Social Prescribing Alongside Palliative Care in Viet Nam: Where Could Community Connection Add Value, and When Must Palliative Care Lead?
IMPLEMENTATION & PRACTICE
Social Prescribing Alongside Palliative Care in Viet Nam: Where Could Community Connection Add Value, and When Must Palliative Care Lead?
Category: Implementation & Practice
Last reviewed: October 2026
A retired teacher living with advanced lung disease misses the music group she used to attend every week. For years, singing and spending time with friends were important parts of her life. She still wants to join them, but her health has become less predictable. On some days, she feels well enough to leave home. On others, even getting ready for an outing is exhausting.
Her palliative care team is helping manage her symptoms and medical needs. Her family provides support at home. Yet she misses the friendships and sense of belonging that came from an activity she enjoyed long before becoming ill.
Could a community navigator help her reconnect with the group?
Perhaps. The organizer might offer shorter sessions, a comfortable place to sit or the option to attend only when she feels able. Friends might also be willing to maintain contact when she cannot join them in person.
These arrangements would need to reflect her wishes and changing health. If singing or traveling to the venue raises clinical concerns, her palliative care team should provide appropriate advice. The group organizer should not be expected to assess breathlessness or determine whether changes in her symptoms require treatment.
This example illustrates a possible contribution of social prescribing alongside palliative care.
People living with serious illness may continue to value friendships, cultural activities, personal interests and participation in community life. Comprehensive palliative care already addresses physical, psychological, social and spiritual suffering, but some relationships and activities exist beyond formal healthcare and support services.
Community connection may help people maintain these parts of their lives when suitable opportunities are available.
For Viet Nam, the question is not whether social prescribing should become another form of palliative care. It is whether care navigation could help people maintain meaningful participation in their communities, how community organizations might adapt to changing needs, and when qualified palliative care professionals must remain responsible for clinical decisions.
Palliative care already includes social support. What could social prescribing add?
Palliative care is not limited to managing pain or providing care during the final days of life.
The World Health Organization describes palliative care as an approach that improves quality of life for people and families facing problems associated with life-threatening illness. It involves preventing and relieving suffering through appropriate assessment and management of physical, psychological, social and spiritual concerns.
Palliative care can begin early in the course of serious illness and continue alongside treatments intended to control or modify the underlying condition.
It may involve physicians, nurses, social workers, psychologists, rehabilitation professionals, trained volunteers and other members of an interdisciplinary team. Its responsibilities extend beyond physical symptoms to include practical needs, emotional well-being, relationships and support for people close to the patient.
Viet Nam's Ministry of Health adopted a comprehensive approach in its Guidance on Palliative Care, issued under Decision No. 183/QD-BYT on 25 January 2022.
The guidance recognizes person-centered care, psychosocial and spiritual support, interdisciplinary responsibilities and community involvement. It explicitly includes connecting patients with local community support, social organizations and other suitable resources when appropriate.
This distinction matters when considering social prescribing.
Community connections and psychosocial support are already recognized within comprehensive palliative care. Social prescribing should therefore not be presented as a new service that introduces social support into palliative care for the first time.
Its potential additional contribution lies in helping people establish or maintain relationships, activities and connections beyond those already available through their existing care arrangements.
For example, a palliative care team may provide counseling, social-work support and assistance with practical concerns. The person may nevertheless wish to continue attending a familiar cultural group, spend time with old friends or remain involved in a local association.
These opportunities may matter because they are part of the person's ordinary life, not because they were originally designed as healthcare interventions.
A navigator could help explore those preferences and determine whether suitable arrangements are possible.
The purpose would be to complement existing care, avoid unnecessary duplication and support connections that remain meaningful to the individual.
Maintaining familiar relationships may matter more than finding new activities
Social prescribing is often associated with introducing people to community activities they have not previously used.
For someone living with serious illness, however, maintaining an existing relationship may be more valuable than joining an unfamiliar program.
A retired teacher may want to continue discussing books with former colleagues. Someone who has belonged to a cultural association for many years may wish to remain involved, even when regular attendance becomes difficult. A person who previously volunteered may still want to contribute, perhaps through a smaller activity that can be completed from home.
These relationships can offer continuity when illness has changed many other aspects of everyday life.
They may also allow people to remain connected with identities and interests that are not defined by their diagnosis.
Someone may still think of themselves as a teacher, musician, gardener, neighbor or member of a community organization. Illness may limit what they can do, but it does not necessarily remove the importance of those roles.
Community support can be valuable when it helps preserve opportunities to participate in ways that remain manageable.
An arts group might invite a longstanding member to join a shorter session. A cultural association could maintain contact with someone who is no longer able to attend every meeting. A volunteer organization might offer a less demanding way to contribute.
These arrangements do not need to become formal therapeutic programs to have personal meaning. Nor should they be described as clinical interventions simply because a person receiving palliative care participates.
Ordinary contact between friends should also not automatically be labeled social prescribing.
The term becomes relevant when an intentional, voluntary process helps someone identify and connect with suitable community resources or opportunities in response to their expressed preferences.
In some circumstances, a navigator may help restore an existing connection. In others, no formal referral may be necessary because the person and their friends can make arrangements independently.
The starting point should remain what the person values, not whether the interaction can be recorded as a social-prescribing activity.
Some people may welcome a new opportunity if previous activities are no longer accessible. Others may prefer to maintain familiar relationships rather than form new ones.
A navigator can help explore these possibilities, but should not assume that a standard list of community services will meet everyone's needs.
The value of a connection depends on whether it reflects something the person actually wants.
Community activities may need to change as health changes
One of the distinctive challenges of supporting people receiving palliative care is that their physical condition and ability to participate may change over time.
Some people experience relatively stable periods. Others have substantial changes in energy, mobility or physical comfort over a shorter period.
An activity that was manageable last month may be difficult today.
This presents a challenge for community organizations that operate through fixed schedules, regular attendance expectations or activities designed around people with relatively stable health.
Consider someone who enjoys a weekly music group but cannot predict how they will feel on the day of the meeting. A standard attendance requirement may discourage participation even when the person remains interested.
Another individual may enjoy gardening but no longer have the stamina to take part in a full outdoor session. Someone else may wish to attend a religious or cultural gathering but become uncomfortable when the activity lasts several hours.
These situations do not necessarily mean that participation is no longer worthwhile. They suggest that the activity may need to be organized differently.
A shorter visit, flexible attendance, a seated activity or an opportunity to remain connected from home may be more appropriate.
The best arrangement should be discussed with the person and considered in relation to the organization's capabilities and any relevant clinical concerns.
Flexibility also means allowing people to change their plans.
Someone should not feel obliged to explain detailed medical circumstances each time they cancel an activity. Repeated cancellations should not automatically result in exclusion when flexible participation has been agreed.
The organization may need to understand that the person's ability to attend can change without much notice.
At the same time, flexibility should not become an expectation that community volunteers remain available at all hours or provide assistance beyond their competence.
An organization may be able to offer occasional participation but not continuous support or personal care. These limits should be understood before arrangements are made.
If attendance involves particular mobility needs, physical assistance or equipment, responsibility for providing that support must be clarified.
This is especially important when the activity takes place outside the home or involves physical demands. Community organizers may be able to adjust the venue or session format, but should not independently determine whether the person is medically fit for activities requiring individualized clinical assessment.
A useful arrangement must be realistic for both the individual and the receiving organization.
Most importantly, community participation should not become another responsibility that a person feels obliged to fulfill.
Someone living with serious illness may already have demanding treatments, appointments and daily care arrangements. Community support should not add pressure to remain active, positive or socially engaged when rest is preferred.
Preserving the opportunity to participate is different from expecting participation.
When leaving home becomes difficult, connection may still be possible
For some people receiving palliative care, leaving home becomes increasingly difficult.
They may still value contact with friends, former colleagues or members of a community group, even when attending an activity is no longer practical.
In these circumstances, maintaining relationships may require a different approach.
A familiar group member might arrange an occasional telephone conversation. A cultural association could keep someone involved through brief personal contact. Friends may agree to visit at home when the person welcomes visitors and appropriate arrangements are possible.
These connections can be modest. They do not need to reproduce the full community activity to remain meaningful.
However, home-based social contact should not automatically be confused with home-based palliative care.
A person visiting for companionship is not providing a medical or nursing service merely because the person receiving the visit has a serious illness.
If a community organization arranges visits through volunteers, it should consider privacy, personal preferences, volunteer competence and arrangements for responding when concerns arise.
The organization should not promise clinical monitoring, physical assistance or other services it is not competent or authorized to provide.
Home visits also require suitable boundaries. A volunteer should understand the purpose of the visit, the agreed arrangements and whom to contact if a concerning situation occurs.
Participation may become more limited as illness progresses.
A person who previously enjoyed a group discussion may eventually prefer a brief conversation with one familiar friend. Someone else may decide that visits are tiring and would rather spend time privately with family.
These choices should be respected.
Social prescribing does not require people to maintain the same level of participation throughout illness.
In some circumstances, the most valuable support may be preserving one meaningful relationship rather than arranging another community activity.
When must the palliative care team lead?
Community organizations and navigators need clear professional boundaries because changes in a person's ability to participate may reflect changes in health.
A person who becomes more breathless, develops significant pain, experiences new confusion or has other concerning symptoms may require clinical assessment rather than a change to the planned community activity.
A navigator should not independently conclude that worsening symptoms are simply part of the expected course of illness.
Nor should a community volunteer provide medical reassurance, change treatment or determine whether prescribed medicines remain appropriate.
Clinical assessment, symptom management, prescribing, treatment decisions and medical escalation must remain with suitably qualified healthcare professionals.
This includes decisions concerning pain, breathlessness, medication-related problems and other symptoms requiring professional judgment.
Where an activity involves individualized medical considerations, the relevant clinician should provide appropriate advice about participation.
However, not every ordinary social interaction requires formal medical clearance. A short conversation with a friend is different from participating in a physically demanding activity.
The need for clinical input should reflect the person's condition and the actual circumstances.
When a person is receiving ongoing palliative care, community partners should understand how to contact the appropriate healthcare service if a concerning change occurs.
They should also know when urgent assistance may be required.
Community staff and volunteers should not be expected to perform clinical triage beyond their training and agreed responsibilities.
If a person's condition changes, the palliative care team may need to reassess medical needs while the community organization adapts or pauses the activity.
The individual should remain free to decide whether continued participation is worthwhile.
These responsibilities are complementary. Community connection should support the person's life outside healthcare without weakening the clinical care on which they depend.
What can a community navigator realistically contribute?
A community navigator may help connect the person's preferences with suitable opportunities outside formal healthcare.
This could begin with a conversation about which relationships, activities or places remain important to them.
Rather than asking only what services the person needs, the navigator might explore what they miss and what they would like to continue doing.
Someone may want to reconnect with an existing community group. Another person may prefer occasional contact with friends or an activity that can be enjoyed at home.
The navigator could contact a suitable organization, explain the person's preferred arrangement where permission has been obtained and explore whether participation can be adapted.
For example, an organizer may be willing to offer flexible attendance but unsure how to communicate with a member whose health frequently changes. The navigator could help establish a simple arrangement that allows the person to confirm participation when they feel able, without requiring detailed explanations about their illness.
Where a connection is made, limited follow-up may help determine whether it remains useful or needs to change.
However, this does not mean that every person receiving palliative care requires a dedicated social-prescribing link worker.
A social worker or another appropriately prepared member of the existing palliative care team may already perform similar coordination functions.
The additional value of a new navigation arrangement should therefore be assessed against what existing services can provide.
Creating another role merely to duplicate established responsibilities would be difficult to justify.
Navigators also need to recognize their professional limits.
They should not independently assess symptom severity, recommend medication changes, provide psychological treatment without appropriate qualifications or take responsibility for professional nursing and personal-care activities.
They should not become the default coordinators of complex clinical care simply because they maintain contact with community organizations.
Their contribution is to facilitate an appropriate connection within an agreed pathway.
Where specialist healthcare, social-work or other professional services are needed, the relevant qualified providers should remain responsible.
The most useful navigation task may sometimes be quite small: helping someone remain involved in a familiar group through an arrangement that respects their changing needs.
Personal choice should guide family and community involvement
Families often play an important role when a person receives palliative care in Viet Nam.
Relatives may assist with appointments, medicines, daily activities and communication with healthcare professionals. They may also influence decisions about whether the person leaves home or participates in community activities.
Family members may wish to protect someone who is seriously ill from fatigue or discomfort. Their concerns can be understandable, particularly when the person's condition is unpredictable.
However, these concerns should not automatically determine what the person wants or is permitted to do.
Someone may consider a short meeting with friends worthwhile, even if participation requires careful planning.
The person's preferences should remain central, while clinical risks are addressed by the appropriate professionals.
Navigators should communicate directly with the individual wherever possible and use suitable communication support when needed.
Family members may provide valuable information and assistance, but their involvement should reflect the person's wishes and applicable legal requirements.
Sometimes relatives may encourage an activity that the person does not want. In that situation, the person's decision should be respected.
The same principle applies to religious and spiritual activities.
Some people may find contact with a faith community particularly meaningful during serious illness. Others may prefer non-religious cultural or social activities.
Community navigation should respect these preferences without assuming that serious illness creates a particular religious or spiritual need.
Palliative care is not an obligation to remain socially active. People may choose companionship, private time, familiar relationships or no organized activity at all.
A respectful community connection supports these choices rather than introducing expectations about how someone should live with illness.
Volunteers can contribute, but goodwill is not enough
Community organizations often depend on volunteers and informal relationships.
These networks may provide companionship, social activities and practical assistance that people receiving palliative care value.
However, volunteer involvement requires preparation and realistic boundaries.
Someone visiting a person for companionship should not be expected to assess symptoms, administer medicines or provide clinical care.
Similarly, a volunteer accompanying someone to a community activity should not undertake physical transfers or complex personal assistance without suitable competence, equipment and arrangements.
Volunteers also need to understand how to communicate respectfully.
Repeated questions about prognosis, treatment or private family circumstances may cause distress even when well intentioned. Personal stories and photographs should not be shared without appropriate permission.
Community organizations should prepare volunteers for changes in participation.
A person may cancel a visit because of fatigue, treatment or a change in health. Volunteers should understand that these changes do not necessarily reflect dissatisfaction with the relationship.
Appropriate training, supervision and communication with a designated organizational contact can help volunteers provide support within manageable limits.
A systematic review by Willis and colleagues, published in Palliative Medicine in August 2026, examined the role and effects of volunteer involvement in palliative and end-of-life care.
The review included 29 reports relating to 24 studies. Volunteer activities included companionship, peer support, information provision, arts-based interventions and practical assistance.
The findings suggested positive experiences and possible benefits for aspects of patient well-being, quality of life and mental health. However, quantitative evidence was limited by small sample sizes, and findings were mixed for some outcomes relating to relationships and well-being.
The review provides useful evidence about volunteer involvement in palliative care, but it did not establish the effectiveness of a specific social-prescribing model.
Its findings support the potential contribution of volunteers while reinforcing the need for appropriate preparation and clearly defined responsibilities.
What does international research tell us about community connection?
The relationship between social prescribing and palliative care is receiving increasing attention internationally, but direct evidence remains limited.
In June 2026, Hospice UK published a thought-leadership article by Dr Chloe Tuck, a researcher at the Wilkes Institute at St Luke's Hospice in Sheffield.
The article examined opportunities for closer collaboration between social prescribing and palliative care, particularly through community-based activities, social relationships and support extending beyond conventional clinical services.
It also highlighted a significant evidence gap.
The author reported that a search across six academic databases had not identified enough literature directly combining social prescribing and adult palliative care to support the planned review.
This finding does not mean that community activities lack value for people receiving palliative care.
Rather, it suggests that the two areas may have developed through different service structures and terminology, even when some activities overlap.
The article also discussed compassionate communities, an approach that recognizes the contribution of social relationships and wider community involvement in experiences of serious illness, dying and bereavement.
Compassionate communities and social prescribing share an interest in community relationships, but they are not identical.
Compassionate communities may involve broader social networks and community initiatives that develop independently of formal healthcare referrals.
Social prescribing, as discussed here, involves an intentional connection between an individual's preferences and suitable community resources.
Research on community connectors provides another relevant perspective.
A qualitative study by Wainwright and colleagues, published in Palliative Care and Social Practice in September 2025, examined a United Kingdom pilot involving Community Connectors working with ethnically diverse populations.
The program aimed to strengthen relationships between communities and cancer, palliative and end-of-life care services.
The research involved four Community Connectors, each participating in three interviews over the study period, together with reflective diary and activity-log data.
The findings emphasized the importance of trust, cultural understanding, relationships and clear role expectations. They also identified challenges involving workload, emotional demands and the need for sustainable organizational support.
However, the study focused mainly on strengthening community engagement and access to cancer and palliative care services.
It was not an evaluation of community participation through social prescribing and did not establish improved clinical outcomes.
These findings nevertheless provide useful lessons about working with existing community relationships and avoiding poorly defined navigation roles.
They should inform questions for local implementation rather than be treated as evidence that a particular model will work effectively in Viet Nam.
What can research from lower-resource settings contribute?
A realist review by Le and colleagues, published in Palliative Care and Social Practice in August 2026, examined the implementation of home-based palliative care in low- and middle-income countries.
The research team included investigators affiliated with the University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City and international academic institutions.
The review synthesized 42 studies and identified contexts and mechanisms relevant to implementation, including community engagement, community health workers and volunteers, nursing leadership, multidisciplinary teamwork and support for family caregivers.
The findings highlighted the importance of relationships, trust, local participation and well-organized professional care.
However, the study examined home-based palliative care implementation across multiple countries. It did not evaluate social prescribing in Viet Nam.
This distinction is important.
A medical or nursing home-care service delivers healthcare within its authorized professional scope. A community organization may provide companionship or meaningful activities within its own capacity.
The two may cooperate, but their responsibilities should not be treated as interchangeable.
For Viet Nam, the review offers useful context for understanding the contribution of community engagement to broader palliative care systems.
It does not justify transferring clinical responsibilities to navigators, volunteers or informal community networks.
What legal and professional boundaries apply in Viet Nam?
Viet Nam's existing healthcare framework provides an important foundation for considering community connections alongside palliative care.
Decision No. 183/QD-BYT of 25 January 2022 issued the Ministry of Health's Guidance on Palliative Care, applicable to public and private medical examination and treatment establishments.
The guidance recognizes physical, psychological, social and spiritual needs and emphasizes person-centered care and interdisciplinary responsibilities.
It also explicitly acknowledges community participation and connections with local support resources.
This framework should remain the professional foundation when a person receiving palliative care is introduced to an external community activity.
The Law on Medical Examination and Treatment No. 15/2023/QH15, effective from 1 January 2024, establishes requirements concerning regulated medical examination and treatment activities, professional responsibilities and patient rights.
Participation in social prescribing does not automatically authorize a community organization to provide medical examination, treatment, clinical rehabilitation or other regulated healthcare services.
Similarly, a community navigator does not acquire clinical practice authority merely by working with a palliative care team.
Where activities involve regulated professional social-work practice, Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work and its applicable implementing regulations must be considered.
Circular No. 51/2024/TT-BYT, effective from 1 March 2025, regulates social-work activities in medical examination and treatment establishments licensed to operate as hospitals.
Decision No. 1975/QD-BYT of 1 July 2026 corrected the formal numbering of that circular by adding the year 2024 to its document number. It did not establish a new social-prescribing service.
Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT, effective from 25 August 2026, further addresses social-work practice and continuing professional knowledge.
These regulations are relevant where proposed activities involve professional social-work functions. They should not be interpreted as creating a nationally recognized social-prescribing qualification or automatically authorizing navigators to undertake regulated social-work interventions.
The applicable legal requirements depend on what the program actually does, the qualifications of participating personnel and the authorization of the organizations involved.
For an early Vietnamese model, providing verified information and facilitating voluntary community connections may be more feasible than establishing a new service that combines clinical, social-work and community responsibilities without clear boundaries.
Personal information must be protected
A community connection may involve information about a person's serious illness, daily functioning or changing support needs.
Such information can be sensitive, particularly when the receiving organization operates outside the healthcare system.
A community group may need to know that someone prefers a shorter activity or requires a comfortable place to sit. It does not automatically need access to diagnoses, medication records or details about prognosis.
A person may also wish to maintain relationships without disclosing the full extent of their illness.
These preferences should be respected.
Viet Nam's Law on Personal Data Protection No. 91/2025/QH15 and Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP, both effective from 1 January 2026, establish requirements concerning the processing and protection of personal data, including sensitive health information.
The Law on Medical Examination and Treatment also provides protections concerning patient information and confidentiality.
Any formal referral pathway must establish an appropriate lawful basis, comply with applicable consent and notification requirements and define what information may be shared for a particular purpose.
The person should understand which organization may receive their information and why it is necessary.
Family involvement does not automatically authorize unrelated disclosure of personal health information.
Where legal representation or other specific circumstances apply, the relevant requirements must be considered.
A simple introduction to a community activity may not require the transfer of clinical information at all.
The aim should be to share only what is necessary for the intended connection and to use appropriate arrangements for protecting that information.
Community participation should not require people to disclose personal medical information that the receiving organization does not need.
What might a realistic pilot look like in Viet Nam?
A practical starting point would be a small collaboration involving an established palliative care service and one or two suitable community organizations.
The pilot should begin with a specific purpose rather than an ambition to provide every possible form of social support.
For example, a participating palliative care team might identify adults who express a wish to maintain contact with an existing community activity or reconnect with a familiar group.
The purpose would be to explore whether those connections can be supported through appropriate communication and flexible participation.
The clinical team would continue to manage the person's medical needs and provide relevant clinical advice when required.
An appropriately prepared navigator or social-work professional could help explore the person's preferences and contact suitable community partners.
The receiving organization would remain responsible for the activity it provides.
Before implementation, the partners should establish whether the organization can offer flexible participation and respond appropriately when arrangements change.
A community group that requires strict attendance or lacks the capacity to make suitable adjustments may not be an appropriate pilot partner.
The partners should clarify how clinical concerns will be communicated, what the navigator can and cannot do, and what happens if the person becomes unable or unwilling to continue.
Volunteer responsibilities should be limited to activities for which suitable preparation and support are available.
People receiving palliative care should also have opportunities to shape the arrangements when they wish and are able to do so.
Their views may reveal that maintaining existing relationships matters more than joining new groups. Others may prefer activities unrelated to illness or healthcare.
The pilot should allow these differences rather than introduce a fixed program for everyone receiving palliative care.
It should also recognize that illness may change during the evaluation period.
Someone who initially wishes to attend a group may later prefer occasional contact from home or may decide that further participation is no longer worthwhile.
The program should be able to respond without creating pressure or treating every withdrawal as a failure.
What would meaningful success look like?
Success should not be measured simply by how many referrals are made or how frequently people attend activities.
For someone living with serious illness, regular attendance may be unrealistic or unrelated to what they value.
A person who joins one meaningful gathering with old friends may consider the experience worthwhile. Another may benefit from maintaining occasional contact with a familiar community group.
Someone else may prefer to spend their available energy on private time with family.
These choices should not be judged against a uniform participation target.
Evaluation should consider whether the connection reflected the person's preferences and whether the arrangement was manageable and respectful.
It should also examine whether community organizations were able to adapt when needs changed.
Did the person understand the proposed activity and agree to participate? Were suitable arrangements available? Could attendance be changed or canceled without pressure? Did the receiving organization understand when to contact the palliative care team?
The experience of community partners should also be considered.
An activity that appears useful for participants may be difficult to sustain if it depends on volunteers undertaking responsibilities beyond their competence or available time.
A pilot should identify situations where referrals were unsuitable, arrangements could not be maintained or clinical concerns were not communicated appropriately.
These findings matter because they help determine whether the model can operate safely.
Reported improvements in well-being or social connection may be encouraging, but they should be interpreted according to the evaluation design.
A small feasibility pilot cannot establish that social prescribing improves survival, reduces hospital admissions or produces healthcare savings.
The more appropriate initial objective is to understand whether a limited, voluntary community-connection pathway can operate alongside palliative care without duplicating services or weakening clinical responsibilities.
Community connection can help people remain part of everyday life
People receiving palliative care may continue to value activities, relationships and community roles that have been important throughout their lives.
Serious illness may change how they participate, but it does not necessarily remove their interest in remaining connected.
Social prescribing could help some people maintain these connections by identifying suitable opportunities and supporting communication between healthcare and community organizations.
Its contribution should remain complementary.
Palliative care already addresses physical, psychological, social and spiritual needs. Qualified healthcare professionals must remain responsible for clinical assessment, symptom management and treatment decisions within their scope.
Community organizations can provide meaningful opportunities for participation when they have suitable capabilities and arrangements.
Navigators may help people identify options, communicate preferences and establish appropriate connections, but they should not become substitutes for clinical professionals or specialist support services.
For Social Prescribing Vietnam, the most useful direction is to explore how palliative care services might connect with existing community resources in ways that respect personal goals and changing circumstances.
This does not require turning ordinary cultural, recreational or social activities into medical interventions. Nor does it mean that everyone receiving palliative care should participate in an organized community program.
Some people may want to remain active in familiar groups. Others may prefer brief contact with friends, occasional activities at home or greater privacy.
The appropriate response should reflect what matters to the person at that point in their illness.
A meaningful community connection may sometimes be as simple as helping someone attend a familiar gathering for a short time or maintain contact with people they have known for years.
The value lies in preserving opportunities for personal choice, relationships and participation when these remain important to the individual.
Palliative care must continue to lead whenever clinical needs arise. Alongside that care, thoughtfully organized community connections may help people remain part of the lives and communities they value.
References
World Health Organization. Palliative Care. WHO Fact Sheet. 5 August 2020.
World Health Organization. Planning and Implementing Palliative Care Services: A Guide for Programme Managers. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016.
World Health Organization. Integrating Palliative Care and Symptom Relief into Primary Health Care: A WHO Guide for Planners, Implementers and Managers. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.
World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific. A Toolkit on How to Implement Social Prescribing. Manila: World Health Organization; 2022.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Decision No. 183/QD-BYT promulgating the Guidance on Palliative Care. 25 January 2022.
Tuck C. What has social prescribing got to do with palliative care? Hospice UK Thought Leadership. 11 June 2026.
Willis S, Simpson-Greene C, Best S, Paradine S, Hudson BF. Does involving volunteers in the provision of palliative care make a difference to patient, family, and unpaid carer wellbeing and service use? A systematic review. Palliative Medicine. Published online 31 August 2026. doi:10.1177/02692163261476480.
Wainwright JE, Cook EJ, Ali N, Wilkinson E, Randhawa G. Bridging inequities in palliative and end-of-life care: The role and experiences of community connectors. Palliative Care and Social Practice. 2025;19:26323524251369896. doi:10.1177/26323524251369896.
Le DD, Duong KD, Peeler A, Hocaoglu M, Normand C, Higginson I, Harding R. Contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of home-based palliative care implementation in low- and middle-income countries: A realist review. Palliative Care and Social Practice. 2026;20:26323524261466691. doi:10.1177/26323524261466691.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. Law No. 15/2023/QH15 on Medical Examination and Treatment. Effective 1 January 2024.
Government of Viet Nam. Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work. Effective 15 October 2024.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Circular No. 51/2024/TT-BYT regulating social-work activities in medical examination and treatment establishments licensed to operate as hospitals. Effective 1 March 2025, with its formal document numbering corrected by Decision No. 1975/QD-BYT of 1 July 2026.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT on Social Work Practice and Continuing Professional Knowledge. Effective 25 August 2026.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. Law No. 91/2025/QH15 on Personal Data Protection. Effective 1 January 2026.
Government of Viet Nam. Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP detailing provisions and implementation measures under the Law on Personal Data Protection. Effective 1 January 2026.
Editorial and legal note: This article provides an educational and implementation-focused discussion of community connection alongside palliative care in Viet Nam, based on international evidence, professional guidance and relevant legal frameworks reviewed through October 2026.
It does not establish that social prescribing is a nationally standardized, specifically authorized or clinically validated palliative care service in Viet Nam. Existing palliative care already includes psychosocial, social and spiritual support, and community-connected activities should be understood as potentially complementary rather than as substitutes for these responsibilities.
Any proposed program should assess its actual activities, applicable legal and professional requirements, clinical escalation arrangements, volunteer competence, patient preferences, confidentiality and personal-data protection, and the capacity of participating healthcare and community organizations.