Purpose: Hospital readmissions are considered by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid as a metric for quality of health care delivery. Robust data on the readmission profile of patients with cancer are currently insufficient to determine whether this measure is applicable to cancer hospitals as well. To address this knowledge gap, we estimated the unplanned readmission rate and identified factors influencing unplanned readmissions in a hospitalist service at a comprehensive cancer center. Methods:We retrospectively analyzed unplanned 30-day readmission of patients discharged from the General Internal Medicine Hospitalist Service at a comprehensive cancer center between April 1, 2012, and September 30, 2012. Multiple independent variables were studied using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models, with generalized estimating equations to identify risk factors associated with readmissions. Results:We observed a readmission rate of 22.6% in our cohort. The median time to unplanned readmission was 10 days. Unplanned readmission was more likely in patients with metastatic cancer and those with three or more comorbidities. Patients discharged to hospice were less likely to be readmitted (all P values Ͻ .01). Conclusion:We observed a high unplanned readmission rate among our population of patients with cancer. The risk factors identified appear to be related to severity of illness and open up opportunities for improving coordination with primary care physicians, oncologists, and other specialists to manage comorbidities, or perhaps transition appropriate patients to palliative care. Our findings will be instrumental for developing targeted interventions to help reduce readmissions at our hospital. Our data also provide direction for appropriate application of readmission quality measures in cancer hospitals.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Research ethics services are critical to the clinical, research, and educational missions of an academic health science center. Our ethics program aims to develop a culture where investigators are as intellectually engaged in ethical issues of scientific integrity as they are in study design, data collection, and implementation. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This descriptive analysis depicts the historical development, from 2010 to 2022, of our research ethics program as an exemplar of ethics integration into the research enterprise of an academic health science center that engages in translational research. In this culture, clinicians, translational researchers and their scientific peers, research participants, and community members become involved in ethics investigation, deliberation, and innovation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: There are four pillars to our research ethics program: 1) research ethics consultation service, which fosters the development of ethical best practices and standards for the practice of translational research; 2) education, which provides customized training and educational opportunities in research ethics to diverse stakeholders; 3) leadership, through collaboration and partnerships; 4) scholarly engagement, in the pursuit of innovative ethics research and professional development. Through these initiatives we can engage a broad constituency of stakeholders, become an integral component of research oversight, engage as active participants in the research enterprise, and have a critical role in guiding institutional culture. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The integration of our ethics program mirrors the translational science continuum which promotes the multidirectional flow of ideas among ethics consultants, laboratory/clinical scientists, implementation researchers and the community.