Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of literature on the public’s knowledge or awareness of PC

From: Examining public knowledge, attitudes and perceptions towards palliative care: a mixed method sequential study

Author (Country of Origin), Year

Aim

Method, Sample Size

Findings

Wallace (Scotland), 2003 [10]

To investigate pubic knowledge and understanding of PC

Postal Survey, n = 668

32% had no knowledge and 49% had some knowledge of PC. Believed PC to be for patients with a terminal diagnosis of cancer

Claxton-Oldfield (Canada), 2004 [11]

To evaluate people’s understanding of PC Atlantic Canada

In person survey, n = 89

75.3% had never heard of PC. Believed PC to be for patients with a terminal diagnosis of cancer

Benini et al. (Italy), 2011 [12]

To examine the awareness of PC among Italians and their perception of the needs of patients with incurable illness

In person survey, n = 1897

40.6% had never heard of PC. Believed it to be non-curative, for terminal patients, and it improves QoL

Hirai et al. (Japan), 2011 [13]

To explore public awareness, knowledge, and readiness for PC services

Survey, n = 3984

63.1% had no knowledge of PC, and only 0.5% were using PC services. 18.6% knew about PC but did not know their availability

MacLoed et al. (New Zealand), 2012 [14]

To investigate New Zealanders views of and local hospice

Online survey, n = 1011

Reasonable understanding of PC reported, seen to provide comfort to people with terminal illness

McIlfatrick et al. (UK), 2013 [15]

To establish awareness and attitudes of the general public in Northern Ireland towards PC

Online and postal survey, n = 600

75% had little/no knowledge of PC, 83% had never heard of PC. Associated with older people and cancer with the aim of achieving a peaceful death

McIlfatrick et al. (UK), 2014 [16]

To explore public perceptions of PC and identify strategies to raise awareness

Semi-structured telephone survey, n = 50

Most had a general knowledge of PC, generally associated with dying and cancer.

Boucher et al. (USA), 2018 [17]

To understand participant knowledge PC and acceptability a new community based PC model

Focus Groups n = 18

Participants had varying knowledge of PC

Roulston et al. (Canada), 2018 [18]

To gauge Canadian views on PC

Online survey, n = 1540

43% were “somewhat aware” of PC

Yim et al. (Korea), 2018 [19]

To navigate public awareness of PC

Online survey, n = 1500

60.5% had no knowledge of PC

Koslov et al. (USA), 2018 [20]

To measure PC knowledge in laypersons and how different socioeconomic groups perform on PaCKS

Online survey, n = 301

Participants had poor knowledge of PC, with an average score < 50% on PaCKS.

Shalev et al. (USA), 2018) [21]

To examine palliative and hospice care awareness, misperceptions, and receptivity among community-dwelling adults

Telephone survey, n = 800

73% were unable to define PC. > 50% had at least one misperception, most commonly was to associate PC with EOL care

Westerlund et (Sweden), 2018 [22]

To investigate awareness of PC in general Swedish population

Online survey, n = 2020

41% had no awareness of PC and 43% had some awareness.

AbdulRaheem et al., (Nigeria), 2019 [23]

To establish current levels of awareness attitudes towards PC among the general public in Nigeria

Survey, n = 564

Knowledge came from personal experience working in healthcare or using PC. Gender (female) and previous experience positively influenced awareness

Alkhudairi (Saudi Arabia), 2019 [24]

To evaluate awareness, knowledge, and beliefs of the Saudi adult population regarding

Online survey, n = 1987

16.2% knew what PC was, 22.8% had heard of PC, and 34.4% believed PC can reduce physical suffering

Huo et al. (USA), 2019 [25]

To examine knowledge penetration of PC in adults

Survey, n = 3194

71% had no knowledge of PC

Taber (USA), 2019 [26]

To explore knowledge and beliefs about PC among the general public

Survey, n = 1162

Respondents who perceived themselves to know a lot about PC were often no less likely to report inaccurate knowledge or negative beliefs (versus accurate and positive, respectively).