Hospice and Palliative Care Response Policy During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic in South Korea
10.14475/jhpc.2025.28.4.138
- Author:
Chang Gon KIM
1
Author Information
1. Graduate School of Social Welfare, Gwangju University, Gwangju, Korea
- Publication Type:Review Article
- From:
Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care
2025;28(4):138-151
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
South Korea received international acclaim for its rapid response to the initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic crisis through the “K-Quarantine” model, successfully managing it without closing its borders; however, terminally ill patients awaiting death in 19 public hospice facilities (83.4%/297 beds) had to vacate their beds to accommodate patients with COVID-19. This study examines and analyzed South Korea’s hospice response policies during the pandemic. It draws on empirical data from domestic and international literature reviews and relevant websites. This study aimed to provide foundational data and policy recommendations for future pandemic preparedness. The findings revealed that, owing to the national response policy focused on infectious disease control and hospital bed allocation, 21 of the 88 inpatient hospice units in South Korea were closed, with their beds repurposed Therefore, hospice palliative care services became a “negotiable service” largely excluded from pandemic response policies. Strict visitation policies lowered hospice service utilization and disrupted service continuity. Emergency care support helped to mitigate care gaps; however, hospice care was limited in addressing patients’ specialized needs, demonstrating structural fragmentation within the health and welfare systems. In conclusion, South Korea’s hospice and palliative care response policy to the COVID-19 pandemic has failed to meet the essential goal of hospice palliative care: enhancing patient dignity and quality of life. To strengthen preparedness for future pandemics, designating specialized hospice institutions as essential health facilities, establishing infrastructure stabilization funds, developing a crisis-responsive payment systems, are essential.
