The timing of outpatient palliative care (PC) visits emerges as a crucial factor influencing healthcare utilization and decision-making for cancer patients approaching the end of life (EOL), according to a comprehensive retrospective cohort study published in BMC Cancer. This pioneering research, taking place at the Comprehensive Cancer Center Helsinki University Hospital, delved into the nuanced impacts of integrating palliative care alongside ongoing oncological treatment versus initiating it after disease-modifying therapies ceased. The findings shed light on how strategic timing may reduce hospital burdens and refine patient management in the most vulnerable phase of life.
Palliative care has long been recognized for enhancing quality of life and providing holistic support to patients with incurable cancer. Despite its known benefits, debate persists around when exactly outpatient palliative care should be introduced to maximize these advantages. This study’s retrospective approach, analyzing data from 3,744 deceased cancer patients treated between 2017 and 2018, offers vital clarity by categorizing individuals based on whether they received integrated PC visits co-occurring with standard cancer therapies, non-integrated visits post-therapy cessation, or no outpatient palliative interventions at all.
The distinction between integrated and non-integrated palliative care lies principally in timing. Integrated PC involves initiating supportive care earlier, alongside disease-modifying treatments, whereas non-integrated PC begins only after those treatments are stopped. This paradigm critically impacts the duration patients benefit from palliative care services and consequently their healthcare experiences at the EOL.
Results from the study strikingly demonstrate that 57.4% of patients accessed outpatient PC clinics, with nearly a third benefiting from integrated PC visits. Importantly, median survival from the first palliative care visit to death was significantly longer for those receiving integrated care, averaging 129 days compared to 55 days for the non-integrated group. This substantial difference highlights the potential of early palliative care engagement to extend meaningful support for patients navigating their terminal cancer journey.
Another cornerstone finding concerns hospitalization rates during the final month of life. Patients who experienced any outpatient palliative care, whether integrated or non-integrated, were less likely to be hospitalized compared to those who never attended PC clinics. Hospital admissions during the last 30 days of life fell from 43.6% in the no-visit group to approximately 36% for both integrated and non-integrated PC recipients. Such data imply that outpatient palliative care plays a pivotal role in reducing aggressive hospital-based interventions as death approaches.
Complementing reduced hospitalizations, the study revealed that patients engaged with outpatient palliative care also spent fewer days as inpatients, underscoring the potential for better resource utilization and improved patient-centered care planning. However, when examining emergency department visits, the study found no significant variation between groups, suggesting that while palliative care may decrease planned hospital admissions, acute emergency care needs may remain consistent regardless of PC timing.
Despite these encouraging outcomes, the research underscores a concerning trend: even integrated palliative care typically commenced relatively late, about four months prior to death. Given recommendations advocating for early palliative integration to optimize symptom management and psychosocial support, this delay indicates a systemic gap between best practices and real-world implementation.
The implications of these findings resonate deeply within oncology and palliative medicine communities. They advocate for systematic integration of outpatient palliative care earlier in the cancer trajectory, not merely as a last resort after therapeutic options are exhausted. Such early engagement allows for comprehensive advance care planning, better symptom control, and may ultimately align medical care more closely with patient wishes.
Technically, the study’s strength lies in its large, well-characterized patient cohort and utilization of detailed hospital data to objectively measure healthcare outcomes tied to PC timing. The retrospective design enables a robust examination of real-world practices and their consequences, though prospective studies are warranted to further establish causality and explore mechanisms underpinning the observed benefits.
Beyond statistical associations, this research stimulates critical conversations about structuring cancer care pathways to embed palliative principles early and seamlessly. Healthcare systems should consider policies that incentivize oncologists and palliative specialists to collaborate from diagnosis onward, facilitating smoother transitions and reducing fragmentation that can compromise quality of life.
Moreover, the study highlights that accessibility to tertiary center outpatient palliative care services was relatively high within the investigated population, with more than half of patients attending such clinics. This availability is an encouraging base for reform, but the challenge remains to ensure timely referral and integration across diverse healthcare settings to reach all patients who might benefit.
In conclusion, this landmark study illuminates the profound yet underrecognized influence of the timing of outpatient palliative care visits on hospital service utilization and end-of-life decision-making in patients with cancer. Earlier integration of outpatient PC not only correlates with longer durations of supportive care but also aligns with decreased hospitalizations and fewer inpatient days as death nears. Addressing the discrepancy between optimal timing and current practices could transform cancer care delivery, enhancing both patient experience and healthcare sustainability in this critical phase.
As cancer incidence continues to rise globally, and with it the complexity of care needs at life’s end, prioritizing early palliative care integration offers a tangible pathway to mitigating healthcare burdens while fulfilling ethical imperatives for compassionate, patient-centered care. Future research focusing on intervention strategies, barriers to early PC adoption, and multidisciplinary coordination will be crucial to translate these findings into widespread clinical improvements.
This study serves as a clarion call for clinicians, hospital administrators, and policymakers alike to rethink timing strategies in palliative oncology care, promoting evidence-based practices that extend beyond prolongation of life to enrich its quality during its final chapter. Its insights herald a paradigm shift in how medical systems approach end-of-life cancer management, rooted in timely, integrated care that honors the dignity and preferences of patients facing advanced illness.
Subject of Research: The association between the timing of outpatient palliative care visits and the utilization of hospital services, as well as decision-making at the end of life in patients with cancer.
Article Title: The association of the timing of outpatient palliative care clinic visit on the utilization of hospital services and decision making at the end of life in patients with cancer – a retrospective cohort study.
Article References:
Anttonen, A., Carpén, T., Nåhls, NS. et al. The association of the timing of outpatient palliative care clinic visit on the utilization of hospital services and decision making at the end of life in patients with cancer – a retrospective cohort study. BMC Cancer 25, 1777 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-15242-1
Image Credits: Scienmag.com
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-025-15242-1
