Education About Specialty Palliative Care Among Nonhealthcare Workers: A Systematic Review

Grant M Smith; Nainwant Singh; Felicia Hui; Philip H Sossenheimer; Josef M Hannah; Pablo Romano; Hong-Nei Wong; Shireen N Heidari; Stephanie M Harman

doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.09.023

Education About Specialty Palliative Care Among Nonhealthcare Workers: A Systematic Review

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2024 Jan;67(1):e70-e89. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.09.023. Epub 2023 Oct 4.

Authors

Grant M Smith¹, Nainwant Singh², Felicia Hui², Philip H Sossenheimer², Josef M Hannah², Pablo Romano³, Hong-Nei Wong², Shireen N Heidari², Stephanie M Harman²

Affiliations

¹ Stanford University School of Medicine (G.M.S., N.S., F.H., P.H.S., H.W., S.N.H., S.M.H.), Stanford, CA. Electronic address: smithgra@stanford.edu.
² Stanford University School of Medicine (G.M.S., N.S., F.H., P.H.S., H.W., S.N.H., S.M.H.), Stanford, CA.
³ Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons (P.R.), New York, NY.

PMID: 37797678
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.09.023

Abstract

Context: Despite the expansion of palliative care (PC) services, the public has little knowledge and holds misperceptions about PC, creating barriers to accessing timely specialty PC.

Objectives: To systematically review the evidence regarding the efficacy of educational interventions to improve knowledge and attitudes about PC among nonhealthcare workers.

Methods: We searched five databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CIANHL, Web of Science, and Scopus) for studies investigating educational interventions about specialty PC in adults who identified as patients, caregivers, or members of the public. We included studies that were available in English and had a comparator group. We excluded studies that only sampled health professionals or children. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to assess quality and risk of bias.

Results: Of 12,420 records identified, we screened 5948 abstracts and assessed 526 full texts for eligibility. Twenty-one articles were extracted for analysis, representing 20 unique educational interventions. Common methodologies included quasi-experimental (9, 45%), randomized controlled trial (4, 20%), and nonrandomized trial (2, 10%). Common components of the educational interventions included video presentations (9, 45%), written materials (8, 40%), and lectures (4, 20%). Content included definition (14, 70%) and philosophy (14, 70%) of PC, distinctions between PC and hospice (11, 55%), and eligibility for PC (11, 55%). Fourteen (70%) interventions showed statistically significant positive differences in either knowledge or attitudes about PC.

Conclusions: While educational interventions can positively impact knowledge and attitudes about PC among nonhealthcare workers, more research is needed to inform the design, delivery, and evaluation of interventions to increase knowledge and attitudes about PC.

Keywords: Palliative care education; palliative care attitudes; palliative care knowledge; patient education; public education.

Publication types

Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Caregivers* / education
Hospice Care*
Humans
Palliative Care*