Aim: To assess men’s experiences when diagnosed with breast cancer. Subject and Methods: The breast is a symbol of femininity. Therefore, it is no surprise that studies on women’s experiences with breast cancer predominate in the literature. Because breast cancer accounts for just 1% of all cancers among men, it is often overlooked. Nevertheless, it accounts for proportionately more deaths than penile or testicular cancer. Five major databases were queried in December 2022 to review primary studies with qualitative design. Results: Of the 206 articles selected and screened, eight met the inclusion criteria. Three highlighting men’s experience with stigmatisation and their need to be taken into consideration, even through information not solely aimed at women, are from a German study conducted between 2018 and 2020. Three from the UK between 2003 and 2007, also emphasise the stigma and the need for more information directed specifically at men. The study from the United States points out that men who receive treatment in women’s care spaces experience feelings of inadequacy. Last, a recent Israeli paper (2021) describes how men conceal the disease to avoid the stigma altogether. Conclusion: The paper examines the paltry, recent research on men’s emotional experience with breast cancer, which is culturally relegated to women. However, a clear need emerges for more attention to be paid to addressing communications and relations for these male patients as well.

Introduction: Intermediate care is a healthcare model designed to bridge the gap between hospital care and home, focusing on the efficient treatment and rehabilitation of patients after hospitalization. Its primary goals include facilitating early discharge, promoting patient independence, and preventing hospital readmissions. While previous studies have shown promise regarding the effectiveness of intermediate care, they often report mixed results, underscoring the necessity for further investigation. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy of bed-based intermediate care services in enhancing patient outcomes during the post-hospital discharge process. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across major scientific databases to identify relevant literature. The inclusion criteria focused on primary experimental studies that reported outcomes related to mortality, post-discharge care settings, functional status, length of hospitalization, rates of hospital readmission, and both physical and psychological well-being, as well as cost-effectiveness. Results: A total of six articles met the inclusion criteria. The findings generally suggest a favorable impact of intermediate care facilities on patient outcomes. However, it is important to note that the data exhibited low statistical significance. The evidence indicates that intermediate care facilities are at least as effective as traditional hospital care, which carries a significantly higher financial burden. Conclusions: Although the statistical significance of the results is limited, the trends indicate that intermediate care facilities may serve as suitable and economically viable alternatives for post-hospital care. Further research with larger sample sizes and more robust methodologies is necessary to confirm these findings and fully understand the role of intermediate care in enhancing patient outcomes.

Background: Quality of Life is a multifaceted concept, and understanding it is essential for improving symptom management, patient care, and rehabilitation. The incidence of metastatic breast cancer in men appears to be rising, with data indicating an increase from 7.2% to 10.3% over the past decade. Although male breast cancer remains rare, it is crucial for nurses to identify the most effective approaches to manage these patients and enhance the quality of care provided. This study aimed to conduct a systematic literature review to determine whether studies exist that assess quality of life in men with breast cancer. Methods: The databases Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, and Wiley were systematically searched by two independent reviewers, ensuring that the studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. Results: Out of 2410 references identified, 731 articles remained after removing duplicates. Following the screening process and exclusion of records not meeting the inclusion criteria, 6 studies were ultimately included in the review. Conclusions: The tools used to assess quality of life were heterogeneous, making it impossible to draw generalizable conclusions.