Purpose: This study examined the relationship between end-of-life care stress, attitude, and performance among home-visit nurses under long-term care insurance. It also identified the factors that influence their performance of end-of-life care.Methods: From September 1 to September 15, 2025, data were collected from 138 Long-Term Care Visiting Nurses using a structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson’s correlation, and multiple regression analysis were performed using IBM SPSS version 26.0.Results: The mean score was 3.81±0.50 for end-of-life care stress, 2.72±0.26 for end-of-life care attitude, and 3.09±0.53 for end-of-life care performance. Nurses’ performance of end-of-life care differed significantly based on the frequency of providing such care (t= -2.53, p=.013). End-of-life care stress was positively correlated with end-of-life care attitude (r=.26, p=.002) and performance (r=.21, p=.012). However, end-of-life care attitude and performance were not correlated (r=.14, p=.109). Furthermore, end-of-life care stress (β=.20, p=.020) and frequency (β=.25, p=.003) significantly influenced the end-of-life care performance of long-term care visiting nurses, explaining 9.4% of the variance in their performance.Conclusion: End-of-life care stress and practical experiences influence the end-of-life care provided by visiting nurses. Supporting nurses in effectively managing stress and converting it into professional competence, along with expanding practice opportunities and case-based education, may enhance the quality of end-of-life care.

Background/Objectives: Pressure injuries and diabetic foot ulcers are prevalent chronic wounds requiring nurses to provide prevention, assessment, treatment, and education, especially in community settings in Korea. Although knowledge–practice gaps have been reported for both conditions, evidence remains limited on which interventions should be prioritized for education. This study assessed community-based nurses’ perceived importance and self-reported performance of pressure injury management and diabetic foot care interventions to identify educational priorities using the Borich needs assessment and the Locus for Focus model. Methods: A descriptive survey was conducted with 128 registered nurses, fewer than the a priori minimum of 210. Participants rated the perceived importance and self-reported performance of 18 pressure injury interventions and 10 diabetic foot interventions on 3-point scales. Educational priorities were determined using the Borich needs assessment and the Locus for Focus model. Results: Perceived importance was significantly higher than self-reported performance for pressure injury management (1.79 ± 0.29 vs. 1.61 ± 0.47; discrepancy = 0.177; Borich = 0.316; t = 3.968, Cohen’s d_z = 0.35, p < 0.001) and diabetic foot care (1.76 ± 0.31 vs. 1.53 ± 0.51; discrepancy = 0.228; Borich = 0.401; t = 5.143, d_z = 0.45, p < 0.001). First-priority educational needs for pressure injury management centered on treatment interventions and positioning/repositioning, whereas diabetic foot priorities emphasized preventive foot care and patient education. Conclusions: First-priority educational needs were identified separately for pressure injury management and diabetic foot care. The findings can inform the relative emphasis of continuing education content for community-based nurses.

Purpose: To examine the relationships among hospice perception, knowledge of advance directives, and attitudes toward advance directives (attitudes) in long-term care (LTC) visiting nurses. The factors influencing their attitudes were also identified.Methods: Data were collected from 164 LTC visiting nurses across South Korea using a structured online questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson’s correlation coefficients, and multiple regression analysis were performed using IBM SPSS version 26.0.Results: The mean scores were 71.75±6.39, 8.37±0.85, and 50.21±4.85 for hospice perception, knowledge of advance directives, and attitudes, respectively. Attitudes differed significantly based on age (F=2.84, p=.040). Attitudes were positively correlated with hospice perception (r=.59, p<.001) and knowledge of advance directives (r=.17, p=.027). However, hospice perception and knowledge of advance directives were not correlated (r=.11, p=.150). Furthermore, hospice perception (β=.58, p<.001) was the only factor that significantly influenced attitudes, explaining 34.6% of the variance. Age and knowledge of advance directives were not significant predictors.Conclusion: Hospice perception is the most significant factor influencing visiting nurses’ attitudes toward advance directives. Accordingly, developing awareness-enhancing programs that incorporate professional knowledge and enable the internalization of the philosophy and values of hospice and palliative care is essential. Such initiatives will ultimately improve the quality of community-based end-of-life care provided by visiting nurses.