Abstract：
BACKGROUND: 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.
OBJECTIVE: 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.
OBJECTIVE: 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.
摘要：
背景：尽管姑息治疗（PC）服务不断扩大，公众对个人电脑知之甚少，持有误解，为及时访问专业PC造成障碍。
目的：系统回顾关于教育干预的有效性的证据，以提高非医疗工作者对PC的知识和态度。
方法：我们搜索了五个数据库（PubMed/MEDLINE，Embase,CIANHL,WebofScience,和Scopus），用于调查有关确定为患者的成年人的专业PC的教育干预措施，看护者,或公众成员。我们纳入了以英语提供的研究，并有一个比较组。我们排除了仅对卫生专业人员或儿童进行抽样的研究。我们使用混合方法评估工具来评估质量和偏倚风险。
结果：在确定的12,420条记录中，我们筛选了5,948份摘要,并评估了526篇全文的合格性.提取了21篇文章进行分析，代表20种独特的教育干预措施。常见的方法包括准实验(9%，45%)，随机对照试验（4，20%），和非随机试验（2，10％）。教育干预的常见组成部分包括视频演示（9，45％），书面材料(8、40%)，和讲座（4，20％）。内容包括PC的定义(14，70%)和哲学(14，70%)，PC和临终关怀之间的区别（11，55％），和个人电脑资格(11%，55%)。14项（70％）干预措施在对PC的知识或态度方面显示出统计学上的显着正差异。
结论：虽然教育干预可以积极影响非医疗工作者对PC的知识和态度，需要更多的研究来为设计提供信息，delivery,并评估干预措施，以增加对PC的知识和态度。
目的：系统回顾关于教育干预的有效性的证据，以提高非医疗工作者对PC的知识和态度。
方法：我们搜索了五个数据库（PubMed/MEDLINE，Embase,CIANHL,WebofScience,和Scopus），用于调查有关确定为患者的成年人的专业PC的教育干预措施，看护者,或公众成员。我们纳入了以英语提供的研究，并有一个比较组。我们排除了仅对卫生专业人员或儿童进行抽样的研究。我们使用混合方法评估工具来评估质量和偏倚风险。
结果：在确定的12,420条记录中，我们筛选了5,948份摘要,并评估了526篇全文的合格性.提取了21篇文章进行分析，代表20种独特的教育干预措施。常见的方法包括准实验(9%，45%)，随机对照试验（4，20%），和非随机试验（2，10％）。教育干预的常见组成部分包括视频演示（9，45％），书面材料(8、40%)，和讲座（4，20％）。内容包括PC的定义(14，70%)和哲学(14，70%)，PC和临终关怀之间的区别（11，55％），和个人电脑资格(11%，55%)。14项（70％）干预措施在对PC的知识或态度方面显示出统计学上的显着正差异。
结论：虽然教育干预可以积极影响非医疗工作者对PC的知识和态度，需要更多的研究来为设计提供信息，delivery,并评估干预措施，以增加对PC的知识和态度。
