Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose Energy hardship is a critical, underexplored challenge and sometimes a barrier for patients who are residing and receiving palliative care at home. Unaffordable energy costs or interruptions to an energy supply can compromise clinical care of the patient at home, causing undue stress, and reduce their quality of life (QoL). This paper shares a viewpoint on how augmented reality (AR) technology applications can contribute in an educational manner. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides a viewpoint into energy hardship, its definition and indicators as well as an insight into the level of awareness and perception of energy hardship and current challenges faced specifically by palliative care patients. The paper investigates the capabilities of AR technology and how it can be used as an awareness and educational support tool relating to energy efficiency in the home and as an engaging educational method providing information on the user energy habits and energy saving tips. Findings We detail how a human centric co-creation-based approach can be applied to develop such useful AR applications to meet energy hardship challenges faced by palliative care patients. A synthesis of current Irish-based policy responses and interventions alongside forward looking recommendations provides an insight into how AR technology can be used as a means to raise awareness, educate such vulnerable populations and enhance their QoL outcomes within the home environment. Originality/value This viewpoint paper offers a valuable perspective around the current energy hardships faced by palliative care patients at home and identifies the potential of AR as an effective tool for raising awareness, educating patients and families about energy use and supporting energy saving behaviours. It also highlights the need for further investigation into energy hardship and palliative care and technology-based interventions for vulnerable patient groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cleary et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: