Limited evidence investigates how knowledge, misconceptions, and beliefs about palliative care vary across patients with cancerous versus non-cancerous chronic disease. We examined the knowledge of and misconceptions about palliative care among these groups.

We used weighted data from the National Cancer Institute Health Information National Trends Survey 5 (Cycle 2) for nationally representative estimates and logistic regression to adjust for respondent characteristics. We identified respondents who reported having (1) cancer ([n = 585]; breast, lung, and colorectal), (2) chronic conditions ([n = 543]; heart failure, lung disease, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder), or (3) neither cancer nor other chronic conditions (n = 2,376).

Compared to cancer respondents, chronic condition respondents were more likely to report being Black or Hispanic, report a disability, and have lower socioeconomic status. In the sample, 65.6% of cancer respondents and 72.8% chronic conditions respondents reported they had never heard of palliative care. Chronic condition respondents were significantly (p < 0.05) less likely to report high palliative care knowledge than cancer respondents (9.1% vs. 16.6%, respectively). In adjusted analyses, cancer respondents had greater odds of high palliative care knowledge (odd ratio [OR] = 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01, 2.86) compared to respondents with neither cancer nor chronic disease; chronic condition respondents did not have increased odds (OR = 0.96; CI = 0.59, 1.54).

Disparities in palliative care knowledge exist among people with non-cancerous chronic disease compared to cancer. Supportive educational efforts to boost knowledge about palliative care remains urgent and is critical for promoting equity, particularly for underserved people with chronic illnesses.

To develop a new caregiver-assisted pain coping skills training protocol specifically tailored for community-dwelling persons with cognitive impairment and pain, and assess its feasibility and acceptability.

In Phase I, we conducted interviews with 10 patient–caregiver dyads to gather feedback about intervention content and delivery. Phase II was a single-arm pilot test to evaluate the intervention's feasibility and acceptability. Dyads in the pilot study (n = 11) completed baseline surveys, received five intervention sessions, and then completed post-intervention surveys. Analyses focused on feasibility and acceptability.

Dyads responded positively to the pain coping skills presented in the interviews; their feedback was used to refine the intervention. Findings from the pilot study suggested that the intervention was feasible and acceptable. 69% of eligible dyads consented, 82% completed all five intervention sessions, and 100% completed the post-treatment assessment. Caregivers reported high satisfaction ratings. They also reported using the pain coping skills on a regular basis, and that they found most of the skills helpful and easy to use.

These preliminary findings suggest that a caregiver-assisted pain coping skills intervention is feasible and acceptable, and that it may be a promising approach to managing pain in patients with cognitive impairment.

The objectives of this study were to obtain patient evaluations of the content, structure, and delivery modality of Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC), a novel psychosocial intervention for patients with advanced cancer and pain. MCPC aims to help patients connect with valued sources of meaning in their lives (e.g., family relationships), while providing training in evidence-based cognitive and behavioral skills (e.g., guided imagery) to reduce pain.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients with stage IV solid tumor cancers and persistent pain. Transcripts were analyzed using methods from applied thematic analysis.

When evaluating MCPC's educational information and skills training descriptions, participants described ways in which this content resonated with their experience. Many coped with their pain and poor prognosis by relying on frameworks that provided them with a sense of meaning, often involving their personally held religious or spiritual beliefs. They also expressed a need for learning ways to cope with pain in addition to taking medication. A few participants offered helpful suggestions for refining MCPC's content, such as addressing common co-occurring symptoms of sleep disturbance and fatigue. Concerning MCPC's structure and delivery modality, most participants preferred that sessions include their family caregiver and described remote delivery (i.e., telephone or videoconference) as being more feasible than attending in-person sessions.

Participants were interested in an intervention that concurrently focuses on learning pain coping skills and enhancing a sense of meaning. Using remote delivery modalities may reduce access barriers (e.g., travel) that would otherwise prevent many patients from utilizing psychosocial services.