I'm still me, I'm still a person: war metaphor use and meaning making in women with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The war metaphor is one strategy used frequently in breast cancer to inspire individuals in a "fight" against cancer and assist patients in navigating their illness experience. Despite prominent use, the emotional impact of this language has not been examined in the context of meaning making among women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: This study involved a semi-structured interview considering the war metaphor's impact on women's illness experience with MBC. Participants (n = 22) had been diagnosed with MBC for at least 6 months or following 1 disease progression and were undergoing treatment at an NCI-designated cancer center in Western Pennsylvania at the time of interview. Each participant underwent an individual interview exploring the war metaphor's impact on illness experience. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed to assess feelings about the war metaphor and emotional response to the lived experience of cancer. RESULTS: Two themes were identified surrounding metaphor use and participants' experiences with meaning making in cancer. First, women with MBC perceive the diagnosis as an "unfair fight" due to its incurable nature. Second, patients use alternative language of "living life" and communicate resistance to being defined by their cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION: War metaphors are one collection of terminology people use to understand their diagnosis. However, their use may apply pressure to prioritize positivity in the face of diagnosis and treatment, in a unique clinical context where this may not be adaptive. These findings affirm a need to consider patients' lived experiences to best facilitate psychological adjustment to illness.

The impact of frailty and rapid response team activation on patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A case-control matched, observational, single-centre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a multi-dimensional syndrome associated with mortality and adverse outcomes in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Further investigation is warranted to explore the interplay among factors such as frailty, clinical deterioration triggering a medical emergency team (MET) review, and outcomes following admission to the ICU. METHODS: Single-centre, retrospective observational case-control study of adult patients (>18 years) admitted to a medical-surgical ICU with (cases) or without (controls) a preceding MET review between 4 h and 14 days prior. Matching was performed for age, ICU admission diagnosis, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III (APACHE III) score and the 8-point Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Cox proportional hazard regression modelling was performed to determine associations with 30-day mortality after admission to ICU. RESULTS: A total of 2314 matched admissions were analysed. Compared to non-frail patients (CFS 1-4), mortality was higher in all frail patients (CFS 5-8), at 31% vs. 13%, and in frail patients admitted after MET review at 33%. After adjusting for age, APACHE, antecedent MET review and CFS in the Cox regression, mortality hazard ratio increased by 26% per CFS point and by 3% per APACHE III point, while a MET review was not an independent predictor. Limitations of medical treatment occurred in 30% of frail patients, either with or without a MET antecedent, and this was five times higher compared to non-frail patients. CONCLUSION: Frail patients admitted to ICU have a high short-term mortality. An antecedent MET event was associated with increased mortality but did not independently predict short-term survival when adjusting for confounding factors. The intrinsic significance of frailty should be primarily considered during MET review of frail patients. This study suggests that routine frailty assessment of hospitalised patients would be helpful to set goals of care when admission to ICU could be considered.