-methyl methacrylate patterned substrates in which nickel pillars were grown by electroplating with height to diameter aspect ratios from 2:1 to 5:1. FIB milling was used to reduce larger grown pillars to sizes similar to EBL grown pillars. X-ray diffraction, electron back-scatter diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, and FIB imaging were used to characterize the nickel pillars. The measured grain size of the pillars was 91±23 nm, with strong <110> and weaker <111> and <110> crystallographic texture in the growth. Load-controlled compression tests were conducted using a MicroMaterials nano-indenter equipped with a 10 μm flat punch at constant rates from 0.0015 to 0.03 mN/s on EBL grown pillars, and 0.0015 and 0.015 mN/s on FIB-milled pillars. The measured Young’s modulus ranged from 55 to 350 GPa for all pillars, agreeing with values in the literature. EBL grown pillars exhibited stochastic strain-bursts at slow loading rates, attributed to local micro yield events, followed by work hardening. Sharp yield points were also observed and attributed to the gold seed layer de-bonding between the nickel pillar and substrate due to the shear stress associated with end effects that arise from the substrate constraint. The onset of yield ranged from 108 to 1800 MPa, which is greater than bulk nickel, but within values given in the literature. FIB-milled pillars demonstrated stochastic yield behaviour at all loading rates tested, yielding between 320 and 625 MPa. Deformation was apparent at FIB-milled pillar tops, where the smallest cross-sectional area was measured, but still exhibited superior yield strength to bulk nickel. The gallium damage at the outer surface of the pillars likely aids in dislocation nucleation and plasticity, leading to lower yield strengths than for the EBL pillars. Thermal drift, substrate effects, and noise due to vibrations within the indenter system contributed to variance and inconsistency in the data.

Challenges, Strengths and Opportunities Related to Implementing Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines on Breast Cancer Survivorship Care by Primary Care Physicians and Nurse Practitioners in Southeastern Ontario

Background Many breast cancer survivors continue to have a broad range of physical and psychosocial problems after breast cancer treatment. As cancer centres move forward with earlier discharge of stable breast cancer survivors to primary care follow-up it is important that comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care is implemented to effectively address these needs. Research suggests primary care providers are willing to provide breast cancer survivorship care but many lack the knowledge and confidence to provide evidence-based care. Purpose The overall purpose of this thesis was to determine the challenges, strengths and opportunities related to implementing comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship guidelines by primary care physicians and nurse practitioners in southeastern Ontario. Methods This mixed-methods research was conducted in three phases: (1) synthesis and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines relevant to provision of breast cancer survivorship care within the primary care practice setting; (2) a brief quantitative survey of primary care providers to determine actual practices related to provision of evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care; and (3) individual interviews with primary care providers about the challenges, strengths and opportunities related to provision of comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care. Results and Conclusions In the first phase, a comprehensive clinical practice framework was created to guide provision of breast cancer survivorship care and consisted of a one-page checklist outlining breast cancer survivorship issues relevant to primary care, a three-page summary of key recommendations, and a one-page list of guideline sources. The second phase identified several knowledge and practice gaps, and it was determined that guideline implementation rates were higher for recommendations related to prevention and surveillance aspects of survivorship care and lowest related to screening for and management of long-term effects. The third phase identified three major challenges to providing breast cancer survivorship care: inconsistent educational preparation, provider anxieties, and primary care burden; and three major strengths or opportunities to facilitate implementation of survivorship care guidelines: tools and technology, empowering survivors, and optimizing nursing roles. A better understanding of these challenges, strengths and opportunities will inform development of targeted knowledge translation interventions to provide support and education to primary care providers.