The growing demand for palliative care has been accelerated due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, providing community-based palliative care was also more difficult to do safely and faced several challenges. The goal of this integrative review was to identify, describe, and synthesize previous studies on the challenges for health professionals delivering palliative care in the community during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Searches were carried out on the Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Social Care Online, PubMed, Embase, and Expanded Academic databases. Journals typically reporting palliative care and community health studies were also searched (Palliative Medicine, Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, and Health & Social Care in the Community). All articles were peer-reviewed and published in English between December 2019 and September 2022.

Database and hand searches identified 1231 articles. After duplicates were removed and the exclusion criteria applied, 27 articles were included in the final review. Themes in the research findings centered on 6 interconnected categories. The challenges imposed by the pandemic (lack of resources, communication difficulties, access to education and training, and interprofessional coordination), as well as the varying levels of success of the health-care responses, impacted the well-being of health professionals and, in turn, the well-being and care of patients and families.

The pandemic has provided the impetus for rethinking flexible and innovative approaches to overcome the challenges of delivering community palliative care. However, existing governmental and organizational policies require revision to improve communication and effective interprofessional collaboration, and additional resources are needed. A blended model of virtual and in-person palliative care delivery may provide the best solution to community palliative care delivery moving forward.

The Views of Informal Carers Experiences of Services (VOICES) instrument is a postal questionnaire that has been utilized internationally to capture the experiences of end-of-life care during the last months of life. Aotearoa/New Zealand, traditionally a bicultural society, reflects both the European worldview and that of the indigenous Māori. The Māori collectivist worldview considers whānau (extended family) support as key at the end of life and privileges “kanohi ki te kanohi” (face-to-face) meetings. In such a context, how will VOICES be received? Our pilot study was designed to test the effectiveness of an adaptation of the VOICES questionnaire in the New Zealand social setting for both Māori and non-Māori.

Cognitive interviews were conducted with 20 bereaved whānau and family members whose relative died between January 1 and April 4, 2014, in one urban New Zealand hospital. Thematic analysis was conducted on the resulting transcripts.

We found that, although the questionnaire provides valuable information, administration of the current questionnaire within a bicultural context is problematic. These problems are related to its scope, cultural acceptability, structure, and content. Distribution of the VOICES questionnaire, either through the post or online, without prior consultation, also risks engaging Māori in a culturally inappropriate manner.

These findings will prompt revisions to both the content and research approach to implementing VOICES in a bicultural context. Recommendations include prior consultation with local indigenous communities as well as utilization of a mixed-methods approach to utilizing VOICES in a bicultural context. The cognitive interview procedures employed (adjusted for a collectivist worldview) in this study may also prove useful to indigenous groups seeking to develop or adapt questionnaires within a bicultural or multicultural context.