Zhousiqi Tang, Yi Fan, Zhuojun Ye, Yuhan Lu, Xiaoyu Zhang, Youyang Tang, Limei Jing
{"title":"公众如何看待安宁疗护和缓和疗护?——来自中国的实证研究。","authors":"Zhousiqi Tang, Yi Fan, Zhuojun Ye, Yuhan Lu, Xiaoyu Zhang, Youyang Tang, Limei Jing","doi":"10.1186/s12904-025-01891-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Global aging and rising chronic disease burden have made hospice and palliative care (HPC) a healthcare priority. China has initiated three rounds of HPC pilot programs covering two-thirds of its cities, yet public utilization remains low. Understanding public knowledge, attitude, and preference (KAP) toward HPC is essential to overcoming adoption barriers and fostering acceptance.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To empirically evaluate public KAP for HPC, pinpoint influencing factors, and offer targeted strategies to address challenges.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study assessed public KAP using the culturally adapted Public Knowledge, Attitude, and Preference of HPC Scale (P-KAPHPCs). Regression analysis was applied to identify factors associated with KAP. A structural equation model was constructed to test their interrelationship.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among all the respondents, the mean score for HPC knowledge was 7.47 ± 2.14, with 41.10% of the respondents could explain HPC. Educational level and household income were associated factors of knowledge (p < 0.05). The overall attitude mean score rate was 84.18%. Public attitude toward end-of-life (EOL) arrangements for terminally ill patients was significantly influenced by age, attitude toward one's own EOL care were affected by educational level (p < 0.05). The majority (67.80%) declined life-sustaining treatment (LST), with preference linked to gender, occupation, experience of witnessing a patient's EOL process, primary family decision-makers, and family size (p < 0.05). Most respondents (47.30%) preferred home as the place for the EOL care. Structural equation modeling analysis showed that knowledge was positively associated with attitude (β = 4.97, p < 0.001) and knowledge was positively associated with preference (β = 0.22, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The public attitude toward HPC is generally positive, though there is a need to improve the quality of public knowledge, and preference varies. Knowledge has a positive influence on both attitude and preference. Traditional cultural values and ethics sometimes create conflicts in HPC decision-making. Therefore, it is recommended to strengthen HPC education, enhance legal protections for advance care planning (ACP) and advance directives (AD), introduce culturally appropriate family consensus communication tools, and establish a home-community hybrid care model.</p>","PeriodicalId":48945,"journal":{"name":"BMC Palliative Care","volume":"24 1","pages":"261"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12534962/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How does the general public perceive hospice and palliative care? -an empirical study from China.\",\"authors\":\"Zhousiqi Tang, Yi Fan, Zhuojun Ye, Yuhan Lu, Xiaoyu Zhang, Youyang Tang, Limei Jing\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12904-025-01891-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Global aging and rising chronic disease burden have made hospice and palliative care (HPC) a healthcare priority. China has initiated three rounds of HPC pilot programs covering two-thirds of its cities, yet public utilization remains low. Understanding public knowledge, attitude, and preference (KAP) toward HPC is essential to overcoming adoption barriers and fostering acceptance.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To empirically evaluate public KAP for HPC, pinpoint influencing factors, and offer targeted strategies to address challenges.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study assessed public KAP using the culturally adapted Public Knowledge, Attitude, and Preference of HPC Scale (P-KAPHPCs). Regression analysis was applied to identify factors associated with KAP. A structural equation model was constructed to test their interrelationship.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among all the respondents, the mean score for HPC knowledge was 7.47 ± 2.14, with 41.10% of the respondents could explain HPC. Educational level and household income were associated factors of knowledge (p < 0.05). The overall attitude mean score rate was 84.18%. Public attitude toward end-of-life (EOL) arrangements for terminally ill patients was significantly influenced by age, attitude toward one's own EOL care were affected by educational level (p < 0.05). The majority (67.80%) declined life-sustaining treatment (LST), with preference linked to gender, occupation, experience of witnessing a patient's EOL process, primary family decision-makers, and family size (p < 0.05). Most respondents (47.30%) preferred home as the place for the EOL care. Structural equation modeling analysis showed that knowledge was positively associated with attitude (β = 4.97, p < 0.001) and knowledge was positively associated with preference (β = 0.22, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The public attitude toward HPC is generally positive, though there is a need to improve the quality of public knowledge, and preference varies. Knowledge has a positive influence on both attitude and preference. Traditional cultural values and ethics sometimes create conflicts in HPC decision-making. Therefore, it is recommended to strengthen HPC education, enhance legal protections for advance care planning (ACP) and advance directives (AD), introduce culturally appropriate family consensus communication tools, and establish a home-community hybrid care model.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"261\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12534962/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-025-01891-3\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-025-01891-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:全球老龄化和慢性疾病负担的增加使得临终关怀和姑息治疗(HPC)成为医疗保健的优先事项。中国已经启动了三轮高性能计算试点项目,覆盖了三分之二的城市,但公共利用率仍然很低。了解公众对高性能计算的知识、态度和偏好(KAP)对于克服采用障碍和促进接受是必不可少的。目的:对HPC的公共KAP进行实证评估,找出影响因素,并提供有针对性的策略来应对挑战。方法:本研究采用与文化相适应的公共知识、态度和偏好HPC量表(P-KAPHPCs)来评估公众的KAP。采用回归分析确定与KAP相关的因素。建立了结构方程模型来检验两者之间的相互关系。结果:所有被调查者对HPC知识的平均得分为7.47±2.14分,能解释HPC的占41.10%。结论:公众对HPC的认知总体上是积极的,但公众对HPC的认知质量有待提高,且偏好存在差异。知识对态度和偏好都有正向影响。传统的文化价值观和伦理观念有时会在高性能计算决策中产生冲突。因此,建议加强HPC教育,加强对advance care planning (ACP)和advance directives (AD)的法律保护,引入文化适宜的家庭共识沟通工具,建立家-社区混合护理模式。
How does the general public perceive hospice and palliative care? -an empirical study from China.
Context: Global aging and rising chronic disease burden have made hospice and palliative care (HPC) a healthcare priority. China has initiated three rounds of HPC pilot programs covering two-thirds of its cities, yet public utilization remains low. Understanding public knowledge, attitude, and preference (KAP) toward HPC is essential to overcoming adoption barriers and fostering acceptance.
Objectives: To empirically evaluate public KAP for HPC, pinpoint influencing factors, and offer targeted strategies to address challenges.
Methods: This cross-sectional study assessed public KAP using the culturally adapted Public Knowledge, Attitude, and Preference of HPC Scale (P-KAPHPCs). Regression analysis was applied to identify factors associated with KAP. A structural equation model was constructed to test their interrelationship.
Results: Among all the respondents, the mean score for HPC knowledge was 7.47 ± 2.14, with 41.10% of the respondents could explain HPC. Educational level and household income were associated factors of knowledge (p < 0.05). The overall attitude mean score rate was 84.18%. Public attitude toward end-of-life (EOL) arrangements for terminally ill patients was significantly influenced by age, attitude toward one's own EOL care were affected by educational level (p < 0.05). The majority (67.80%) declined life-sustaining treatment (LST), with preference linked to gender, occupation, experience of witnessing a patient's EOL process, primary family decision-makers, and family size (p < 0.05). Most respondents (47.30%) preferred home as the place for the EOL care. Structural equation modeling analysis showed that knowledge was positively associated with attitude (β = 4.97, p < 0.001) and knowledge was positively associated with preference (β = 0.22, p < 0.001).
Conclusions: The public attitude toward HPC is generally positive, though there is a need to improve the quality of public knowledge, and preference varies. Knowledge has a positive influence on both attitude and preference. Traditional cultural values and ethics sometimes create conflicts in HPC decision-making. Therefore, it is recommended to strengthen HPC education, enhance legal protections for advance care planning (ACP) and advance directives (AD), introduce culturally appropriate family consensus communication tools, and establish a home-community hybrid care model.
期刊介绍:
BMC Palliative Care is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the clinical, scientific, ethical and policy issues, local and international, regarding all aspects of hospice and palliative care for the dying and for those with profound suffering related to chronic illness.