Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 May 7;23(1):117.
doi: 10.1186/s12904-024-01424-4.

Barriers and drivers of public engagement in palliative care, Scoping review

Pilar Barnestein-Fonseca  1 , Alicia Nebro-Gil  2 , Virginia P Aguiar-Leiva  2 , Eva Víbora-Martín  2 , Inmaculada Ruiz-Torreras  2 , Maria Luisa Martín-Rosello  2 ; on behalf iLIVE Group
Collaborators, Affiliations

Barriers and drivers of public engagement in palliative care, Scoping review

Pilar Barnestein-Fonseca et al. BMC Palliat Care. .

Abstract

Background: The integral model of Palliative Care recognizes the community as essential element in improving quality of life of patients and families. It is necessary to find a formula that allows the community to have a voice. The aim of this scoping review is to identify barriers and facilitators to engage community in PC.

Methods: Systematic search was conducted in NICE, Cochrane Library, Health Evidence, CINAHL and PubMed database.

Keywords: Palliative care, End of life care, community networks, community engagement, public engagement, community participation, social participation, barriers and facilitators.

Results: Nine hundred seventy-one results were obtained. Search strategy and inclusion criteria yielded 13 studies that were read in detail to identify factors influencing community engagement in palliative care, categorized into: Public health and public engagement; Community attitudes towards palliative care, death and preferences at the end of life; Importance of volunteers in public engagement programs; Compassionate communities.

Conclusion: Societal awareness must be a facilitated process to catalyse public engagement efforts. National policy initiatives and regional system support provide legitimacy and focus is essential for funding. The first step is to get a sense of what is important to society, bearing in mind cultural differences and to channel those aspects through health care professionals; connecting the most assistential part with community resources. The process and long-term results need to be systematically evaluated.

Keywords: Barriers and Facilitators/drivers; Community engagement; Palliative Care; Public engagement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow-chart of study retrieval and selection process
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lowton K. Compassionate Cities. Public Health and End of Life Care - by Kellehear, A. Sociol Health Illn. 2008;30:163–164. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.1075_4.x. - DOI
    1. Abel J. Compassionate communities and end-of-life care. Clin Med J R Coll Physicians London. 2018;18:6–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abel J, Bowra J, Walter T, et al. Compassionate community networks: supporting home dying. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2011;1:129–133. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2011-000068. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kellehear A. Health-promoting palliative care: Developing a social model for practice. Mortality. Epub ahead of print 1999. 10.1080/713685967.
    1. Sallnow L, Richardson H, Murray SA, et al. The impact of a new public health approach to end-of-life care: A systematic review. Palliat Med. 2016;30:200–211. doi: 10.1177/0269216315599869. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources