Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation

12100 Pinceland Spur, Ashland, KY 41102 (606) 928-2963
For profit - Limited Liability company 60 Beds DAVID MARX Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
30/100
#209 of 266 in KY
Last Inspection: October 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor overall standing in the care it provides. Ranking #209 out of 266 facilities in Kentucky places it in the bottom half, and as #3 out of 3 in Boyd County, it offers the least favorable option locally. The facility is showing signs of improvement, with issues decreasing from 10 in 2019 to 3 in 2024, which is a positive trend. However, staffing is a weakness, with a low rating of 1 out of 5 stars and less RN coverage than 76% of Kentucky facilities, meaning residents may not receive the attention they need for more complex care. Specific incidents have raised concerns, such as a resident not receiving prescribed pain medication for over 24 hours after admission and failures in developing proper care plans, which could lead to inadequate treatment and increased pain for residents. While there are no fines recorded, the facility still needs to address its serious deficiencies to ensure a better quality of care.

Trust Score
F
30/100
In Kentucky
#209/266
Bottom 22%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
10 → 3 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
42% turnover. Near Kentucky's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kentucky facilities.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 26 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Kentucky. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2019: 10 issues
2024: 3 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (42%)

    6 points below Kentucky average of 48%

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below Kentucky average (2.8)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Staff Turnover: 42%

Near Kentucky avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: DAVID MARX

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record

3 actual harm
Oct 2024 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview, record review, and review of facility's policy, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care in a manner that promoted maintenance of his or her qua...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review, and review of facility's policy, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care in a manner that promoted maintenance of his or her quality of life for 1 of 1 sampled residents (Resident (R) 62). R62's religious beliefs prohibited cutting of women's hair and R62 was given a haircut without consulting the resident's guardian. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident's Rights Policy, dated October 2019, revealed it was the responsibility of all staff members to recognize the rights of residents at all times to enable personal dignity, well-being, and proper delivery of care. Review of R62's Face Sheet found in the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed the facility admitted R62 on 07/26/2021 with diagnoses to include vascular dementia unspecified, cognitive communication deficit, and generalized znxiety disorder. Review of R62's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/24/2022, revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three out of 15, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of a Care Team Member Corrective Action Form, dated 01/25/2022, revealed State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) 7 cut R62's hair after a shower, stating the resident had requested this. Further review of the form revealed SRNA7 was re-educated on resident rights, although she refused to sign, stating the resident had requested the haircut. During an interview with R62's daughter (Daughter 62), on 10/25/2024 at 9:41 AM, she stated when R62 was initially admitted to facility, she stressed to the admitting staff to please not cut the resident's hair as it was against her religion. She stated R62 had hair that hung way down her back on admission, and she had never known her mother to cut her hair. She stated she started crying when she came to the facility in late January of 2022 and saw her mother's hair was cut to the top of her shoulders. She believed staff may have cut R62's hair so they did not have to take care of it. She stated R62 never said anything about it, and did not appear to be affected negatively due to her confusion. SRNA7 was no longer employed at the facility and could not be reached for interview. During an interview with SRNA4, on 10/24/2024 at 1:36 PM, she stated she remembered working with R62 and the resident had dementia and was confused. She stated R62's family was very religious, and the resident would always have to be in skirts and wear her hair long. SRNA4 stated she would sometime braid R62's hai, and the resident's hair would hang about to her waist. She stated she had never known the resident to cut her hair, but heard someone on night shift had cut her hair to about shoulder length. She stated the family was upset regarding this, although it did not appear to upset R62. SRNA4 stated everyone knew R62 did not cut her hair, and she remembered speaking with family who stated her hair could be braided or put into a ponytail. During an interview with SRNA5, on 10/24/2024 4:58 PM, she stated R62 had to wear skirts and her family would not allow her hair to be cut. She stated she was told by family when R62 arrived that she only wore skirts and not to cut her hair. SRNA5 could not remember a situation in which R62's hair was cut. During an interview with SRNA6, on 10/24/2024 at 7:40 PM, he stated he remembered taking care of R62. He described R62 as confused and she would holler out a lot. He stated she always had long hair, and it was never cut during the time she was on his hallway, that he was aware of. During an interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1, on 10/24/2024 at 3:00 PM, she stated she was not aware R62 wore her hair long for religious reasons and that it could not be cut, but heard about it after the fact. She stated R62 had hair past her shoulders, and after cutting it, her hair came down to her shoulders. During an interview with the Wound Nurse, on 10/24/2024 at 4:43 PM, she stated R62 had dementia. She further stated R62's family would come to visit, and although she was not certain which religion the resident and family belonged to, she remembered R62 always wore skirts and had long hair. She stated R62 would wear her hair pulled back and braided or in a bun, and that it would hang down to her mid back area. She stated she remembered something about the family being upset someone had cut R62's hair, and that it did look a little shorter to her. During an interview with the Regional Social Services (RSS), formerly the Social Services Director, on 10/24/2024 at 8:12 AM, she stated she did not remember any situation in which R62 had a haircut. She stated R62's family was very involved and came to visit often. The RSS described R62 as being a pleasantly confused resident who enjoyed being around activities to see what was going on. During an interview with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS), on 10/25/2024 at 8:42 AM, she stated she did not remember the circumstances behind why SRNA7 cut R62's hair, but remembered SRNA7 refused to sign a corrective action form, as she maintained R62 wanted her hair cut. The DNS stated she reviewed the resident's EMR and could not find anything regarding her preferences for no haircut. She stated she was uncertain whether or not staff knew not to cut the resident's hair. She further stated SRNA7 was disciplined as she was not a beautician, and was not authorized to cut R62's hair. The DNS stated the process would have been to put a resident on the beautician list for haircuts, as aides do not normally cut hair. She further stated she believed R62's sister was the one that complained after the haircut, and R62's family was very involved. She stated in cases where a resident was not their own responsible party, the guardian should be consulted before a haircut. During an interview with the Executive Director (ED), on 10/25/2024 at 10:28 AM, he stated he was not employed at the facility at the time of the incident, and only knew R62 briefly. He stated his expectation for any resident with religious preferences stringent in dressing or hair style would be for staff to follow their wishes. He further stated the guardian should be contacted prior to doing anything.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and review of facility's policy, the facility failed to follow an infection prevention and control policy to prevent the development and transmission of communicable d...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and review of facility's policy, the facility failed to follow an infection prevention and control policy to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 8 sampled residents receiving blood glucose monitoring (Resident (R) 55). Observation on 10/23/2024 at 11:00 AM revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 placed R55's glucometer on top of the treatment cart without a barrier prior to obtaining a blood glucose reading. Following the glucose reading, LPN1 cleaned the glucometer for two minutes and placed the glucometer on top of the treatment cart to dry without a barrier between the cart top and the glucometer. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention, dated March 2022, revealed it was the responsibility of nurses to practice aspectic technique when obtaining glucose readings and to follow the manufacturer's guidelines when performing cleaning of the glucometer. Review of the Validation Checklist for Glucometer Disinfection, undated, revealed the nurse is to perform the procedure in accordance with the facility's standard of practice. Further review revealed the following: Step 13 indicated to cleanse the glucometer with a disinfectant wipe; Step 14 revealed to discard the disinfectant wipe into the waste receptacle; and Step 15 revaeld to allow the device to dry for five minutes or per the manufacturer's recommendation. Review of R55's Face Sheet revealed the facility admitted the resident on 07/09/2024 with diagnoses to include morbid obsesity, type II diabetes with Insulin, and lower extremity weakness. Review of R55's initial Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/23/2024, revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated the resident had no cognitive impairment. During an interview with LPN1 on 10/23/2024 at 11:21 AM, she stated the way to clean the glucometer after each use was by using a prepackaged wipe. She further explained she used the prepackaged wipe to wipe all around the glucometer to be sure any blood products were not on it, and did so for two minutes. After the two minutes was over, the glucomter was placed on the cart to dry for five minutes, on a barrier. During an interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing Services (ADNS) on 10/23/2024 at 1:40 PM, she stated nurses were expected to place a barrier between the top of the treatment cart and the clean glucometer when preparing to obtain a glucose reading from a resident. She further stated after the cleaning of the glucometer, it should be placed on a barrier to dry and not set directly on the treatment cart. During an interview with the Director of Nursing Services (DNS) on 10/24/2024 at 11:08 AM, she stated nursing staff were expected to follow guidlines outlined in the glucometer disinfection policy. She further stated nurses should use a protective barrier between the glucometer and any multi-use surface to prevent contamination and the spread of germs. During an interview with the Executive Director (ED) on 10/25/2024 at 10:29 AM, he stated his expectation was for nurses to properly follow the policies related to infetion control and the cleaning of glucometers. He further stated it was important for nurses to clean glucometers to prevent the spread of infection from resident to resident.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview, review of the facility staffing sheets, review of the facility assessment, review of the payroll-based journal staffing information, and review of resident grievances, the facility...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, review of the facility staffing sheets, review of the facility assessment, review of the payroll-based journal staffing information, and review of resident grievances, the facility failed to have adequate nursing staff to maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, considering the number, acuity, and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment. The findings include: Review of the payroll-based journal (PBJ) data, dated April-June 2024, revealed the facility had an overall staffing rating of one star. Review of the facility assessment, dated 10/17/2024, revealed the facility determined it required three state registered nurse aides (SRNAs) each shift to meet the needs of the residents. Further review revealed the facility required one to two Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) per shift. Review of the facility report Daily Census, dated 10/12/2024 and 10/13/2024 revealed the facility's census was 58 and 57 residents, respectively. Review of the facility monthly staff schedules for 05/2024, 06/2024, and 10/2024 revealed the facility had two SRNAs on night shift on 05/01/2024, 06/01/2024, 06/05/2024. Further review revealed the facility had two SRNAs on day and night shift on 10/12/2024 and 10/13/2024. Review of the monthly staffing data compared with the facility census revealed the total number of nursing services hours on 10/12/2024 and 10/13/2024 was 95.5 hours with 57-58 residents in the building. When divided by the number of residents in the facility on 10/12/2024 and 10/13/2024, the hours per patient day (PPD) was 1.6. Review of the facility form Report of Concern, dated 10/17/2024 revealed R8 filed a grievance that she did not receive her shower over the weekend of 10/12/2024 -10/13/2024. Further review revealed the facility found R8 received a shower on 10/14/2024, but did not confirm the grievance. In an interview on 10/22/2024 at 12:11 PM, R51 stated he often had to wait up to an hour for staff to answer his call light to help him with toileting needs. He further stated he felt frustrated by having to wait so long. In an interview on 10/22/2024 at 12:14 PM, R55 stated he saw his roommate, R51, have to wait up to an hour for his call light to be answered and that made him worried about his roommate and other residents in the facility who could not get up on their own to go ask for help. In an interview on 10/25/2024 at 12:03 PM, R8 stated she did not get her shower on 10/12/2024 as she preferred because of staffing. She further stated when this occurred, she felt dirty and frustrated when staff told her they did not have enough time to give her shower because there were only two SRNAs working each shift that day. In continued interview, R8 stated when the facility was down to two SRNAs per shift, residents did not receive showers according to their preferences. In interview on 10/23/2024 at 2:03 PM, the long-term care ombudsman stated she heard repeated complaints from residents about long call light wait times and not getting showers due to short staffing. In an interview on 10/24/2024 at 1:20 PM, SRNA4 stated when there were only two SRNAs per shift, some, but not all, nurses would help the SRNAs complete tasks such as assisting with repositioning, incontinence care, and showering. In further interview, SRNA4 stated residents would eventually get care, but might have to wait longer than they should when staffing was that low. In an interview on 10/25/2024 at 11:39 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing Services (ADNS) stated one of her responsibilities was managing the schedule. In further interview, the ADNS stated she tried to meet a staffing level of four SRNAs per shift. Per interview, members of the management team and office staff helped with meal pass and answering call lights on day shift but did not provide coverage as long as there was a licensed nurse in the building. Additionally, the ADNS stated she believed the one-star staffing rating for the 04/2024, 05/2024, and 06/2024 quarter was related to staff being less likely to pick up shifts for extra money due to having tax return money. In an interview on 10/25/2024 at 9:27 AM, the Director of Nursing Services (DNS) stated in addition to the estimates in the facility assessment, the facility used an hours per patient day (PPD) ratio to determine the level of staffing needed for current census. Per interview, the staffing level goal was a 2.8PPD for nurses and aides combined. She continued to state she would need to look up the census for 10/12/2024 and 10/13/2024 to see if that met the PPD goal. In further interview, the DNS stated for the average census, the facility required four or five SRNAs and two Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) on day shift, and three to four SRNAs and one LPN on night shift. In an interview on 10/25/2024 at 10:38 AM, the Executive Director (ED) stated the facility's process to cover staffing shortages caused by a call-in was to try to get staff to pick up the shifts using incentives. Per interview, if no staff came in to cover the shift, administration would be willing to come in to help, but night shift staff were generally more senior and able to work efficiently enough to get their work done, even with a heavy patient load. In further interview, the ED stated if day shift SRNAs knew night shift was short, they would do extra tasks to help out. When asked about specific dates with short staffing on both shifts, the ED stated an activities aide who was also an SRNA pitched in to help with patient care tasks on day shift, but he could not verify what was done on night shift. The ED continued to state that he understood the facility assessment was important and the facility management team, including himself and the DNS, determined three SRNAs per shift was what they needed to meet the needs of the residents. Additionally, the ED stated he was aware R8 did not receive her 10/12/2024 shower until 10/14/2024 and that he had apologized to the resident.
Oct 2019 10 deficiencies 3 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement a Baseline Car...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement a Baseline Care Plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care for one (1) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #207). Resident #207 was admitted to the facility on the evening of 09/23/19 at approximately 8:00 PM, with diagnoses to include Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. However, there was no documented evidence the Baseline Care Plan dated 09/23/19, was developed and implemented to address the resident's Left Arm Fracture and associated pain. Upon admission, Physician's Orders were received for Percocet 10-325 milligrams (mg), one (1) tablet by mouth three (3) times a day PRN (as needed) related to the Left Humerus Fracture. Staff interview, and interview with Resident #207, revealed the resident was experiencing pain and requesting pain medication on 09/23/19 and 09/24/19, and the resident was treated with an ice pack to the affected arm. However, there was no documented evidence the resident received Percocet pain medication until 09/24/19 at 8:44 PM, which was over twenty-four (24) hours after admission. Furthermore, new Physician's Orders dated 09/25/19, were received for Percocet 10-325 mg, one (1) tablet every four (4) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. The Baseline Care Plan was revised on 09/26/19, with a focus of at risk for pain related to a diagnosis of Left Arm Fracture, with an intervention to administer pain medication as ordered by the Physician; however, the Baseline Care Plan was not implemented. According to the Controlled Drug Record, the resident received the last dose of the Percocet 10-325 mg on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM, and did not receive another dose of the pain medication until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, which was approximately thirty-one (31) hours later. Resident #207 complained, he/she requested pain medication and was experiencing a high level of pain during the timeframes in which the pain medication was unavailable. (Refer to F-697 and F-755) The Findings Include: Interview with the DON on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM revealed the facility did not have a policy related to Baseline Care Plans. 1. Review of Resident #207's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/23/19, with diagnoses to include Unspecified Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm, Closed Fracture; Chronic Pain due to Trauma; and Parkinson's Disease. Resident #207's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was not completed at the time of the survey, due to the resident being newly admitted . Review of Resident #207's Baseline Care Plan, dated 09/23/19, revealed the resident could communicate easily and understood staff, and was alert and cognitively intact. Additional review revealed presence of pain was marked, No. There was no goal or evidence of interventions in place to address the resident's pain, although the resident had a diagnosis of Left Humerus Fracture and Chronic Pain due to Trauma, and Physician's Orders for Percocet PRN (narcotic pain medication). Review of the Admit/Readmit Screener dated 09/23/19 at 8:43 PM, revealed the resident was alert to person, place and situation. Additional review revealed Resident #207's pain intensity was documented as three (3) out of ten (10) on a rating scale of zero (00) to ten (10) with ten (10) being the highest level of pain. Further review revealed no documentation of the location, onset or duration, quality of the pain, coping, lifestyle effects or treatments on the document. Observation of Resident #207, on 10/01/19 at 5:05 PM, revealed the resident was in bed and had a sling in place to his/her left arm. Interview with Resident #207 during this observation, revealed he/she was prescribed Percocet 10 mg and was used to taking the medication four (4) times a day. Further, the prescribed Percocet was not available the first twenty-four (24) hours after admission to the facility, although he/she requested the medication on 09/23/19 and 09/24/19 for pain in his/her left arm. Additional interview revealed he/she received the Percocet last Sunday morning (09/29/19), and then there was no more Percocet available until Monday (09/30/19), at around 5:00 PM. Subsequent interview with Resident #207, on 10/03/19 at 8:33 AM, revealed going without pain medication for his/her fractured arm during his/her stay at this facility was Ridiculous. Further interview revealed when he/she had to go a day without pain medication he/she was hurting really bad. Per interview, his/her pain level was a seven (7), an eight (8), or a nine (9), on a scale of one (1) to ten (10), with ten (10) being the highest level of pain when he/she had to go without the pain medication during his/her stay at the facility. Review of Resident #207's Order Recap Report, revealed orders dated 09/23/19, for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen (Percocet) 10/325 mg, one (1) tablet every eight (8) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. Review of Resident #207's Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated September 2019, revealed orders for Percocet 10-325 mg, one (1) tablet every eight (8) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm, Closed Fracture, with a start date of 09/23/19 at 8:00 PM. However, further review of the MAR, revealed there was no PRN Percocet 10-325 milligram signed out as administered on 09/23/19 or 09/24/19. (This MAR which revealed the time as 8:00 PM, which was the first documented time in the medical record to indicate the time the resident was admitted to the facility). Additional review of the MAR, revealed orders for Percocet 5-325 mg, two (2) tablets by mouth one (1) time only with a start date of 09/24/19 at 6:30 PM. According to the MAR, the resident received the one (1) time dose on 09/24/19 at 8:44 PM. This was the first dose of the Percocet medication Resident #207 received since the resident was admitted on [DATE] at approximately 8:00 PM, revealing the resident went over twenty-four (24) hours without pain medication. The Pharmacy correspondence, dated 10/04/19 at 12:38 PM, revealed the prescription for Oxycodone-Acetaminophen 10/325 mg for one (1) tablet PO TID PRN was received on 09/24/19 at 2:22 PM, and the medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 2:32 AM. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM and 10/04/19 at 11:44, revealed she admitted Resident #207 sometime after 7:00 PM on 09/23/19. Per interview, she received the Discharge Summary from the transferring hospital, which included the list of discharge medications upon the resident's admission and verified Physician's Orders with the Physician via phone. Further, she entered the orders into the point click care electronic medical record, which was then automatically electronically transferred to pharmacy. She stated she then faxed the prescription sent by the hospital for the resident's Oxycodone/Acetaminophen to pharmacy. Continued interview with LPN #2, revealed Resident #207 did ask for an ice pack for his/her shoulder after admission on [DATE], and was persistent about it, but she could not remember if the resident was in pain or if the resident requested pain medication. She stated the resident's Percocet medication was not delivered by pharmacy and she did not call pharmacy in an attempt to get a code in order to get the Percocet out of the Nexsys the evening of the resident's admission. LPN #2 stated when she left around 10:00 PM on 09/23/19, the resident's Percocet pain medication had not yet arrived from pharmacy. Interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #3, on 10/04/19 at 5:00 PM, revealed he was working the evening Resident #207 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM, and recalled the resident being in pain and requesting pain medication. Further, SRNA #3 stated Resident # 207 would ask every three (3) to four (4) hours for pain medicine as he/she was in pain, but the pain medication was unavailable. Continued interview revealed staff used ice packs on the resident's affected arm. Interview on 10/04/19 at 4:30 PM, with SRNA #1, revealed she was working the night Resident #207 was admitted to the facility, and she recalled the resident was in pain. However, she could not recall if the resident received any pain medication. Interview with LPN #1, on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, revealed Resident #207 asked for pain medication and had grimacing on his/her face when she arrived at work on 09/24/19, at 2:00 PM. LPN #1 further stated the Registered Nurse (RN) Supervisor was trying to get the code for the Nexsys from pharmacy in order to obtain Percocet pain medication for the resident due to the pharmacy not receiving the prescription. Interview with the RN Supervisor, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM, revealed Resident #207 was requesting pain medication on 09/24/19, and after the Director of Nursing (DON) refaxed the prescription for Percocet to pharmacy, she (RN Supervisor) called the pharmacy and was informed Resident #207's Percocet would not be delivered until 10:00 PM or 11:00 PM that night. The RN Supervisor further stated she had to call the Physician to obtain orders for a one (1) time dosage of two (2) Percocet 5/325 tablets. She further stated she then called Pharmacy to get the code to the Nexsys in order to obtain the medication. Interview with the Pharmacist, on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM and 10/04/19 at 9:40 AM, revealed facility pharmacy did not receive the prescription for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen for Resident #207 until 09/24/19 at 2:22 PM. Per interview, the prescription was for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen 10/325 tablets, give one (1) tab TID or five (5) days PRN for mild to severe pain for fifteen (15) doses and the pharmacy delivered twelve (12) tablets to the facility on [DATE] at 2:32 AM. Continued interview revealed the pharmacy received a verbal order to get a one (1) time emergent dose for Resident #207 for two (2) tablets of Oxycodone 5/325 mg on 09/24/19 at 5:25 PM, and the facility obtained the medication from the Nexsys. 2. Additional review of Resident #207 medical record revealed an Order Summary Report, including new Physician's Orders dated 09/25/19 for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen 10-325 mg, give (1) one tab every four (4) hours PRN pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus Left Arm. Review of Resident #207 revised Baseline Care Plan, dated 09/26/19, revealed the resident was at risk for pain due to diagnosis of left arm fracture. Continued review revealed a goal stating the resident would not have any unaddressed episodes of pain. Interventions included administer pain medication as ordered by the Physician; monitor for effectiveness; and observe for nonverbal signs of pain. Review of Resident #207's MAR, dated September 2019, revealed orders for Percocet tablet 10-325 mg, give one (1) tablet by mouth every four (4) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. Further review of the MAR, revealed Resident #207 received the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM, for a pain level of seven (7) out of ten (10). According to the Controlled Drug Record, this dose was the last dose of the medication available, and was signed out by LPN #1. Continued review of the September 2019 MAR, revealed Resident #207 was not administered another dosage of Oxycodone-Acetaminophen tablet 10-325 mg until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, for a pain level of eight (8) out of ten (10). Therefore, the resident went approximately thirty-one (31) hours between doses of the PRN Percocet pain medication, indicating the Baseline Care Plan was not implemented. Interview with LPN #1, on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, revealed she thought she reordered the Oxycodone for Resident #207 when she administered the last dose of the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM; however, she could not remember for sure. She stated she left work on 09/29/19 at 2:00 PM and another nurse was working on obtaining the prescription; however, she could not recall which nurse. Further, she stated Resident #207's medication should have been reordered and the prescription obtained prior to the medication running out. Additional interview with the Pharmacist, on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM and 10/04/19 at 9:40 AM, revealed the facility did not request the re-order for Percocet for Resident #207 until 09/29/19 at 9:17 AM. Per interview, at that time the facility was notified a new prescription was required because the facility had already changed the order in the electronic system to dose every four (4) hours PRN. Further, pharmacy did receive the prescription on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM, for Percocet 10/325 mg one (1) tablet every four (4) hours PRN, and the medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 4:56 PM. Interview with the MDS Coordinator, on 10/04/19 at 4:43 PM, revealed the admission nurse starts the Baseline Care Plan as it was autopopulated by the computerized system. Further, the Baseline Care Plan was reviewed in the morning meeting by the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) to ensure it was accurate. Further, interview revealed there were no interventions on Resident #207's Baseline Care Plan dated 09/23/19, but the Baseline Care Plan needed to have interventions to ensure necessary care was delivered by the nurses and SRNAs until the Comprehensive Care Plan was developed. Further interview revealed Resident #207's Baseline Care Plan update on 09/26/19 did have interventions related to administering pain medications as ordered; and she acknowledged the resident's Care Plan was not implemented. Per interview, the resident did not have medication available to administer upon request on admission and also for a timeframe between 09/29/19 and 09/30/19. Interview with the DON, on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM, and on 10/04/19 at 7:47 PM, revealed it was unacceptable for the resident to wait over twenty-four (24) hours after admission to receive PRN pain medication if requested. Further, she was unaware Resident #207's Oxycodone pain medication was unavailable from 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, until this Survey, and this was unacceptable. The DON, reviewed Resident #207's Baseline Care Plan, and acknowledged it did not address the resident's pain on admission, 09/23/19, even though the resident was admitted with a Fractured Arm. Further, the DON acknowledged the Baseline Care Plan interventions added on 09/26/19 were not implemented related to administration of pain medication. Interview with the Administrator on 10/04/19 at 7:44 PM, revealed staff was to deliver care as per Physician's Orders. Further, she acknowledged the Baseline Care Plan should be developed and implemented in order to provide a guideline for staff in delivery of care. .
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure pain management was provided...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure pain management was provided to residents who require such services for one (1) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #207). Resident #207 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] at approximately 8:00 PM, and Physician's Orders were obtained for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen (Percocet) 10-325 milligrams (mg), one (1) tablet PO TID (by mouth three (3) times a day) PRN (as needed) related to a Closed Fracture of the Left Humerus. However, there was no documented evidence the resident received any pain medication until 09/24/19 at 8:44 PM, after orders were received for a one (1) time dose of Percocet 5-325 mg, two (2) tablets. Staff interviews revealed the resident did request the PRN Percocet pain medication after admission, and an ice pack was used to treat the resident's pain due to the medication being unavailable. Resident #207 went over twenty-four (24) hours after admission without the ordered Percocet pain medication, while experiencing pain in the left arm. In addition, new Physician's Orders dated 09/25/19 were received for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen, 10-325 mg, one (1) tablet every four (4) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus Left Arm for Resident #207. Per the Controlled Drug Record, the resident received the last dose of the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM. However, the facility failed to ensure the medication was re-ordered and a prescription was obtained timely. There was no documented evidence the resident received the medication from 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM, until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, which was approximately thirty-one (31) hours later. Interview with Resident #207, revealed he/she was experiencing a high level of pain during the time periods in which the pain medication was unavailable. (Refer to F-655 and F-755) The findings include: Interview with the Administrator, on 10/03/19 at 2:03 PM, revealed the facility did not have a policy related to pain management; however, she stated it was her expectation residents were on an effective pain regimen. 1. Review of Resident #207's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/23/19 with diagnoses including Unspecified Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm, Closed Fracture; Chronic Pain due to Trauma; Seizures; and Parkinson's Disease. Resident #207's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was not completed at the time of the survey, as the resident was newly admitted . Review of the Baseline Care Plan, dated 09/23/19, revealed the resident could communicate easily and understood staff, and was alert and cognitively intact. Further review revealed presence of pain was marked No. There was no goal or evidence of interventions in place related to pain, although the resident had a diagnosis of Left Humerus Fracture and Chronic Pain due to Trauma, and Physician Orders for PRN (as needed) pain medication (Oxycodone/Acetaminophen). Review of the Admit/Readmit Screener dated 09/23/19 at 8:43 PM, revealed Resident #207 was alert to person, place and situation. Further review revealed Resident #207's pain intensity was documented as three (3) out of ten (10) on a rating scale of zero (00) to ten (10) with ten (10) being the highest level of pain. Additional review revealed no documentation of the location, onset or duration, quality of the pain, coping, lifestyle effects or treatments on the document. Observation of Resident #207, on 10/01/19 at 5:05 PM, revealed the resident was in bed with family identified as the resident's spouse, at the bedside. Resident #207 was observed with a sling in place to his/her left arm. Interview with Resident #207 during this observation, revealed he/she was prescribed Percocet 10 mg and was used to taking the medication four (4) times a day. Continued interview with Resident #207, revealed the prescribed Percocet was not available the first twenty-four (24) hours after admission to the facility, although he/she requested the medication on 09/23/19 and 09/24/19 for pain in his/her left arm. Resident #207 stated the nurses told him/her the Physician's Orders for pain medication had been sent to pharmacy, but the medication was not delivered. Further interview revealed he/she received the Percocet last Sunday morning (09/29/19) and then there was no more Percocet available until Monday (09/30/19) at around 5:00 PM. Additional interview revealed the facility staff told him/her they were waiting on pharmacy to deliver the medication. Subsequent interview with Resident #207, on 10/03/19 at 8:33 AM, revealed during the times his/her pain medications were not available, after admission, and also between 09/29/19 and 09/30/19, he/she was in a lot of pain. Per interview, he/she could take a lot of pain as he/she had been in car wrecks and worked construction, and was tough, but going without pain medication for his/her fractured arm during his/her stay at this facility was Ridiculous. Further, when he/she had to go a day without pain medication he/she was hurting really bad. The resident stated his/her pain level was a seven (7), an eight (8), or a nine (9), on a scale of one (1) to ten (10), with ten (10) being the highest level of pain when he/she had to go without the pain medication during his/her stay at the facility. Review of Resident #207's Hospital Discharge Summary, from the transferring hospital, printed on 09/23/19 at 3:39 PM, revealed a list of discharge medications including Percocet 10/325 mg one (1) tablet PO TID PRN. (by mouth three (3) times a day as needed). Review of Resident #207's Order Recap Report, revealed orders dated 09/23/19, for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen 10/325 mg, give one (1) tablet every eight (8) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. Review of Resident #207's Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated September 2019, revealed the resident was ordered Percocet 10-325 mg, one (1) tablet every eight (8) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm, Closed Fracture, with a start date of 09/23/19 at 8:00 PM. However, further review of the MAR, revealed there was no PRN Percocet 10-325 milligram administered on 09/23/19 or 09/24/19. (This MAR which revealed a time of 8:00 PM, was the first documented time in the medical record to indicate the time the resident was admitted to the facility). Additional review of the MAR, revealed orders for Percocet (Oxycodone-Acetaminophen) tablet 5-325 mg, two (2) tablets by mouth one (1) time only with a start date of 09/24/19 at 6:30 PM. Per the MAR, the resident received the one (1) time dose on 09/24/19 at 8:44 PM. This was the first dose of the Percocet medication received since admission on [DATE] at approximately 8:00 PM, revealing the resident went over twenty-four (24) hours without pain medication. (There was no documentation to indicate the resident's pain level at the time this dose was administered). Review of the written Pharmacy correspondence, dated 10/04/19 at 12:38 PM, revealed the prescription for Oxycodone-Acetaminophen 10/325 mg for one (1) tablet PO TID PRN was received on 09/24/19 at 2:22 PM, and the medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 2:32 AM. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM and 10/04/19 at 11:44, revealed Resident #207 arrived sometime after 7:00 PM on 09/23/19, and she completed his/her admission. Per interview, she received the Discharge Summary from the transferring hospital, which included the list of discharge medications upon the resident's admission. She stated she talked to the facility Physician to verify medications before entering the resident's Physician's Orders into the point click care electronic medical record, which was then automatically electronically transferred to pharmacy. Further, the hospital sent a prescription for the resident's Oxycodone/Acetaminophen and she faxed this prescription to pharmacy the evening of the resident's admission. Continued interview with LPN #2, revealed the transferring facility called a report in related to Resident 207, but when she was to the nurse at the transferring hospital, she did not receive a clear answer as to what time the resident received the last doses of his/her medications. Per interview, the transferring hospital did not send the MAR, and therefore she did not know when the resident last received his/her medications, including Percocet. LPN #2 stated she did not think to ask the facility Physician if she should administer Resident #207's evening doses of medications once delivered from pharmacy or obtained from the Nexsys (emergency box), and she did not administer any medication to the resident on her shift, 09/23/19. Continued interview with LPN #2, revealed new admission's orders were automatically Stat orders and if a controlled drug was ordered, staff was to get the controlled drug from the Nexsys. She stated facility staff had to call the pharmacy to obtain a code number to enter into the Nexsys in order to obtain controlled medications, and pharmacy needed the prescription before they could give out the code. Per interview, if Resident #207's medications were not delivered from pharmacy on the night shift after the resident's admission, the night nurse should have pulled the resident's medications from Nexsys for the night doses, or called pharmacy to have the medications sent Stat. Continued interview with LPN #2, revealed Resident #207 did ask for an ice pack for his/her shoulder after admission on [DATE] and was persistent about it, but she could not recall if the resident was in pain or if the resident requested pain medication. Per interview, she did not call pharmacy in an attempt to get a code in order to get the Percocet out of the Nexsys the evening of the resident's admission. LPN #2 stated she left around 10:00 PM on 09/23/19, and the resident's Percocet pain medication had not yet arrived from pharmacy when she left. She stated she completed the admission paperwork, verified the orders with the Physician, entered the orders in the electronic record, and then went home. Interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #3, on 10/04/19 at 5:00 PM, revealed he was working the evening Resident # 207 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM, and was assigned to the resident that evening. Further interview revealed he recalled the resident being in pain and requesting pain medication. SRNA #3 stated he remembered the nurses saying they were waiting to get pain medication from the pharmacy. Further, SRNA #3 stated Resident # 207 would ask every three (3) to four (4) hours for pain medicine as he/she was in pain. Per interview, staff used ice packs on the resident's affected arm. Interview on 10/04/19 at 4:30 PM, with SRNA #1, revealed she was working the night Resident #207's was admitted to the facility. Additional interview revealed Resident #207 was having pain, but she could not recall the pain being severe. Per interview, she could not recall if the resident received any pain medication. Interview with LPN #4, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM, revealed she was assigned to the resident on 09/24/19 when the pharmacy called and said they did not receive the prescription for Resident #207's pain medication. LPN #4 stated she then faxed the prescription from the nurse's station fax machine and later realized the faxes were not going through. She stated the Director of Nursing (DON) then refaxed the prescription to the pharmacy on 09/24/19. Interview with LPN #1, on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, revealed Resident #207 asked for pain medication and had grimacing on his/her face when she came in to work on 09/24/19, at 2:00 PM. LPN #1 stated the Registered Nurse (RN) Supervisor was trying to get the code for the Nexsys from pharmacy in order to obtain pain medication for the resident. Per interview, pharmacy said they did not get the prescription and had to call the Physician to get a prescription sent over to pharmacy. LPN #1 stated Resident #207 should have had pain medication available for administration as the resident was having pain related to his/her fractured arm. Interview with the RN Supervisor, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM, revealed Resident #207 was asking for his/her pain medication on 09/24/19. Per interview, after the DON refaxed the prescription for Oxycodone, she (RN Supervisor) called the pharmacy and was informed Resident #207's Percocet would not be delivered until 10:00 PM or 11:00 PM that night. The RN Supervisor further stated she then called the Physician to obtain orders for a one (1) time dosage of two (2) Percocet 5/325 tablets. She stated she then called Pharmacy to get the code to the Nexsys in order to obtain the medication. Interview with the Pharmacist, on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM and 10/04/19 at 9:40 AM, revealed facility staff enters the orders into the electronic system and the pharmacy receives them electronically. Further, if the medication order was for a controlled drug, a prescription was needed in order to fill the medication. Per interview, the pharmacy did not receive the prescription for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen for Resident #207 until 09/24/19 at 2:22 PM. Per interview, the prescription was for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen 10/325 tablets, give one (1) tab TID or five (5) days PRN for mild to severe pain for fifteen (15) doses and twelve (12) tablets were delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 2:32 AM. Further interview revealed the pharmacy received a verbal order to get a one (1) time emergent dose for Resident #207 for two (2) tablets of Oxycodone 5/325 mg on 09/24/19 at 5:25 PM, and the facility obtained the medication from the Nexsys. 2. Further review of Resident #207 medical record revealed an Order Summary Report, including new Physician's Orders dated 09/25/19 for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen 10-325 mg, give (1) one tab every four (4) hours PRN pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus Left Arm. Review of Resident #207's MAR, dated September 2019, revealed orders for Percocet tablet 10-325 mg, one (1) tablet by mouth every four (4) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. Continued review of the MAR, revealed Resident #207 received the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM, for a pain level of seven (7) out of ten (10). Review of the Controlled Drug Record, revealed this dose was the last dose of the medication available, and was signed out by LPN #1. Additional review of the September 2019 MAR, revealed Resident #207 was not administered another dosage of Oxycodone-Acetaminophen tablet 10-325 mg until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, for a pain level of eight (8) out of ten (10). Therefore, the resident went approximately thirty-one (31) hours between doses of the PRN Percocet pain medication. Interview with LPN #1, on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, revealed the nurses were to reorder the medication through the electronic medical record in the computerized system by pushing the re-order button on the electronic MAR, when the medication was getting low. Further, she thought she reordered the Oxycodone for Resident #207 when she administered the last dose of the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM; however, she could not remember for sure. She stated she left work on 09/29/19 at 2:00 PM and another nurse was working on obtaining the prescription, but she could not recall which nurse. However, she stated Resident #207's medication should have been reordered and the prescription obtained prior to the medication running out to ensure the medication was delivered from pharmacy promptly. Further interview with the Pharmacist, on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM and 10/04/19 at 9:40 AM, revealed it was the facility's responsibility to send refill requests before the resident ran out of medication. Additional interview revealed the facility did not request the re-order for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen for Resident #207 until 09/29/19 at 9:17 AM, and at that time the facility was notified a new prescription was required because the facility had already changed the order in the electronic system to dose every four (4) hours PRN. Per interview, pharmacy did not receive the prescription until 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM, for Percocet 10/325 mg one (1) tablet every four (4) hours PRN, and the medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 4:56 PM. Additional interview revealed if the pharmacy receives specific requests to deliver sooner than the normal delivery times, via Instant Message system or phone call, the pharmacy can make as special delivery. However, further interview revealed the facility did not put in a special request for the medication to be delivered sooner. Interview with the DON, on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM, and on 10/04/19 at 7:47 PM, revealed when the facility received a new admission from the hospital, the nurse verified the Hospital Discharge Summary list of medications with the Physician by phone, then entered the Physician's Orders into the electronic record which was automatically electronically transmitted to pharmacy. The DON stated the Physician reconciled and signed off on the orders during their next visit. She stated for a controlled drug, the prescription needed to be faxed to the pharmacy. Further, upon a resident's admission to the facility, the nurse should check with the transferring facility to find out what time the residents received his/her last dose of medication in order to know when to start administration of medication. Per interview, the staff nurses should ensure medications were obtained from pharmacy or the Nexsys in a timely manner for administration. The DON reviewed Resident #207 MAR, and stated it was unacceptable for the resident to wait over twenty-four (24) hours after admission to receive PRN pain medication if requested. Per interview, it was not acceptable for a resident to have to suffer in pain and it could cause psychosocial harm. Continued interview with the DON, revealed any medication should be re-ordered prior to the medication running out. Per interview, the nurse should re-order the medication through the electronic system, which was automatically transmitted electronically to pharmacy. Per interview, if a prescription was needed for a controlled medication such as Percocet, pharmacy would inform the facility and the facility would contact the Physician who would send the prescription directly to pharmacy via phone application or via fax. Additional interview revealed she was unaware Resident #207's Oxycodone pain medication was unavailable from 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, until this Survey. She stated Resident #207's Percocet controlled pain medication should have been ordered and a prescription sent to pharmacy prior to the resident running out of medication on 09/29/19. She further stated, staff could have called the Physician and asked them to order alternate medication or alternate dosages of the Percocet, which could have been obtained from the Nexsys system. The DON stated Resident #207's Attending Physician was out of the country and unavailable for interview. Interview with the Medical Director, on 10/04/19 at 1:00 PM, revealed it was important the admitting nurse clarify with the transferring facility the date and time in which a new admission received his/her last dose of medications. Per interview, this was important to ensure the new resident had continuity of care and received medications including PRN pain medications timely and as needed. Continued interview revealed it was his expectation, a new resident had pain medications available for administration. Per interview, it was also important for the nurses to ensure controlled pain medications such as Percocet were reordered timely to ensure the resident did not have to go without the pain medications. The Medical Director stated Physicians could send a script by phone application or write script and fax it to pharmacy if a new prescription was needed for a controlled medication. The Medical Director stated there was also the Nexsys system for emergency medications that could be utilized and this system did include controlled pain medications. Per interview, the facility should have ensured Resident #207 had pain medications available for administration as needed. Interview with the Administrator, on 10/04/19 at 7:44 PM, revealed it was her expectation facility staff follow the process to obtain medications and ensure residents received medications for pain as ordered. Continued interview revealed it was uncomfortable and possibly psychologically harmful for Resident #207 to not have pain medications available upon request and as ordered.
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for two (2) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #32, and Resident #207). Although the facility admitted Resident #207 on 09/23/19 at approximately 8:00 PM, and Physician's Orders were obtained for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen (Percocet) 10-325 milligrams (mg), one (1) tablet PO TID (by mouth three (3) times a day) PRN (as needed) related to a Closed Fracture of the Left Humerus, there was no documented evidence the resident received any pain medication until 09/24/19 at 8:44 PM, when the resident received a one (1) time dose of Percocet 5-325 mg, two (2) tablets. Interviews with staff who cared for the resident during this timeframe, revealed the resident had requested pain medication and an ice pack was used to treat the pain to the resident's affected arm. Additionally, new Physician's Orders dated 09/25/19 were received for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen (Percocet) 10-325 mg, one (1) tablet every four (4) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus Left Arm for Resident #207. According to the Controlled Drug Record, the resident received the last dose of the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM. However, there was no documented evidence the resident received the pain medication after 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM, until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, which was approximately thirty-one (31) hours later, due to the facility's failure to ensure the medication was reordered and a prescription obtained timely. Resident #207 complained of experiencing a high level of pain during the time the pain medication was unavailable. (Refer to F-655, and F-697) Furthermore, record review revealed Resident #32 missed three (3) consecutive scheduled doses of Ativan 0.5 milligrams (mg), as doses were not administered on 09/30/19 at 11:00 PM, and on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM and 7:00 AM, due to the facility failing to reorder the medication and obtain a prescription for the medication. (Refer to F-656, and F-849) The findings include: Review of the facility Provider Pharmacy Requirements Policy, undated, revealed regular and reliable pharmaceutical service is available to provide residents with prescription and non prescription medications, services, and related equipment and supplies. The provider pharmacy agrees to provide routine and timely pharmacy service as contracted, and emergency pharmacy service twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week. Emergency or STAT medications are available for administration and all other new medication orders are received and available for administration as soon as possible on the next routine delivery, unless indicated otherwise by facility staff. Medications will be delivered by the primary pharmacy or back-up pharmacy, or are available from the emergency medication kit/back up medication supply. Interview on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM with the Pharmacist, who worked for the Pharmacy utilized by the facility, revealed new orders were dispensed from Ohio, and if orders were received by 9:00 AM, the medication would leave pharmacy by Noon. Further interview revealed 4:00 PM was the second delivery and the next delivery was at 9:00 PM. Continued interview revealed refill or reorder requests received by 1:00 PM were dispensed that day and refills received after 1:00 PM were processed for the next day. Per interview, if the pharmacy received specific requests to deliver sooner, via Instant Message system or phone call, the pharmacy could deliver sooner. Further interview revealed any controlled medication such as Percocet or Ativan required a prescription in order for the medication to be filled and delivered. 1. Review of Resident #207's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/23/19 with diagnoses including Unspecified Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm, Closed Fracture; Chronic Pain due to Trauma; and Parkinson's Disease. Observation of Resident #207, on 10/01/19 at 5:05 PM, revealed the resident was in bed and was observed to have a sling to his/her left arm. Interview with Resident #207 during this observation, revealed he/she was prescribed Percocet 10 mg and was used to taking the medication four (4) times a day. Continued interview revealed the prescribed Percocet was not available the first twenty-four (24) hours after he/she was admitted to the facility. Per interview, he/she did request the medication on 09/23/19 and 09/24/19 for the pain in his/her left arm, and he/she was informed by the nurses the Physician's Orders for his/her pain medication had been sent to pharmacy, but the medication was not delivered due to the facility changing pharmacies. Additional interview revealed he/she received the Percocet last Sunday morning (09/29/19) and then there was no more Percocet available until Monday (09/30/19) at around 5:00 PM. He/she stated the nurses informed him/her they were waiting on pharmacy to deliver the medication. Subsequent interview on 10/03/19 at 8:33 AM, with Resident #207, revealed during the times his/her Percocet was not available, after admission and also between 09/29/19 and 09/30/19, he/she was in a lot of pain. The resident stated he/she could take a lot of pain related to his/her fractured arm. Additional interview revealed when he/she had to go a day without any pain medication he/she was hurting really bad. The resident stated his/her pain level was a seven (7), an eight (8), or a nine (9), based on a scale of one (1) to ten (10), with ten (10) being the highest level of pain during the time he/she had to go without the pain medication while at the facility. Review of Resident #207's Hospital Discharge Summary, printed on 09/23/19 at 3:39 PM, revealed a list of discharge medications which included Percocet 10/325 mg, one (1) tablet PO TID PRN (by mouth three (3) times a day as needed). Review of Resident #207's Order Recap Report, revealed orders dated 09/23/19, for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen (Percocet) 10/325 mg, give one (1) tablet every eight (8) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. Review of Resident #207's Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated September 2019, revealed orders for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen (Percocet) 10-325 mg one (1) tablet every eight (8) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm with a start date of 09/23/19 at 8:00 PM. However, further review of the MAR, revealed there was no PRN Percocet 10-325 milligram administered on 09/23/19 or 09/24/19. (This MAR revealing a time of 8:00 PM, was the first documented time noted in the medical record to indicate the time the resident was admitted to the facility). Additional review of the MAR, revealed orders for Oxycodone-Acetominophen (Percocet) tablet 5-325 mg, two (2) tablets by mouth one (1) time only with a start date of 09/24/19 at 6:30 PM. Per the MAR, the resident received the one (1) time dose on 09/24/19 at 8:44 PM. This was the first documented dose of Percocet medication received since admission on [DATE] at approximately 8:00 PM, revealing the resident went over twenty-four (24) hours without pain medication. (There was no documentation to indicate the resident's pain level at the time this dose was administered). Review of the written Pharmacy correspondence, dated 10/04/19 at 12:38 PM, revealed the prescription for Oxycodone-Acetaminophen 10/325 mg for one (1) tablet PO TID PRN was received on 09/24/19 at 2:22 PM, and the medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 2:32 AM. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM and 10/04/19 at 11:44, revealed Resident #207 arrived sometime after 7:00 PM on 09/23/19, and she completed his/her admission. Per interview, upon the resident's admission, she received the Hospital Discharge Summary which included the list of medications from the transferring hospital and called the Physician to verify Physician's Orders. Per interview, she then entered the orders into the point click care electronic medical record which was then automatically electronically transferred to pharmacy. Further, the hospital sent a prescription for the resident's Oxycodone/Acetaminophen and she faxed this prescription to pharmacy the evening of the resident's admission. Continued interview with LPN #2, revealed the transferring facility called a report in related to Resident 207, but when she was communicating with the nurse at the transferring hospital, she did not receive a clear answer as to what time the resident received the last doses of his/her medications, nor did the hospital send the resident's hospital MAR. She stated she was unsure when the resident last received his/her last dose of pain medication at the hospital. LPN #2 stated she did not think to ask the facility Physician if she should administer Resident #207's evening doses of medications once delivered from pharmacy or obtained from the Nexsys (emergency box), and she did not administer any medication to the resident on her shift, 09/23/19. Continued interview with LPN #2, revealed new admission's orders were automatically Stat orders and if a controlled drug was ordered, staff was to get the controlled drug from the Nexsys. She stated facility staff had to call the pharmacy to obtain a code number to enter into the Nexsys in order to obtain controlled medications, and pharmacy needed the prescription before they could give out the code. Per interview, if Resident #207's medications were not delivered from pharmacy on the night shift after the resident's admission, the night nurse should have pulled the resident's medications from Nexsys for the night doses, or called pharmacy to have the medications sent Stat. Continued interview with LPN #2, revealed Resident #207 did ask for an ice pack for his/her shoulder after admission on [DATE] and was persistent about it, but she could not recall if the resident was in pain or if the resident requested pain medication. Per interview, she did not call pharmacy in an attempt to get a code in order to get the Percocet out of the Nexsys the evening of the resident's admission. LPN #2 stated she left around 10:00 PM on 09/23/19, and the resident's Percocet pain medication had not yet arrived from pharmacy when she left. She stated she completed the admission paperwork, verified the orders with the Physician, entered the orders in the electronic record, and then went home. Interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA)#3, on 10/04/19 at 5:00 PM, revealed he was working the evening the resident was admitted on [DATE] from 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM and was assigned to the resident. He stated he did recall Resident #207 being in pain and requesting pain medication. SRNA #3 stated he remembered the nurses saying they were waiting to get pain medication from the pharmacy. Further, SRNA #3 stated Resident #207 would ask every three (3) to four (4) hours for pain medicine as he/she was in pain. Per interview, staff used ice packs on the resident's affected arm. Interview on 10/04/19 at 4:30 PM, with SRNA #1, revealed she was working the night of Resident #207's admission to the facility. Further interview revealed Resident #207 was having pain, but she could not recall the pain being severe. Per interview, she could not recall if the resident received pain medication. Interview with LPN #4, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM, revealed she was assigned to Resident #207 on 09/24/19 when the pharmacy called and said they did not receive the prescription for the resident's Percocet medication. LPN #4 stated she then faxed the prescription from the nurse's station fax machine and later realized the faxes weren't going through. She stated the Director of Nursing (DON) then refaxed the prescription to the pharmacy on 09/24/19. (A copy of the faxes sent to the pharmacy on 09/24/19 for Resident #207's Percocet was requested; however, not submitted for review) Interview with LPN #1, on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, revealed Resident #207 asked for pain medication and had grimacing on his/her face when she came in to work on 09/24/19, at 2:00 PM. LPN #1 stated RN Supervisor was trying to get the code for the Nexsys from pharmacy in order to obtain pain medication for the resident. Per interview, pharmacy said they did not get the prescription and the RN Supervisor had to call the Physician to get a prescription sent over to pharmacy. LPN #1 stated Resident #207 should have had pain medication available for administration as the resident was having pain related to his/her fractured arm. Interview with the Registered Nurse (RN) Supervisor, on 10/03/19 at 6:25 PM, revealed Resident #207 was asking for his/her pain medication on 09/24/19. Per interview, after the DON refaxed the prescription for Oxycodone on 09/24/19, she (RN Supervisor) called the pharmacy and was informed Resident #207's Percocet would not be delivered until 10:00 PM or 11:00 PM that night. The RN Supervisor further stated she then called the Physician to obtain orders for a one (1) time dosage of two (2) Percocet 5/325 mg tablets. Per interview, she then called Pharmacy to get the code to the Nexsys in order to obtain the medication. Interview with the Pharmacist, on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM and 10/04/19 at 9:40 AM, revealed the pharmacy began services with the facility on 08/29/19. Per interview, for this facility, staff enters the orders into the electronic system and the pharmacy receives them electronically. Continued interview revealed if the medication order was for a controlled drug, a prescription was needed in order to fill the medication. Per interview, the pharmacy did not receive the prescription for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen for Resident #207 until 09/24/19 at 2:22 PM. Per interview, the script was for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen 10/325 tablets, give one (1) tab TID for five (5) days as needed for mild to severe pain for fifteen (15) doses. Per interview, twelve (12)tablets were delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 2:32 AM. Further interview revealed the pharmacy received a verbal order to get a one (1) time emergent dose for Resident #207 for two (2) tablets of Oxycodone 5/325 mg on 09/24/19 at 5:25 PM, and the facility obtained the medication from the Nexsys. 2. Further review of Resident #207's clinical record revealed an Order Summary Report, including new Physician's Orders, dated 09/25/19, for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen 10-325 mg, give (1) one tablet every four (4) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. Review of Resident #207's MAR, dated September 2019, revealed orders for Percocet tablet 10-325 mg, one (1) tablet by mouth every four (4) hours PRN for pain related to Fracture of Shaft of Humerus, Left Arm. Continued review of the MAR, revealed Resident #207 received the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM, for a pain level of seven (7) out of ten (10). Review of the Controlled Drug Record, revealed this dose was the last dose of the medication available and it was signed out by LPN #1. Additional review of the September 2019 MAR, revealed Resident #207 was not administered another dosage of Oxycodone-acetaminophen tablet 10-325 mg until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, for a pain level of eight (8) out of ten (10). Thus, the resident went approximately thirty-one (31) hours between doses of the PRN Percocet pain medication. Interview with LPN #1, on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, revealed when medication was getting close to running out, the nurses were to reorder the medication through the electronic medical record in the computerized system by pushing the re-order button on the electronic MAR. LPN #1 stated she thought she reordered the Oxycodone for Resident #207 when she administered the last dose of the medication on 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM; however, she could not remember for sure. Further, she left work on 09/29/19 at 2:00 PM, and another nurse was working on obtaining the prescription, but she could not recall which nurse. However, she stated the medication should have been ordered and the prescription obtained prior to the medication running out to ensure the medication was delivered from pharmacy timely. Further interview with the Pharmacist, on 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM and 10/04/19 at 9:40 AM, revealed in order to obtain refills for controlled drugs such as Oxycodone/Acetaminophen, pharmacy would send a Controlled Form to the prescriber or the facility per the prescriber's request. Per interview, it was the facility's responsibility to send refill requests before the resident ran out of medication. Additional interview revealed the facility did not request the re-order for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen for Resident #207 until 09/29/19 at 9:17 AM, and at that time the facility was informed a new prescription was required because the facility had already changed the order in the electronic system to dose every four (4) hours PRN. Per interview, pharmacy did not receive the prescription until 09/30/19 at 8:54 AM, for Percocet 10/325 mg one (1) tablet every four (4) hours PRN, and the medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 4:56 PM. Further interview revealed the facility did not put in a special request for the medication to be delivered sooner. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM, and on 10/04/19 at 7:47 PM, revealed when the facility received a new admission from the hospital, the nurse reviewed the Hospital Discharge Summary list of medications with the Physician by phone, then entered the orders into the electronic record which was automatically electronically transmitted to pharmacy. The DON stated the Physician reconciled the orders and signed off on the orders during their next visit. Further, for a controlled drug, the script needed to be faxed to pharmacy. Per interview, for a new admission, the facility nurse should check with the transferring facility to find out what time the resident last received his/her last dose of medication in order to know when to start administration of medication. The DON stated the staff nurses should ensure medications were obtained from pharmacy or the Nexsys in a timely manner for administration. Continued interview revealed Resident #207 was admitted on the very day the facility went live, and started using the computerized system, electronic record and that may be the reason there was confusion and a delay in receiving Resident #207's pain medications on admission. The DON reviewed Resident #207's MAR, and stated it was unacceptable for the resident to wait over twenty-four (24) hours after admission to receive PRN pain medication. Per interview, it was not acceptable for a resident to have to suffer in pain and it could also cause psychosocial harm. Continued interview with the DON, revealed any medication should be re-ordered prior to the medication running out. Per interview, the nurse should re-order the medication through the electronic system which was automatically transmitted electronically to pharmacy. She stated if a prescription was needed for a refill for a controlled medication such as Percocet, pharmacy would inform the facility and the facility would contact the Physician who would send the prescription directly to pharmacy via phone application or via fax. Additional interview revealed she was unaware Resident #207's Oxycodone pain medication was unavailable from 09/29/19 at 9:50 AM until 09/30/19 at 5:06 PM, until this Survey. She stated Resident #207's Percocet controlled pain medication should have been ordered and a prescription sent to pharmacy prior to the resident running out of medication on 09/29/19. She further stated, staff could have called the Physician and asked them to order alternate medication or alternate dosages of the Percocet which could have been obtained from the Nexsys system. The DON stated Resident #207's Attending Physician was out of the country and unavailable for interview. Interview with the Medical Director, on 10/04/19 at 1:00 PM, revealed it was important the admitting nurse clarify with the transferring facility the date and time in which a new admission received his/her last dose of medications. Per interview, this was important to ensure the new resident had continuity of care and received medications including PRN medications timely. Further, it was important for the staff nurses to follow through with pharmacy and the Physicians to ensure residents' medications were available for new admissions. Continued interview revealed it was also important for the nurses to ensure refills for controlled pain medications such as Percocet were reordered timely and a prescription obtained in order for the resident not to go without their pain medications. The Medical Director stated Physicians could send a prescription by phone application or write a prescription and fax it to pharmacy if a new prescription was needed for a controlled medication. Further, there was the Nexsys system for emergency medications that could be utilized and this system did include controlled pain medications. Per interview, the facility did have a challenge, with the new computer system and new pharmacy; however, the facility should have ensured Resident #207 had pain medications available for administration as needed. 3. Review of Resident #32's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/01/18 and readmitted the resident on 04/23/19 with diagnoses to include Atrial Fibrillation; Secondary Parkinsonism; Cognitive Communication Deficit, and Anxiety. Review of the Update to Care Plan, Hospice, dated 09/11/19, revealed Resident #32 had become a Hospice patient, with a goal that the resident, resident's family, nursing facility staff and Hospice staff and volunteers would work together to assure that the resident had quality end of life care. The interventions included the resident's medication was to be obtained from the facility; nursing facility staff to notify the Hospice Nurse with changes in the resident's level of comfort, be it pain or other symptoms; nursing staff from both agencies to communicate with each other to manage the pain and other symptoms in a timely manner; and if any questions arise, a Hospice Nurse can be contacted. Observation of Resident #32, on 10/01/19 at 12:44 PM, revealed the resident was in bed with his/her eyes closed and the resident's spouse was at the bedside. Interview with the resident's spouse during this observation revealed the resident did not receive his/her morning Ativan medication and the spouse was told pharmacy had not delivered the medication. Resident #32's spouse further stated the resident did get restless at times. Review of Resident #32's Order Summary Report, revealed active Physician's Orders dated 09/26/19, for Ativan Tablet 0.5 mg (Lorazepam) (anti-anxiety medication) give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety. Review of Resident #32's September 2019 Medication Administration Record (MAR), revealed Ativan Tablet 0.5 mg, give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety was scheduled at 3:00 AM, 7:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 3:00 PM, 7:00 PM, and 11:00 PM. Continued review of the MAR, revealed the last dose of Ativan was administered on 09/30/19 at 7:00 PM, by LPN #1. Further review of the MAR, revealed no documented evidence Resident #32 received the scheduled Ativan dose at 11:00 PM on 09/30/19. According to the Controlled Drug Record (CDR), the Ativan 0.5 mg was last administered on 09/30/19 at 7:00 PM, and there was no Ativan available after this dose. Review of Resident #32's October 2019 MAR, revealed Ativan Tablet 0.5 mg, one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety was scheduled at 3:00 AM, 7:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 3:00 PM, 7:00 PM, and 11:00 PM. However, review of the MAR, revealed no documented evidence the resident received the scheduled Ativan dose on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM or 7:00 AM. Review of the Controlled Drug Record, revealed the resident received Ativan 0.5 mg on 10/01/19 at 12:00 Noon. Thus, the resident missed three (3) consecutive scheduled doses of Ativan 0.5 mg, as doses were not administered on 09/30/19 at 11:00 PM, and on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM and 7:00 AM. Review of Resident #32's Progress Note, dated 10/01/19 at 3:37 AM, revealed the resident's Ativan medication had not arrived from pharmacy, and pharmacy stated they were waiting on a prescription. Further review of the Note, revealed a call was placed to the Physician on call, who stated she would send the prescription. Interview with Resident #32's Hospice Nurse, on 10/01/19 at 12:54 PM, revealed facility staff informed her today, Resident #32 missed Ativan medication due to pharmacy didn't deliver the medication. Additional interview revealed the facility had the medication in the emergency box Nexsys system, but couldn't obtain the medication because the facility had to have a code from pharmacy, and needed a prescription in order to get the code. Further, during her visit with Resident #32, the resident was pulling at his/her blanket and had a grimace on his/her face, and didn't look comfortable. The Hospice Nurse stated if she had known the resident did not have Ativan available for administration, she would taken measures to ensure the resident received the medication. Additional interview with the Hospice Nurse, on 10/02/19 at 12:08 PM, and 10/03/19 at 10:10 AM, revealed she contacted the Physician herself and obtained Resident #32's Ativan medication from a local pharmacy in time for the 11:00 AM dose on 10/01/19. She further stated it was a concern Resident #32 did not receive scheduled doses of Ativan for his/her anxiety. Interview on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, with LPN #1, revealed she reviewed Resident #32's MARs and identified she administered the last two (2) doses of Ativan to Resident #32 on 09/30/19. Further, she did not reorder the medication, but told another nurse (could not recall which nurse) the resident received the last two (2) pills of Ativan. LPN #1 further stated when she arrived at the facility the following day, on 10/01/19, at 2:00 PM, she was informed Hospice had brought in a bottle of Ativan for the resident. Further interview with LPN #1, revealed she was not assigned to the resident when he/she missed the doses of Ativan, and she did not know how many doses the resident missed. LPN #1 stated medications were re-ordered through the point click care computerized system and the order was automatically electronically transmitted to pharmacy. She further stated if a refill was needed for a controlled drug such as Ativan, there would need to be a new prescription, but she did not know if the Hospice Physician or the facility Physician was responsible for sending the prescription for the Ativan for Resident #32 who was a Hospice resident. Phone interview with the Pharmacist, on 10/04/19 at 9:18 AM, revealed a request for Resident #32's Ativan was received on 10/01/19 at 2:28 AM, and the pharmacy called the facility back at 3:32 AM, and advised a script was needed. The Pharmacist further stated there were no prior refill requests for the medication. The Pharmacist stated the Ativan medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 12:56 AM. Additional interview revealed if the resident was routinely taking Ativan medication, the resident could become more anxious if the medication was missed. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM, revealed it was her expectation the facility nurses reorder medications and obtain prescriptions for medications in a timely manner for Hospice residents. Per interview, the process for reordering medications for Hospice residents was the same as ordering the medication for other residents. Further, she stated the Ativan medication for this resident could have been obtained from the Nexsys system once pharmacy received a prescription, or staff could have informed Hospice the medication was unavailable. Additional interview revealed review of Resident #32's MAR, indicated the resident missed the scheduled Ativan 0.5 mg dose on 09/30/19 11:00 PM dose, and also missed the 10/01/19 doses at 3:00 AM and at 7:00 AM. She stated this revealed the resident missed three (3) consecutive doses of Ativan which could cause an increase in anxiety and discomfort for this Hospice resident. Per interview, staff should have communicated with Hospice related to the resident not receiving the medication as scheduled. Further, the DON stated Resident #32's Attending Physician was out of the country and unable to be interviewed. Interview with the Medical Director, on 10/04/19 at 1:00 PM, revealed Resident #32 was a Hospice resident and was prescribed Ativan every four (4) hours scheduled. Per interview, missing doses of the medication could be a problem if the resident exhibited symptoms of anxiety. Continued interview revealed there was an emergency box (Nexsys) which could be utilized to obtain Ativan medication that had not been delivered from pharmacy, and also staff could utilize Hospice to ensure medications were obtained. Interview with the Administrator, on 10/04/19 at 7:44 PM, revealed it was her expectation the facility have an effective process in place to ensure medications were available to administer as ordered including routine and as needed medication. Per interview, it was uncomfortable and possibly psychologically harmful for Resident #207 to not have pain medications available upon request and as ordered. Further, Resident #32 should have received the scheduled Ativan as ordered for anxiety.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #54's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 07/10/19 with diagnoses to include At...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #54's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 07/10/19 with diagnoses to include Atrial Fibrillation, Heart Failure and Coronary Artery Disease. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 07/17/19, revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a BIMS of fifteen (15) out of fifteen (15), indicating no cognitive impairment. Interview with Resident #54, on 10/02/19 at 12:00 PM, revealed the commode in his/her room moved when he/she tried to sit on it. Further interview revealed he/she had not reported this to any staff member, but he/she had to use the shower room bathroom because he/she did not think this toilet was safe. Observation at the time of interview, revealed the resident's bathroom was a shared bathroom for residents in room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]. Continued observation revealed the commode did shift with movement. Further observation revealed the grab rails positioned on each side of the commode were not secure, and shifted with movement. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) observed Resident #54's bathroom with the State Agency Representative, on 10/02/19 at 12:14 PM. The ADON looked at the commode and hand rails and checked them to ensure they were secure. She then stated this could be a tragedy, and the commode and hand rails were unsafe. Further, she would report these concerns to maintenance. The ADON stated she was going to tell residents using this bathroom and staff assisting residents who used this bathroom to use the bathroom in the shower room. Subsequent interview with the ADON, on 10/02/19 at 2:54 PM, revealed the bolts were rusted and broken underneath the commode. Interview on 10/04/19 at 6:41 PM, with the Maintenance Director, revealed the system for monitoring equipment, was a computerized system called TELS and staff could enter work orders in the system which he would receive. He further stated the TELS system helped him track things such as when to test the generator, change filters in oxygen concentrators, check water temperatures, and change air conditioner filters. Further interview revealed there was not really any system to check commodes. The Maintenance Director was questioned about the safety of Resident #54's commode and hand rails, and he stated he did not think the commode would turn over, but it did have movement. Further interview revealed a resident might lose balance because the commode or hand rails might move while they were using them. Per interview, he had not been made aware of this issue prior to this week. Further interview revealed one (1) of the bolts on the toilet was loose, and rusted and in bad shape. The Maintenance Director stated he had not checked any other commodes or hand rails in resident bathrooms yet, but if there was a problem with Resident #54's toilet and hand rails, there may be problems such as this in other bathrooms. Interview with the Director of Nursing, on 10/04/19 at 7:44 PM, revealed there was no current system in place to ensure maintenance and upkeep for the residents' toilets or hand rails. She stated she would have expected staff to identify Resident #54's toilet and hand rails were not secure and notify maintenance in order to have the problem corrected. Further interview revealed Resident #7's air conditioner should have been repaired or replaced at the time the resident first complained of the concern. She stated it was her expectation the residents' environment was safe and comfortable. Interview with the Administrator, on 10/04/19 at 8:33 PM, revealed it was her expectation for the environment to be maintained and safe and all equipment to be in working order. Per interview, Resident #54's toilet and hand rails should have been repaired for safety purposes, and Resident #7's air conditioner should have been fixed or replaced in order for the resident to be comfortable in his/her room. Based on observation, and interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the resident has a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for two (2) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #7 and Resident #54). Observation of Resident #7's air conditioning unit on 10/02/19, revealed the unit was set to seventy-nine (79) degrees Fahrenheit (F), and when the resident attempted to lower the temperature on the air conditioning unit, the air conditioner remained in the seventy-nine (79) degree position. Interview with Resident #7, during the observation, revealed he/she had complained of the air conditioning not working properly six (6) months ago, and he/she was uncomfortable and hot during the summer months. In addition, observation on 10/02/19, of Resident #54's bathroom, revealed the commode as well as the hand rails positioned on each side of the commode were not secure, and shifted with movement. Interview with Resident #54 during this observation, revealed he/she had to use the toilet in the shower room. The findings include: Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), and the Maintenance Director, on 10/04/19 at 5:32 PM, revealed the facility did not have a policy related to maintaining the environment. 1. Review of Resident #7's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/10/19 with diagnoses to include Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 07/10/19, revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fourteen (14) out of fifteen (15), indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Observation of Resident #7, on 10/01/19 at 11:28 AM, revealed he/she was in bed with only a brief and shirt on, and the bed covering on the bed was not covering the resident. The resident stated, Come on in if you don't mind seeing my legs. During the Group Interview, conducted by the State Agency Representative, on 10/02/19 at 10:00 AM, Resident #7 complained he/she had informed maintenance six (6) months prior about his/her air conditioner not functioning or working properly in his/her room. Resident #7 stated it was often hot in his/her room which made it very uncomfortable in the recent hot summer days. Resident #7 further stated maintenance would be in and out of his/her room frequently working on the air conditioner, but the air conditioner never seemed to get fixed. Observation and interview with Resident #7, on 10/02/19 at 2:00 PM, revealed the air conditioning unit was set to seventy-nine (79) degrees Fahrenheit (F). Resident #7 attempted to lower the temperature on the air conditioning unit, but the air conditioner remained in the seventy-nine (79) degree position. Resident's room was warm, and further observation revealed the resident's roommate had a fan blowing in the room. Resident #7 stated he/she would observe maintenance staff come in and fiddle with the unit, but it would never truly be fixed. Interview with the Maintenance Director, on 10/02/19 at 3:33 PM, revealed he kept no maintenance log in regards to what needed to be fixed or what had been fixed. He stated Resident #7's air conditioner would often reset itself and set to a certain degree of temperature like seventy-nine (79) degrees F, and would not allow the temperature to be turned down. He further stated he didn't remember Resident #7 complaining about the air, but staff would come and tell him the room was too hot and uncomfortable. Per interview, when he was informed of this, he would re-boot/reset Resident #7's air conditioner temperature dials in order for the temperature to adjust down below seventy-nine (79) degrees F. The Maintenance Director stated he had to do this multiple times throughout the summer and it would continue to set and lock itself on a certain temperature. He stated he attempted to reset it today and the unit failed to reset itself, and he finally replaced the whole unit. Per interview, he did not do this earlier in the summer months because there were only so many air conditioning units he could use to replace the broken ones.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview, record review, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual 3.0, it was determined the facility failed to develop and i...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual 3.0, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for two (2) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #32 and Resident #57). Resident #57's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 02/15/19, was not implemented related to administering oxygen as ordered. Interview with the Hospice Nurse and review of the Hospice Interdisciplinary Nursing Notes, dated 08/12/19, revealed the Hospice Nurse entered the resident's room, and noted the resident to be in respiratory distress during a facility power outage, as the resident's oxygen concentrator was not plugged into the red emergency outlet supplied by the generator. (Refer to F-695) In addition, Resident #32's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 09/14/19, was not implemented related to administering medications as per Physician's Order. Resident #32 missed three (3) consecutive doses of Ativan 0.5 milligram (mg) on 09/30/19 at 11:00 PM, and on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM and 7:00 AM. (Refer to F-755 and F-849) The findings include: Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM, revealed the facility did not have a policy related to the Comprehensive Care Plan, but the facility did follow the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual. Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual 3.0, dated October 2016, revealed the Comprehensive Care Plan is an interdisciplinary communication tool and must include measurable objectives and time frames and must describe the services to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Further review revealed the services provided or arranged must be consistent with each resident's written Plan of Care. Review of Resident #57's closed clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 02/15/19 and re-admitted the resident on 07/13/19 with diagnoses to include Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation, Systolic Congestive Heart Failure, and Atherosclerotic Heart Disease. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 02/15/19, and a goal target date of 10/15/19, revealed a focus of requiring oxygen therapy. The goal revealed the resident would have no unidentified complications. There were several interventions including change tubing/humidifier per protocol and as needed; observe for changes or symptoms that may indicate worsening respiratory status and report to physician; pulse oximeter as ordered and as needed; and administer oxygen as ordered and ensure supply is available at all times The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 05/10/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #57 as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fourteen (14) out of fifteen (15), indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Continued revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a diagnosis of Heart Failure, and receiving oxygen therapy while a resident at the facility. Review of the August 2019 Physician's Orders, revealed orders with a start date of 07/13/19, for oxygen at two (2) liters via nasal cannula in order to maintain oxygen saturation at ninety percent (90%) or above; and orders with a start date of 07/15/19, to admit the resident to Hospice Services. Review of of Resident #57's Hospice Interdisciplinary Nursing Notes, dated 08/12/19, untimed, revealed the Hospice Nurse entered the resident's room, and the resident's oxygen was not working due to electrical issues at the facility. The oxygen concentrator was not plugged into the emergency red outlet. Further review revealed the resident was found in respiratory distress and the oxygen was immediately plugged into the red outlet. According to the Note, staff was informed of the incident, and the resident required as needed Ativan (antianxiety medication) for symptoms at this time and the medication was administered by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 orally. Further review revealed the resident coughed and did not tolerate drink. The resident's lungs were diminished, with cough and congestion, and suspected aspiration. Additional review of the Note, revealed the resident's head of the bed was elevated and pulmonary toileting was performed. Several minutes passed, and the resident's oxygen saturation was up to ninety percent (90%). Per the Note, staff was educated on the resident's condition. Interview on 10/03/19 at 11:01 AM, with the Hospice Nurse, who documented the Hospice Interdisciplinary Nursing Notes, dated 08/12/19, revealed on 08/12/19, while she was at the facility the power went out. Per interview, when she entered Resident #57's room sometime after 3:00 PM, she found the resident in distress because the oxygen concentrator was not on. She stated Resident #57 was pale in color and struggling to take breaths, and she immediately plugged the oxygen concentrator into the red emergency outlet that was supplied by the generator. Per interview, she then called for the resident's nurse to administer medications to help improve the resident's symptoms. Further, the resident returned to baseline, yet showed signs and symptoms of aspiration pneumonia, after the nurse administered the Ativan medication. Additional review of the closed clinical record revealed there was no documentation by facility staff of the event related to the resident being in respiratory distress or not having the oxygen concentrator plugged into the red outlet during the power outage on 08/12/19. Interview with LPN #5, on 10/03/19 at 12:20 PM, who was the nurse assigned to Resident #12 on 08/12/19, from 7:00 AM through 7:00 PM, revealed she could not remember working the day in question or remember Resident #57 having serious labored breathing, or not having his/her oxygen concentrator plugged into the red emergency outlet when the power went out. She stated Resident #57 would often become anxious and have trouble breathing and would request his/her PRN (as needed) Ativan medication because it would help his/her breathing and make him/her feel more calm. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/04/19 at 7:44 PM, confirmed the power did go out on 08/12/19, and the facility was notified via phone by the power company that this would happen prior to the electric being turned off. The DON stated in order to prepare for the power outage, she checked to find out which residents required oxygen and tube feeding or other electrical medical equipment. Further, then she, Maintenance Staff and the State Registered Nurse Aides (SRNAs) went around to all resident rooms to ensure every resident requiring oxygen had the oxygen concentrators plugged into the emergency red outlets powered by the generator, and also to ensure other electrical medical equipment was plugged into the red outlets. She further stated it was communicated to nursing staff by word of mouth, there would be an outage. Continued interview with the DON, revealed she did not read the Hospice notes in question related to Resident #57 on 08/12/19, and was unaware the resident was not receiving oxygen at any point during the power outage until this interview. Further, the nurses should have ensured there was no concerns with their assigned residents during the power outage. The DON stated it was important to ensure residents received oxygen as ordered as their oxygen saturation levels could decline without the oxygen, which could cause respiratory distress. Additional interview revealed from reviewing the Hospice Notes, it looked like Resident #57 was in respiratory distress on 08/12/19, and the resident's Care Plan was not implemented related to administering oxygen as ordered. 2. Review of Resident #32's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/01/18 and readmitted the resident on 04/23/19 with diagnoses which included Atrial Fibrillation; Secondary Parkinsonism; Cognitive Communication Deficit; and Anxiety. Review of the Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 07/26/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #32 as having a BIMS score of five (5) out of fifteen (15), indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review revealed the facility assessed the resident as having active diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease, Dementia, Parkinson's Disease, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 09/14/19, revealed Resident #32 was at risk for side effects from psychotropic medication use and received antipsychotic medications for hallucinations and antianxiety medications. Per the goal, the resident would have no unidentified complications related to medication usage/side effects with a target date of 10/05/19. There were several interventions including discuss medication side effects with resident and family member/responsible party; and administer medication as ordered by Physician. Further review revealed an intervention dated 09/20/19, to administer antianxiety medications per Physician's Order. Observation of Resident #32, on 10/01/19 at 12:44 PM, revealed the resident was in bed with his/her eyes closed. Interview with the resident's spouse, who was at the bedside, revealed the Resident #32 did not receive his/her morning Ativan medication and the spouse was told pharmacy had not delivered the medication. Resident #32's spouse verified the resident did get restless at times. Review of the Order Summary Report, revealed active Physician's Orders dated 09/26/19, for Ativan Tablet 0.5 milligram (mg) (anti-anxiety medication), give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety. Review of Resident #32's September 2019 Medication Administration Record (MAR), revealed Ativan Tablet 0.5 mg, give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety was scheduled to be administered at 3:00 AM, 7:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 3:00 PM, 7:00 PM, and 11:00 PM. Further review revealed the last dose of Ativan was administered on 09/30/19 at 7:00 PM, by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1. Additional review of the MAR, revealed no documented evidence Resident #32 received the scheduled Ativan dose at 11:00 PM on 09/30/19. Per the Controlled Drug Record (CDR), the Ativan 0.5 mg was last administered on 09/30/19 at 7:00 PM, and there was no Ativan available for administration after this dose. Review of Resident #32's October 2019 MAR, revealed Ativan Tablet 0.5 mg, give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety was scheduled to be administered at 3:00 AM, 7:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 3:00 PM, 7:00 PM, and 11:00 PM. Further review of the MAR, revealed no documented evidence the resident received the scheduled Ativan dose on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM or 7:00 AM. The Controlled Drug Record, dated 10/01/19, revealed Resident #32 received Ativan 0.5 mg on 10/01/19 at 12:00 Noon. Thus, the resident missed three (3) consecutive scheduled doses of Ativan 0.5 mg, as doses were not administered on 09/30/19 at 11:00 PM, and on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM and 7:00 AM. This revealed the resident's Care Plan was not implemented related to administering antianxiety medications as per Physician's Orders. Review of Resident #32's Progress Note, dated 10/01/19 at 3:37 AM, revealed the resident's Ativan medication had not arrived from pharmacy, and pharmacy stated they were waiting on a prescription. Additional review of the Note, revealed a call was placed to the Physician on call, who stated she would send the script. Interview with Resident #32's Hospice Nurse, on 10/01/19 at 12:54 PM, revealed the facility informed her today of Resident #32 missing Ativan medication due to pharmacy didn't deliver the medication. Further interview, revealed during her visit with Resident #32, the resident was pulling at his/her blanket and had a grimace on his/her face, and didn't look comfortable. Further interview with the Hospice Nurse, on 10/02/19 at 12:08 PM, and 10/03/19 at 10:10 AM, revealed she contacted the Physician and obtained Resident #32's Ativan medication herself from a local pharmacy in time for the 11:00 AM dose on 10/01/19. Interview on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1, revealed review of Resident #32's MARs, revealed she administered the last two (2) doses of Ativan to Resident #32 on 09/30/19. She stated she did not reorder the medication, but told another nurse (could not recall which nurse) the resident received the last two (2) pills of Ativan. LPN #1 further stated she arrived at the facility the following day, on 10/01/19, at 2:00 PM and was advised Hospice had brought in a bottle of Ativan for the resident. Interview on 10/04/19 at 4:43 PM, with the MDS Coordinator, revealed Resident #32's Comprehensive Care Plan had an intervention to administer antianxiety medications as ordered. The MDS Coordinator further stated if Resident #32 did not receive the scheduled Ativan, the resident's Care Plan was not implemented related to administering antianxiety medications as per Physician's Orders. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM, revealed review of Resident #32's MAR, revealed the resident missed the scheduled Ativan 0.5 mg dose on 09/30/19 11:00 PM dose, and also missed the 10/01/19 doses at 3:00 AM and at 7:00 AM. The DON stated the resident's Care Plan was not implemented related to administering medications as ordered. Interview with Administrator, on 10/04/19 at 8:33 PM, revealed it was her expectation residents' Care Plans were implemented. She stated Resident #57's Care Plan should have been implemented related to the ensuring oxygen was administered as ordered and ensuring the oxygen supply was available at all times. Continued interview revealed Resident #32's Care Plan should have been implemented related to administration of antianxiety medication as ordered.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, review of the facility's Policy, and review of the Kentucky Board of Nursing (KBN), Advisory Opinion Statements (AOS) #14, revised October 2015, Roles o...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, review of the facility's Policy, and review of the Kentucky Board of Nursing (KBN), Advisory Opinion Statements (AOS) #14, revised October 2015, Roles of Nurses in the implementation of Patient Care Orders, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one (1) of sixteen (16) sampled residents, (Resident #16). The findings include: Review of the facility's Policy #7.2 titled Medication Administration General Guidelines, undated, revealed, The resident is always observed after medication administration to ensure that the dose was completely ingested. Additional review of the Policy, revealed residents are allowed to self-administer medications when specifically authorized by the attending physician and in accordance with procedures for self-administration of medications. Review of the KBN, AOS #14, revised October 2015, Roles of Nurses in the implementation of Patient Care Orders, revealed in accordance with Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 314.021 (2), nurses are responsible and accountable for making decisions that are based upon the individual's educational preparation and current clinical competence in nursing and requires licensees to practice nursing with reasonable skill and safety. Further review revealed licensed nurses should administer medication and treatment as prescribed by the Physician, Physician Assistant, Dentist, or Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (ARNP). This includes preparing and administering medications in the prescribed dosage, route, and frequency. Review of Resident #16's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 02/15/19 with diagnoses including Hypertension, Heart Failure, Diabetes, Renal Failure and Dialysis. Review of Resident #16's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 04/12/19, revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15) out of fifteen (15), indicating intact cognitive status. Review of Resident #16's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 07/12/19, revealed there was no BIMS score listed and the resident was receiving dialysis. Review of Resident #16's Physician's Orders, dated 09/19/19, revealed orders to start Velphoro 500 milligrams (mg), one (1) tablet by mouth three (3) times per day with meals. However, there were no orders related to self administration of medication. Review of Resident #16's current Comprehensive Care Plans, revealed no documented evidence Resident #16 was assessed and approved to self-administer medications. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated 09/19/19, revealed a handwritten order for Velphoro 500 mg-one (1) tablet PO TID (by mouth three times a day with meals) at 7:00 AM, 11:00 AM, and 4:00 PM. (Velphoro is a drug used to lower high blood phosphate levels in people who are on dialysis due to kidney disease. Velphoro reduces the amount of phosphorus that can be absorbed into the bloodstream when taken with meals. Velphoro works by binding phosphorus from food in the digestive tract (stomach and intestines) and thus lowers phosphorus levels in the blood). Observation on 10/02/19 at 3:00 PM, revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1, left a medication cup containing a chewable tablet on Resident #16's over bed table. Resident #16 did not ingest the medication, verbalizing to LPN # 1 he/she took his/her Velphoro medication with meals, and he/she had taken a dose of the medication at 11:00 AM with the lunch meal. Resident #16 again verbalized he/she would not take the medication at this time. LPN #1 told Resident #16 the medication (Velphoro 500 milligram) was on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) to be administered at 3:00 PM. LPN #1 left the medication on the over bed table and exited the room. Observation on 10/02/19 at 3:10 PM, revealed Resident #17 wandered into Resident #16's room in his/her wheelchair, opening the closet door and removing an incontinence brief (Attends) from the closet. Resident #16 called staff to the room. Staff re-directed Resident #17 to his/her assigned room. Further observation revealed Resident #16 set the medication aside and continued talking to the Surveyor. Prior to leaving the room, the Surveyor summoned the Director of Nursing (DON) and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) to Resident # 16's room to manage the medication left at the bedside. The DON removed the medication from the bedside. Review of LPN #1's Clinical Skills Competency Annual Review, dated 07/15/19, revealed the nurse met the requirements to administer medications safely without additional training and remediation. Additionally, on 07/26/19, 08/25/19, 09/01/19 and 09/29/19, the DON conducted follow-up medication administration competency audits on LPN #1. Two (2) areas on 07/26/19 did not meet expectations. Those areas included failure to lock the medication cart before walking away and failure to ensure the resident swallowed the medication prior to walking away. Further review revealed on 10/01/19, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) conducted a competency evaluation with LPN #1 to address medications left in the room for residents to self-administer. Interview with LPN #1, on 10/02/19 at 3:30 PM, revealed she left the medication at the bedside because Resident #16 was alert, oriented, and capable of taking his/her medications unsupervised. When asked if Resident #16 had a Physician's Order as required by policy to self-administer his/her medications, she replied, No. In addition, when asked if medications left at the bedside followed the facility's medication administration policy, she replied, No. LPN #1 was questioned related to the potential problems with leaving medications at the bedside; however, LPN #1 did not provide an answer. When LPN #1 was questioned related to the reason for giving the medication with meals, LPN did not provide an answer. Further, LPN #1 was questioned about the safety of wanderers coming in and out of the room as witnessed during the medication administration period, and LPN #1 stated Resident #16 was alert and oriented and he/she would not let another resident take his/her medication. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), on 10/2/19 at 3:30 PM, revealed Resident #16 did not have an order to self-administer medications, nor had the resident been assessed and care planned to self-administer medications. Continued interview revealed LPN #1 had been trained not to leave medications at the bedside. Further interview revealed there could be problems with leaving medications at the bedside as wandering residents could come in and take the medication. Per interview, if medications were left at the bedside, residents could forget to take the medications or accidentally knock them onto the floor. Additionally, it was very important for dialysis residents to receive the medication with food as prescribed to allow phosphorus to bind with the food, and help lower blood phosphorus levels. Per the ADON, LPN #1 would be re-educated and disciplined. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/03/19 at 2:00 PM, revealed there was a self-administration medication assessment to be performed by the nursing staff before a resident could administer their own medications. Once assessed to be safe, the next step was to proceed to care plan self-administration of medication and re-evaluate the resident on a quarterly basis. Per interview, Resident # 16 had not been assessed for self-administration of medication. Additional interview revealed nurses were trained to verify orders, take the MAR in the room with them when administering medications, and follow the five (5) rights of medication administration (right medication, right resident, right time, right route and right dose). Further interview revealed LPN #1 did not follow the standards of practice for medication administration., nor did she follow the facility's medication administration policy. Per the DON, if LPN #1 had taken the MAR into the room with her, she would have noticed the medication order on the MAR was to be given with meals. Continued interview with the DON, revealed it was important for Resident #16 to receive the Velphoro medication as ordered in order to help process food. Per interview, if the medication was not given with food as ordered, this would lessen the effect of the medication. Further, not leaving medications at the bedside was important for several reasons. The DON stated the resident might drop the medication and therefore not take it or a wandering resident could consume the medication. Per interview, it was the DON's expectation that residents receive their medications as ordered and nurses follow policy and procedures related to medication administration. Further, she stated LPN #1 and all nursing staff would need to be re-educated related to proper medication administration. Interview with the Administrator, on 10/03/19 at 2:30 PM, revealed the facility's medication administration policy, prohibits leaving medications at the bedside. Per interview, it was her expectation as the Administrator that staff would adhere to the facility's policies and procedures. Further interview revealed failure to adhere to the facility's established medication administration policy and procedure could have un-intended adverse effects for the resident, or present safety concerns for residents who wander by consuming medications not intended for them. Additionally, it was her expectation for nursing leadership to follow-up with staff, educate and address the identified concern to include, if necessary, progressive discipline action.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and review of the Emergency Preparedness Manual utilized by the facility, it was determined t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and review of the Emergency Preparedness Manual utilized by the facility, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care is provided such care for one (1) of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #57). The facility failed to ensure appropriate measures were in place for Resident #57, in order to provide adequate respiratory services when the electricity/power went out on 08/12/19. (Refer to F-656 and F-849) The findings include: Review of the Emergency Preparedness Manual, undated, Appendix C.1, Electrical Outages/Loss of Power, utilized by the facility, revealed in the event of an electrical power outage the Director of Nursing is responsible for monitoring oxygen usage and other medical equipment, and ensure residents are switched to oxygen tanks when necessary due to the outage. Nursing team members are responsible for ensuring residents using oxygen are moved to areas with red emergency outlets or changed over from concentrators and piped systems to portable oxygen tanks. Interview with the Administrator, on 10/04/19 at 8:33 PM, revealed the facility did not have a policy related to respiratory care. Review of Resident #57's closed clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 02/15/19 and re-admitted the resident on 07/13/19 with diagnoses to include Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation, Systolic Congestive Heart Failure, and Atherosclerotic Heart Disease. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan, initiated 02/15/19, with no revision date, and a goal target date of 10/15/19, revealed a focus of requiring oxygen therapy. The goal stated the resident would have no unidentified complications. The interventions included administer oxygen as ordered and ensure supply is available at all times; change tubing/humidifier per protocol and as needed; observe for changes or symptoms that may indicate worsening respiratory status and report to physician; and pulse oximeter as ordered and as needed. Review of Resident #57's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 05/10/19, revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fourteen (14) out of fifteen (15), indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further review revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a diagnosis of Heart Failure. Continued review of the MDS Assessment, revealed the facility assessed the resident as receiving oxygen therapy while a resident at the facility. Review of the August 2019 Physician's Orders, revealed orders with a start date of 07/13/19, for oxygen at two (2) liters via nasal cannula to maintain oxygen saturation at ninety percent (90%) or above; and orders with a start date of 07/15/19, to admit to Hospice Services. Review of Resident #57's Comprehensive Care Plan, initiated 07/15/19, revealed a focus of Hospice Care related to a diagnosis of Congestive Heart Failure. The goal stated the resident would experience a peaceful, dignified death, and would remain comfortable throughout Hospice Care. The Interventions included assist with setting up Hospice Services; coordinate care with hospice team to assure resident experiences as little pain as possible; provide resident and family with grief and spiritual counseling if desired; social services supportive the family; provide education on the stages of grief process as needed; encourage open discussion about end of life issues as needed; and no weights or labs. Review of Resident #57's Hospice Plan of Care, with a start date of 07/15/19, revealed the resident had a life expectancy of six (6) months or less, and was alert and oriented. Review of of Resident #57's Hospice Interdisciplinary Nursing Notes, dated 08/12/19, untimed, revealed the Hospice Nurse collaborated with the facility nurse on the resident's status. According to the Note, the Hospice Nurse entered the resident's room, and the resident's oxygen was not working due to electrical issues at the facility and the (oxygen concentrator) was not plugged into the emergency red outlet. Further review of the Note, revealed the resident was found in respiratory distress and the oxygen was immediately plugged into the red outlet. Per the Note, staff was informed of the incident, and the resident required as needed Ativan (antianxiety medication) for symptoms at this time and the medication was administered by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 orally. Further, the resident coughed and did not tolerate drink. Per the Note, the resident's lungs were diminished, with cough and congestion, and suspected aspiration. Continued review of the Note, revealed the resident's head of the bed was elevated and pulmonary toileting was performed. Several minutes passed, but the resident's oxygen saturation was up to ninety percent (90%). Staff was educated on the resident's condition. Interview on 10/03/19 at 11:01 AM, with the Hospice Nurse, who documented the Hospice Interdisciplinary Nursing Notes dated 08/12/19, revealed she was present in the facility on 08/12/19 and recalled the utility company was outside working on the lines. She stated at some point the electric went out. Per interview, when she entered Resident #57's room sometime after 3:00 PM, she found him/her in distress because the oxygen concentrator was not on. She stated Resident #57 was pale in color and struggling to take breaths. She further stated she immediately plugged the oxygen concentrator into the red emergency outlet that was supplied by the generator and called for the resident's nurse to administer medications to help improve the resident's symptoms. Per interview, the resident returned to baseline, yet showed signs and symptoms of aspiration pneumonia, after the nurse administered the Ativan medication. Further review of the closed clinical record revealed there was no documentation by facility staff of the event related to the resident being in respiratory distress or not having the oxygen concentrator plugged into the red outlet during the power outage on 08/12/19. Interview with LPN #5, on 10/03/19 at 12:20 PM, who was the nurse assigned to Resident #12 on 08/12/19, from 7:00 AM through 7:00 PM, revealed she did not remember working the day in question or remember Resident #57 having serious labored breathing, or not having his/her oxygen concentrator plugged into the red emergency outlet when the power went out. She stated Resident #57 often times would get anxious and have trouble breathing and would request his/her PRN (as needed) Ativan medication because it would help his/her breathing and make him/her feel more calm. She further stated often times staff would have to use therapeutic communication to reduce the resident's anxiety. Interview with the Maintenance Director, on 10/03/19 at 4:34 PM, revealed the power did go out on 08/12/19, but he could not recall how long it was out. He stated he and the Director of Nursing (DON) went around to all resident rooms prior to the electric going out with the State Registered Nurse Aides (SRNAs) and made sure all the oxygen concentrators and tube feeding pumps were plugged into the red emergency generator outlets. Interview with the DON, on 10/04/19 at 7:44 PM, revealed the power did go out on 08/12/19, and they were notified via phone by the power company that this would happen prior to the electric being turned off. Per interview, they were not told how long the electric would be out as the power company was working on moving power lines. The DON stated in order to prepare for the power outage, she took the [NAME] and checked to find out which residents required oxygen and tube feeding or other electrical medical equipment. Further interview revealed the DON, Maintenance Staff and the SRNAs went around to all resident rooms to ensure every resident requiring oxygen had the oxygen concentrators plugged into the emergency red outlets powered by the generator, and also to ensure other electrical medical equipment was plugged into the red outlets. She stated there was nothing other than that done to ensure oxygen would be plugged into the red emergency outlets, except it was communicated to nursing staff by word of mouth, there would be an outage. Continued interview with the DON, revealed she followed up with Hospice by reviewing the notes that Hospice placed in a binder at the nurse's station. She stated she did not read the Hospice notes in question related to Resident #57 on 08/12/19, and was unaware the resident was not receiving oxygen at any point during the power outage until this interview. Further interview revealed she was not aware of any formal training with staff related to the need to use the red outlets during a power outage for medical equipment on 08/12/19, after the facility was informed there would be an outage, but she thought this was communicated by word of mouth staff to staff on 08/12/19 prior to the outage. Per interview, the nurses should have ensured there was no concerns with their assigned residents during the power outage. Further interview revealed it was important to ensure residents received oxygen as ordered as their oxygen saturation levels could decline without the oxygen, which could cause respiratory distress. Further interview revealed from reading the Hospice Notes it looked like Resident #57 was in respiratory distress on 08/12/19, and hospice should have notified the DON as well as the nurse assigned of the incident. However, she stated she did not see any documentation by the facility nurse assigned to Resident #57 during the date and time in question related to the resident having respiratory difficulty, or the oxygen concentrator not being plugged into the red outlet. Interview with the Administrator, on 10/04/19 at 8:33 PM, revealed she recalled on 08/12/19, the power did go out due to the power company was working on electrical lines outside the building. However, the Administrator stated she was unaware of any residents being impacted by the power outage. She stated she knew the DON and Maintenance walked around with staff to ensure the residents' electrical medical equipment was plugged into red outlets. However, the Administrator stated she was unaware of staff being educated related to the need to have medical equipment plugged into the red outlets on 08/12/19, when the facility found out the power would be going out. Further interview revealed if Resident #57's Hospice Nurse had not found the resident when she did, the resident may have suffered adverse consequences related to not having his/her oxygen.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and review of facility Policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure proper storage o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and review of facility Policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure proper storage of drugs and biologicals. Observation of the medication refrigerator, on [DATE], revealed an expired vial of Tubersol dated [DATE], accessible for use. The findings include: Review of the facility's Storage of Medications Policy, undated, revealed medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. Further review of the Policy, revealed when the original seal of a manufacturer's container or vial is initially broken, the container or vial will be dated. The nurse will check the expiration date of each medication before administering it. Observation of the medication refrigerator, on [DATE] at 10:43 AM, revealed a vial of Tubersol (Tuberculin Purified Protein Derivative for intradermal tuberculin testing), dated [DATE], that was half full of solution. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3, on [DATE] at 11:50 AM, revealed she was unsure of how long Tubersol solution was good for after it was opened, and she would questioned LPN #2 about the opened vial. Interview with LPN #2, on [DATE] at 11:53 AM, revealed the packaging for the Tubersol solution stated once the vial was open, it was only good for thirty (30) days. LPN #2 stated she would throw this vial away in the sharps container and order a new vial. She further stated if this vial were to be used the TB (Tuberculin) skin test results could be inaccurate. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), on [DATE] at 7:16 PM, revealed she expected staff to look at the expiration date prior to administration of the Tubersol. She further stated the Tubersol vial found in the medication refrigerator dated [DATE], should have been disposed of on [DATE]. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on [DATE] at 7:44 PM, revealed it was her expectation the Tubersol vial would have been disposed of, as it was expired. She stated staff should not have been administering the solution from the vial after it had expired as it could provide inaccurate TB skin test results. Interview with the Administrator, on [DATE] at 8:00 PM, revealed it was her expectation for staff to follow the facility policies and procedures regarding medication storage and labeling.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0849 (Tag F0849)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's Hospice Agreement, dated 08/30/19, it was determine...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's Hospice Agreement, dated 08/30/19, it was determined the facility failed to designate a member of the facility's interdisciplinary team who is responsible for working with Hospice representatives to coordinate care to the resident provided by the Long Term Care (LTC) facility staff and Hospice staff. In addition, the facility failed to have an effective communication process between the LTC facility and the Hospice representative to ensure the needs of the resident are addressed and met twenty-four (24) hours per day. This affected two (2) of two (2) sampled residents reviewed for Hospice services out of a total of sixteen (16) sampled residents (Resident #32 and #57). Resident #57's oxygen concentrator was not plugged into the red outlet during a power outage on 08/12/19, and the Hospice Nurse entered the resident's room and noted the resident was in respiratory distress. The Hospice Nurse notified the assigned nurse; however, there was no documented evidence the Hospice Nurse notified administrative staff or other members of the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) of the incident. Interview with the Hospice Nurse, revealed there was no one (1) designated person at the facility responsible for working with Hospice representatives in order to coordinate care and communicate concerns. (Refer to F-656 and F-695) In addition, record review revealed Resident #32 missed three (3) consecutive scheduled doses of Ativan 0.5 milligrams (mg), as doses were not administered on 09/30/19 at 11:00 PM, and on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM and 7:00 AM, due to the facility failing to reorder the medication and obtain a script for the medication. However, the facility staff did not notify the Hospice Nurse of the need for the medication until she visited the resident on 10/01/19. (Refer to F-F-656 and F-755) The findings include: Review of the facility's Hospice Agreement, dated 08/30/19, revealed it is the responsibility of Hospice to provide services to a Hospice patient for the palliation and management of such Hospice patient's terminal illness, either directly or under arrangement by Hospice, as specified in the Hospice plan of care. If services are provided under arrangement they will coordinated and supervised by Hospice. Hospice services will include nursing care and services, such as medical supplies, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, drugs and biologicals; and inpatient care when needed for pain and symptom management. Review of the Resident Census and Condition of Residents, dated 10/01/19, revealed there were two (2) current residents receiving Hospice care. 1. Review of Resident #57's closed medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 02/15/19, and re-admitted the resident on 07/13/19, with diagnoses to include Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation, Systolic Congestive Heart Failure, and Atherosclerotic Heart Disease. Review of Resident #57's Comprehensive Care Plan, initiated 02/15/19, with no revision date, and a goal target date of 10/15/19, revealed a focus of requiring oxygen therapy. The goal revealed the resident would have no unidentified complications. There were several interventions including administer oxygen as ordered and ensure supply is available at all times; change tubing/humidifier per protocol and as needed; observe for changes symptoms that may indicate worsening respiratory status and report to physician; and pulse oximeter as ordered and as needed. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 05/10/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #57 as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fourteen (14) out of fifteen (15), indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Continued review revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a diagnosis of Heart Failure, and as receiving oxygen therapy. Review of the Resident #57's August 2019 Physician Orders, revealed orders with a start date of 07/13/19, for oxygen at two (2) liters per nasal cannula to maintain oxygen saturation at ninety percent (90%) or above; and orders with a start date of 07/15/19, to admit to Hospice Services. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan, initiated 07/15/19, revealed a focus of Hospice Care related to Congestive Heart Failure. The goal revealed the resident would experience a peaceful, dignified death, and would remain comfortable throughout Hospice Care. There were several interventions including assist with setting up Hospice Services; coordinate care with hospice team to assure resident experiences as little pain as possible; provide resident and family with grief and spiritual counseling if desired; social services supportive the family; provide education on the stages of grief process as needed; encourage open discussion about end of life issues as needed; and no weights or labs. Review of the Hospice Plan of Care, with a start date of 07/15/19, revealed Resident #57 had a life expectancy of six (6) months or less, and was alert and oriented. Review of of the Hospice Interdisciplinary Nursing Note, dated 08/12/19, untimed, revealed the Hospice Nurse entered the resident's room, and noted the resident's oxygen was not working due to electrical issues at the facility and the oxygen concentrator was not plugged into the emergency red outlet. Further, the resident was found in respiratory distress and the oxygen was immediately plugged into the red outlet. According to the Note, staff was informed of the incident, and the resident required as needed (PRN) Ativan (antianxiety medication) for symptoms and the medication was administered by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 orally. Continued review of the Note, revealed the resident coughed and did not tolerate drink. The resident's lungs were diminished, with cough and congestion, and suspected aspiration. Further, the resident's head of the bed was elevated and pulmonary toileting was performed. Additional review of the Note, revealed several minutes passed, but the resident's oxygen saturation was up to ninety percent (90%) and staff was educated on the resident's condition. Interview with the Hospice Nurse, on 10/03/19 at 11:01 AM, who documented the Hospice Interdisciplinary Nursing Note, dated 08/12/19, revealed she remembered she was in the facility on 08/12/19 and the utility company was outside working on the lines. She further stated at some point the electric went out. Further interview revealed when she entered Resident #57's room sometime after 3:00 PM, she found him/her in distress because the oxygen concentrator was not on. The Hospice Nurse stated Resident #57 was pale in color and struggling to take breaths, and she immediately plugged the oxygen concentrator into the red emergency outlet that was supplied by the generator. She further stated she then called for the resident's nurse to administer medications to help improve the resident's symptoms. Additional interview revealed the resident returned to baseline, yet showed signs and symptoms of aspiration pneumonia, after the nurse administered the as needed Ativan. Continued interview revealed there was no designated person at the facility for her or Hospice representatives to collaborate and communicate concerns and therefore she just collaborated with the nurses assigned to the Hospice residents or the Social Worker. Further review of the closed medical record revealed there was no documented evidence of an assessment of the resident by facility staff, or documentation by facility staff related to the Hospice Nurse informing staff of Resident #57 being in respiratory distress, on 08/12/19 after 3:00 PM. Additionally, there was no documented evidence the Hospice Nurse talked to administrative staff related to the resident's oxygen concentrator not being plugged into the red outlet during the power outage. Interview on 10/03/19 at 12:20 PM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5, who was assigned to Resident #57 on 08/12/19, from 7:00 AM through 7:00 PM, revealed she did not remember working the day in question or remember Resident #57 having serious labored breathing, or not having his/her oxygen concentrator plugged into the red emergency outlet during the power outage. She further stated Resident #57 would often get anxious and have difficulty breathing and would request his/her PRN Ativan medication because it would help his/her breathing and make him/her feel more calm. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/04/19 at 7:44 PM, revealed she followed up with Hospice by reviewing the notes that Hospice placed in a binder at the nurse's station. She stated she did not review the Hospice notes in question related to Resident #57 on 08/12/19, and was unaware the resident was not receiving oxygen due to the oxygen concentrator not being plugged into the red outlet on 08/12/19, until this interview. Continued interview revealed it was important to ensure residents received oxygen as ordered as their oxygen saturation levels could decline without the oxygen, which could cause respiratory distress. Additional interview revealed from reading the Hospice Notes it looked like the resident was in respiratory distress on 08/12/19, and the Hospice Nurse notified the nurse assigned to the resident. Per interview, the Hospice Nurse should also have notified her (DON) of the incident as she needed to be aware there was a problem in order to ensure there were no other residents in a similar situation. Additional interview with the DON, revealed it was her expectation for the Hospice Nurse to follow up with administrative staff regarding any issues or concerns. 2. Review of Resident #32's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/01/18 and readmitted the resident on 04/23/19 with diagnoses including Atrial Fibrillation; Secondary Parkinsonism; Cognitive Communication Deficit; and Anxiety. Review of the Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 07/26/19, revealed Resident #32 was assessed as having a BIMS score of five (5) out of fifteen (15), indicating severe cognitive impairment. Continued review revealed the facility assessed the resident as having active diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease, Dementia, Parkinson's Disease, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Resident #32's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 09/11/19, revealed the resident had chosen Hospice services related to Parkinson's Disease. The goal stated the resident would experience a peaceful, dignified death and remain comfortable through Hospice care, with no target date. Interventions included provide Hospice phone number and Power of Attorney (POA) phone number, provide education about dying process and stages of grief, and coordinate care and services with Hospice team. Review of the Update to Care Plan, Hospice, dated 09/11/19, revealed the resident had become a Hospice patient, with a goal that the resident, resident's family, nursing facility staff and Hospice staff and volunteers would work together to assure that the resident had quality end of life care. Interventions included the resident's medication was to be obtained from the facility; nursing facility staff to notify the Hospice Nurse with changes in the resident's level of comfort, be it pain or other symptoms; nursing staff from both agencies to communicate with each other to manage the pain and other symptoms in a timely manner; and if any questions arise, a Hospice Nurse can be contacted. Review of Resident #32's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 09/14/19, revealed the resident was at risk for side effects from psychotropic medication use and received antipsychotic medications for hallucinations and antianxiety medications. The goal stated the resident would have no unidentified complications related to medication usage/side effects with a target date of 10/05/19. Interventions included discuss medication side effects with resident and family member/responsible party; and administer medication as ordered by Physician. Continued review revealed an intervention dated 09/20/19 to administer antianxiety medications per Physician's Order. Observation of Resident #32, on 10/01/19 at 12:44 PM, revealed the resident was in bed with eyes closed. Interview with the resident's spouse, who was at the bedside, revealed the resident did not receive his/her morning Ativan medication and the spouse was told pharmacy had not delivered the medication. Resident #32's spouse stated the resident did get restless at times. Review of the Order Summary Report, revealed active Physician's Orders dated 09/26/19, for Ativan Tablet 0.5 milligram (mg) (Lorazepam) (anti-anxiety medication) give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety. Review of Resident #32's September 2019 Medication Administration Record (MAR), revealed Ativan Tablet 0.5 mg, give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety was scheduled at 3:00 AM, 7:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 3:00 PM, 7:00 PM, and 11:00 PM. Further review of the MAR, revealed the last dose of Ativan was administered on 09/30/19 at 7:00 PM, by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1. Continued review of the MAR, revealed no documented evidence Resident #32 received the scheduled Ativan dose at 11:00 PM on 09/30/19. According to the Controlled Drug Record (CDR), the Ativan 0.5 mg was last administered on 09/30/19 at 7:00 PM, and there was no Ativan available for administration after this dose. Review of Resident #32's October 2019 MAR, revealed Ativan Tablet 0.5 mg, give one (1) tablet every four (4) hours for anxiety was scheduled at 3:00 AM, 7:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 3:00 PM, 7:00 PM, and 11:00 PM. Continued review of the MAR, revealed no documented evidence the resident received the scheduled Ativan dose on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM or 7:00 AM. Review of the Controlled Drug Record, dated 10/01/19, revealed Resident #32 received Ativan 0.5 mg on 10/01/19 at 12:00 Noon. This revealed the resident missed three (3) consecutive scheduled doses of Ativan 0.5 mg, as doses were not administered on 09/30/19 at 11:00 PM, and on 10/01/19 at 3:00 AM and 7:00 AM. Review of the Progress Note, dated 10/01/19 at 3:37 AM, revealed the resident's Ativan medication had not arrived from pharmacy, and pharmacy stated they were waiting on a prescription. Further review of the Note, revealed a call was placed to the Physician on call, who stated she would send the script. Further review of the medical record, revealed no documented evidence of communication with Hospice regarding the resident's missed Ativan doses, or the need for a new script for the medication. Interview with Resident #32's Hospice Nurse, on 10/01/19 at 12:54 PM, revealed the facility informed her today that Resident #32 missed Ativan medication due to pharmacy didn't deliver the medication. Further interview revealed the facility had the medication in the emergency box Nexsys system, but couldn't obtain the medication because the facility had to have a code from pharmacy, and needed a prescription in order to get the code. Per interview, during her visit with Resident #32, the resident was pulling at his/her blanket and had a grimace on his/her face, and didn't look comfortable. Further interview revealed if she had known the resident did not have Ativan available for administration, she would taken measures to ensure the resident received the medication. Additional interview with the Hospice Nurse, on 10/02/19 at 12:08 PM, and 10/03/19 at 10:10 AM, revealed she contacted the Physician and obtained Resident #32's Ativan medication herself from a local pharmacy in time for the 11:00 AM dose on 10/01/19. She stated it was a concern Resident #32 did not receive scheduled doses of Ativan. Interview on 10/04/19 at 11:12 AM, with LPN #1, revealed she reviewed Resident #32's MARs and identified she administered the last two (2) doses of Ativan (Lorazepan) to Resident #32 on 09/30/19. Further interview revealed she did not reorder the medication, but told another nurse (could not recall which nurse) the resident received the last two (2) pills of Ativan. LPN #1 stated she arrived at the facility the following day, on 10/01/19, at 2:00 PM and was advised Hospice had brought in a bottle of Ativan for the resident. Further interview with LPN #1, revealed she was not assigned to the resident when he/she missed the doses of Ativan. LPN #1 stated medications were re-ordered through the point click care computerized system and the order was automatically transmitted to pharmacy. She further stated if a refill was needed for a controlled drug such as Ativan, there would need to be a new prescription, but she did not know if the Hospice Physician or the facility Physician was responsible for sending the script for the Ativan for this Hospice resident. Phone interview with the Pharmacist, on 10/04/19 at 9:18 AM, revealed a request for Ativan was received on 10/01/19 at 2:28 AM, and the pharmacy called the facility back at 3:32 AM, and advised a prescription was needed. The Pharmacist stated there were no prior refill requests for the medication. The Pharmacist stated the medication was delivered to the facility on [DATE] at 12:56 AM. Additional interview revealed if the resident was routinely taking the medication, the resident could become more anxious if the medication was missed. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 10/04/19 at 8:42 AM, revealed it was her expectation the nurses reorder medications and obtain prescription for medications timely to ensure the medication was available for administration. Further interview revealed review of Resident #32's MAR, revealed the resident missed the scheduled Ativan 0.5 mg dose on 09/30/19 11:00 PM dose, and also missed the 10/01/19 doses at 3:00 AM and at 7:00 AM. Continued interview revealed missing three (3) consecutive doses of Ativan could cause an increase in anxiety and discomfort for this Hospice resident who was used to receiving the medication on a scheduled basis. Per interview, staff should have communicated with Hospice related to the resident not receiving the medication as scheduled. Resident #32's Attending Physician was out of the country and unable to be interviewed. Interview with the Medical Director, on 10/04/19 at 1:00 PM, revealed Resident #32 was a Hospice resident and was prescribed Ativan every four (4) hours scheduled, and missing doses of the medication could be a problem if the resident exhibited symptoms of anxiety. Further, there was an emergency box (Nexsys) which could be utilized to obtain Ativan medication that had not been delivered from pharmacy, and also staff could utilize Hospice to ensure medications were obtained. Interview with the Administrator, on 10/04/19 at 8:34 PM, revealed the facility did not have a designated member of the facility's interdisciplinary team who was responsible for working with Hospice representatives to coordinate care to the residents. She stated she felt Hospice treatment should not be handled by one (1) member of the facility's interdisciplinary team (IDT), but Hospice should collaborate with all staff on the IDT. She further stated she hoped the Hospice Nurse would voice any issues or concerns with a Hospice resident's care with the Assistance Director of Nursing (ADON) or DON. Further, she felt the nurses or IDT should communicate with Hospice over any concerns related to resident care. Per interview, she did not think it would be effective to have just one (1) staff member communicate with Hospice related to concerns or incidents. Further interview with the Administrator, revealed she felt the Hospice nurse should have followed up with the DON related to the incident where Resident #57's oxygen was not plugged into the red emergency outlet when the power went out on 08/12/19. She further stated facility staff should have notified the Hospice Nurse to ensure the Ativan medication was obtained and administered for Resident #32.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Observation of the medication refrigerator, on [DATE], revealed the only vial of Tubersol was dated as opened [DATE], revealing it was expired. Interviews revealed this vial may have been used to administer Purified Protein Derivative (PPD) Skin Tests to State Registered Nurse Aides #3 and #4. In addition, observation of wound care on [DATE], performed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2, revealed the nurse failed to perform hand hygiene between glove changes during wound care. The findings include: Review of the facility's Storage of Medications Policy, undated, revealed medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. Further review of the Policy, revealed when the original seal of a manufacturer's container or vial is initially broken, the container or vial will be dated. The nurse will check the expiration date of each medication before administering it. 1. Observation of the medication refrigerator, on [DATE] at 10:43 AM, revealed a vial of Tubersol (Tuberculin Purified Protein Derivative for intradermal tuberculin testing), dated [DATE], which was half full of solution and was expired. Continued observation revealed this vial was the only vial of Tubersol in the medication refrigerator at this time. Review of the package insert for the Tubersol solution, revealed once open, the vial was only good for thirty (30) days. Observation of the medication storage room, on [DATE] at 10:45 AM revealed two (2) Tuberculin Skin Test Tracking Forms on the wall. Review of the Tuberculin Skin Test Tracking Form, revealed State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #4 was administered a PPD Skin Test on [DATE] at 3:30 PM, site undocumented. Further review of the Tracking Form, revealed SRNA #3 was administered a PPD Skin Test in the right forearm on [DATE], (untimed). There was no documented evidence to verify if the expired vial of Tubersol found in the medication refrigerator was used to administer SRNA #3 and SRNA #4's PPD Skin Tests as the lot numbers were not noted on the Tuberculin Skin Test Tracking Form. Interview with the Infection Control Nurse, on [DATE] at 7:05 PM, revealed she was responsible for re-ordering the Tubersol vials when they expired or were low. She stated staff did not write the lot numbers of the vial when administering the PPD Skin Tests to employees so she was unsure if the expired TB medication had been administered to the staff. She further stated nurses should check the vial and the expiration date prior to administering the medication, as the Tubersol was only good for thirty (30) days after opened. Per interview, the expired vial of Tubersol could have been used to administer staff's PPD Skin Tests, and if this was the case, there could be false positive or false negative PPD Skin Test results for these SRNAs. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on [DATE] at 7:44 PM, revealed it was her expectation for medications to be checked for expiration prior to administration. She stated she was unsure if staff were administered Tubersol solution from the expired vial. She further stated administering Tubersol solution that was expired could lead to incorrect and inaccurate results, and the expired Tubersol solution should not have been accessible for use, but should have been discarded. Interview with the Administrator, on [DATE] at 8:32 PM, revealed it was her expectation for medications to be given as per the policy. She stated she would not expect staff to administer medications that had expired. Per interview, she was unsure of the possible outcomes related to administering expired Tubersol. 2. Interview with the DON, on [DATE] at 8:42 AM, revealed the facility did not have a Policy related to Handwashing or Wound Care. However, the facility utilized [NAME] and [NAME] Clinical Nursing Skills and Techniques, 9th Edition for standards of practice. Review of the [NAME] and [NAME] Clinical Nursing Skills and Techniques, 9th Edition Chapter nine (9), Medical Asepsis, revealed for antiseptic hand rub, dispense ample amount of product into palm of one hand. Rub hands together, covering all surfaces of hands and fingers with antiseptic, and rub hands together until alcohol is dry. Allow hands to dry completely before applying gloves. Additional review revealed in section Skill 9.1 Hand Hygiene, when handwashing using regular or antimicrobial soap, apply three (3) to five (5) milliliters of soap and rub hands together to ensure that all surfaces of hands and fingers are cleaned. Review of the facility Clean Dressing Change skills check, undated, revealed hands should be washed prior to the dressing change. Further review revealed gloves should be removed and hands washed after removing soiled dressing, and after cleansing and measuring the wound, prior to applying the treatment, and after the treatment and dressings were secured. Review of Resident #4's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on [DATE] with diagnoses including Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation; Muscle Weakness (Generalized); and Other Abnormalities of Gait and Mobility. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15) out of fifteen (15), indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further review of the assessment, revealed the resident was not assessed as having pressure ulcers. (per record review the resident did not have a pressure ulcer at the time of the assessment) Review of the Physician's Orders, dated [DATE], revealed orders to cleanse the resident's right buttock/sacral area with wound cleanser, apply calcium alginate to right buttock/sacral area daily, and apply a border gauze, one (1) time a day. Observation of Resident #4, on [DATE] at 11:34 AM, revealed the resident was in bed with a pressure reducing mattress in place. Interview with the resident during the observation, revealed he/she had an area on his/her backside that started recently, and the nurses applied a treatment to the area. Observation on [DATE] at 9:46 AM, of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 performing wound care for Resident #4 with Registered Nurse (RN) #1/Supervisor assisting, revealed LPN #2 removed the soiled dressing, then removed her soiled gloves, and without washing or sanitizing her hands, applied new gloves. Continued observation revealed LPN #2 measured the pressure ulcer wound on the right buttock and reported measurements as 0.6 centimeters (cm) by 0.5 cm, then removed her gloves and without washing or sanitizing her hands, applied new gloves. Continued observation revealed LPN #2 cleansed the wound with wound cleanser, removed her gloves, and without washing or sanitizing her hands, applied new gloves. LPN #2 then applied calcium alginate and border gauze dressing. LPN #2 then removed the soiled gloves and without washing or sanitizing her hands, applied new gloves and adjusted the resident in the bed. LPN #2 then removed her gloves and washed her hands. Interview with LPN #2, directly after exiting the resident's room following wound care, revealed hands should be washed for thirty (30) seconds before and after care and she was unsure if it was policy/protocol to perform hand hygiene each time gloves were removed. LPN #2 stated since her gloves were not visibly soiled, she did not wash her hands or use hand sanitizer each time she removed soiled gloves during the wound care for Resident #4. Interview with the RN#1/ Supervisor, on [DATE] at 10:30 AM, revealed handwashing should be completed each time gloves were removed, or alcohol gel could be used after gloves were removed, as long as the gloves or staff's hands were not visibly soiled. Further interview revealed after wound care was provided, gloves should be removed and hands washed with soap and water. Continued interview with RN#1/ Supervisor, revealed LPN #2 did not perform hand hygiene with each glove change during the wound care for Resident #4. Interview with the Infection Control Nurse, on [DATE] at 6:12 PM, revealed the facility did not have a policy related to handwashing or dressing changes. The Infection Control Nurse stated staff had received training on wound care and were knowledgeable of the need to wash hands, or use hand sanitizer with each glove change. Per interview, the hand sanitizer should be used only if gloves were not visibly soiled. Further, the purpose of performing hand hygiene with each glove change was to prevent cross contamination. Interview on [DATE] at 7:44 PM, with the DON, revealed when staff provide wound care, staff should wash hands or use hand sanitizer between glove changes and each time gloves were removed. Continued interview revealed this was to prevent the spread of infection and prevent the chain of infection cycle. Per interview, it was her expectation staff follow the dressing change guidelines for skills practice to prevent cross contamination. Interview with the Administrator, on [DATE] at 8:45 PM, revealed it was her expectation staff follow professional standards of practice related to handwashing. Continued interview revealed improper handwashing could cause the transfer of infections and bacteria.
Aug 2018 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, review of the Diversicare Infection Control Manual and review of the Centers for...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, review of the Diversicare Infection Control Manual and review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Management of Multi-Drug-Resistant Organisms in Healthcare Setting, 2006, it was determined the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the transmission of infections for one (1) of fourteen (14) sampled residents (Resident #1). The facility failed to have consistent isolation processes in place to protect other residents and staff from infection. Observation on 08/28/18, revealed Resident #1 had contact isolation signage and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) on the door; however the facility was unable to locate a Physician's Order for the contact isolation or laboratory reports which would indicate the need for contact isolation. On 08/29/18, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON)/Infection Control Preventionist (ICP) removed the signage and the PPE from the resident's door. On 08/30/18, after the ADON/ICP called the Physician for clarification related to the need for precautions for Resident #1, an order was obtained for contact isolation. Interviews with staff were inconsistent related to the need to wear PPE and adhere to contact precautions for this resident. Review of the laboratory report with collection date of 09/01/17 and report date of 09/05/17, revealed the resident's wound culture to the Lower Extremities showed Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) as well as Staphylococcus Aureus and Streptococcus Agalactiae ([NAME]-Drug Resistant Bacteria). The findings include: Review of the Diversicare Infection Control Manual, undated, revealed general guidelines were provided for contact isolation. Per the Manual, gloves were required for entry into the room and gowns were required if clothing came into contact with the resident or any environmental surface in the room. No other facility infection control policies were submitted for review. Review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Management of Multi-Drug-Resistant Organisms in Healthcare Setting, 2006 last updated February 15, 2017, revealed once multi-drug resistant organisms (MDROs) were introduced into a healthcare setting, transmission and persistence of the organism was dependent on prevention efforts. Further review revealed recommendations for contact precautions (gowns and gloves) when in contact with draining wounds. Continued review revealed educational interventions should intensify when MDROs were identified within the facility. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 03/09/17 with diagnoses to include Morbid Obesity, Cardiomegaly, Low Back Pain, and Non-pressure chronic ulcer of unspecified calf with unspecified severity. Review of Resident #1's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 05/28/18, revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of fifteen (15) out of fifteen indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan with problem onset of 11/20/17, revealed a problem of isolation related to wound infection. The goal stated the resident would have no unidentified complications from wound infections with a target date of 11/29/18. Interventions included activities, isolation education, antibiotics as prescribed, and vital signs as ordered. Observation on 08/28/18 at 11:49 AM, revealed a contact isolation sign and a personal protective equipment (PPE) caddy on the door of room [ROOM NUMBER], which was Resident #1's room. When License Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 was questioned by the State Agency Representative during the observation as to what precautions were needed prior to entering the room, she stated no PPE was required. She further stated she did not know the reason for the isolation signage and PPE caddy on Resident #1's door. Interview on 08/28/18 at 12:08 PM, with LPN #2, revealed the nurse did not know why Resident #1 was in an isolation room. She stated she believed the isolation was for a fungal infection. She further revealed no PPE was needed unless wound care was performed. Interview with LPN #5, on 08/28/18 at 12:15 PM, revealed she did not know the reason for isolation precautions for Resident #1. She stated she wore personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing wound care. She further stated she was unsure, but thought the resident had a fungal infection requiring isolation precautions. Review on 08/28/18 at 12:30 PM, of Resident #1's Physician Orders for June, July, and August 2018, revealed no documented evidence of orders to start isolation or discontinue isolation. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), during this review, revealed she could not locate the initial order to begin isolation for Resident #1. Review of the Physician's Orders, dated 08/30/18 at 2:00 PM, revealed an order to place Resident #1 on contact precautions for ESBL Pseudomonas ( MDRO bacteria) to BLEs (bilateral lower extremities). No other isolation precaution orders were located by the facility. In addition, the facility was unable to locate wound cultures for Resident #1. Review of the Care Giver Information Sheet (Care Card) dated 08/30/18, revealed Resident #1 was placed on contact precautions on 08/30/18. However, observation on 08/30/18 at 2:30 PM, revealed the door to Resident #1's room (room [ROOM NUMBER]) had no isolation signage and no PPE caddy present. Interview on 08/30/18 at 2:32 PM, with State Registered Nursing Assistant (SRNA) #2, revealed she learned about isolation precautions during facility orientation. She stated she relied on signage on the door and report received during walking rounds at change of shift for information related to residents with isolation precautions. She further stated she also reviewed the Care Card which was a reference the SRNAs used to provide care for information on each resident. SRNA #2 stated she was rarely assigned to Resident #1. Per interview, she recalled wearing a gown to care for Resident #1 recently; however, if there was no signage was on the door and no caddy for PPE, she would assume the resident was no longer on isolation precautions. Interview on 08/30/18 at 2:38 PM, with SRNA #3, revealed she received information related to resident isolation precautions during shift report. She further stated she understood she was to wear gown and gloves before entering the room of a resident on contact isolation precautions. Continued interview revealed Resident #1 was not on contact isolation. She stated she wore gloves when in the room, but did not use any additional precautions. Interview on 08/30/18 at 2:50 PM, with SRNA #7, revealed she relied on door signage for information about isolation precautions. SRNA #7 stated she also received information about resident precautions during walking rounds at change of shift and from the Care Card provided at the start of her shift. She further stated she wore gowns and gloves to care for Resident #1 when the PPE caddy was on the door. SRNA #7 revealed if the PPE caddy was no longer on Resident #1's door, she assumed no isolation precautions were required. Interview with LPN #1, on 08/30/18 at 2:54 PM, revealed he relied on isolation signage on a resident's door and the Twenty Four (24) Hour Report for information related to isolation precautions. He further stated if there was no isolation signage or PPE caddy present on the door, he would assume isolation precautions were discontinued. LPN #1 stated he was sometimes assigned to Resident #1 and understood Resident #1's room mate had been on isolation, not Resident #1. He stated after Resident #1's roommate left, he assumed isolation was no longer needed in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Interview with LPN #3, on 08/30/18 at 3:05 PM, revealed she received education related to facility isolation practices during orientation. She stated she relied on the nurses in shift report to inform her of residents in isolation. She further stated if a resident was in isolation, there would be an isolation sign and a PPE caddy on the door of the room. She further stated if signage and the PPE caddy was removed from Resident #1's door, she would expect to see a Physician's Order to discontinue the isolation. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #2, on 08/30/18 at 3:18 PM, revealed if a resident was on isolation precautions, the resident should have a Physician's Order for isolation from the provider, signage on the door, and a caddy with PPE on the door. She stated when caring for Resident #1 she wore a gown and gloves as the resident was on contact isolation for yeast and pseudomonas in his/her calf wounds. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing/Infection Control Preventionist, on 08/30/18 at 3:36 PM, revealed isolation was instituted upon order of a physician. She further stated isolation signage on a resident's door along with the PPE caddy helped staff to know when to start and stop isolation. Continued interview revealed she could not find an order for isolation for Resident #1, and could not find laboratory reports to support isolation, therefore she removed the signage and discontinued the isolation last night, on 08/29/18. Further interview revealed today she contacted the physician for clarification as to whether the resident needed contact isolation precautions and the Physician ordered isolation precautions for Resident #1. Per interview, the signage and PPE caddy should be placed back on the resident's door because the resident was in contact isolation. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/30/18 at 3:46 PM, revealed nursing staff depended on shift report, and Care Cards which were updated daily and provided at the beginning of the shift, to find out if residents were on isolation precautions. She further stated door signage and the PPE door caddy would provide staff with additional knowledge for use of PPE when entering an isolation room. The DON stated if there was no signage or door caddy containing PPE, staff would only use routine precautions. Further interview revealed Physician's Orders were required to start and stop isolation precautions. The DON stated Resident #1 had been on contact isolation precautions since prior to the beginning of the survey and the door signage and PPE caddy should not have been removed on 08/29/18. She further stated the original order for contact isolation could not be found, but the physician had never discontinued isolation. Per interview, the ADON called the Physician on 08/30/18 related to the need for isolation, and obtained orders for contact isolation. She stated it was her expectation for staff to adhere to contact precautions for Resident #1 and to follow isolation guidelines for staff and resident safety. The DON stated the corporate infection control guidelines were general and the facility would be teaching isolation guidelines specific to the facility in the near future. Interview with the Administrator, on 08/30/18 at 4:25 PM, revealed the corporate infection control guidelines were meant to be general guidelines and each facility was responsible for customizing the guidelines specific to the resident population served by the facility. Per interview, it was her expectation for staff to adhere to resident isolation precautions to best ensure the prevention of disease transmission to staff and other residents. She stated nursing management had the responsibility of ensuring proper management of infection control measures. Post Survey review of the Laboratory Report for Resident #1, with collection date 09/01/17 and report date of 09/05/17, revealed the resident's wound culture showed Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) as well as Staphylococcus Aureus and Streptococcus Agalactiae. No other culture results were located by the facility.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure proper storage of drugs and ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure proper storage of drugs and biologicals. Observation on [DATE], revealed topical Nyamyc medication was in the windowsill in Resident #7's room. The label on the Nyamyc medication revealed it was prescribed to another resident. In addition, observation on [DATE], of the Medication Cart on the 100 Hall, revealed glucose control solutions were opened and not marked with an open date, or were expired. Also, observation on [DATE] and [DATE], revealed the Treatment Cart on the 200 Hall was left unattended and unlocked and contained topical medications. Additionally, on [DATE], review of the Medication Refrigerator Log, revealed there was no documented evidence the Medication Refrigerator temperature was checked and recorded on a daily basis to ensure the safe storage of medications at the proper temperature for June, July and [DATE]. 1. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on [DATE] at 3:46 PM, revealed the facility did not have a medication storage policy and relied on a reference book titled, Clinical Nursing Skills and Techniques, 9th Edition, [NAME] and [NAME], Review of Chapter Twenty One (21), Administering Oral Medications, page 525, revealed staff should read the label of a medication and compare to the written order. The guidelines further revealed, on page 527, the patient's name on the medication label should be compared to the Medication Administration Record prior to administration of the medication. The Guidelines did not reveal any process for the storage of drugs and biologicals or the storage of medications at the resident's bedside. Review of Resident #7's Medical Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Diabetes Mellitus Type 2, Morbid Obesity, Heart Failure, Hypothyroidism, and Essential Hypertension. Review of Resident #7's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed the resident as having a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15) out of fifteen (15) indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Observation on [DATE] at 11:32 AM, revealed a bottle of topical Nyamyc 100,000 units (anti-fungal medication) on the windowsill at Resident #7's bedside. The pharmacy label on the Nyamyc medication revealed the medication was prescribed for Resident #15. Interview with Resident #7 during the observation revealed the bottle of medicine on the windowsill was used to treat his/her red areas. Review of Resident #7's Physician's Orders, dated [DATE], revealed current orders starting [DATE], for Nyamyc 100,000 units per gram of powder to be administered topically to abdominal folds twice daily until healed. Further review revealed there was no Physician's Order for medication to be kept at bedside. Review of Resident #7's Comprehensive Care Plan initiated [DATE], revealed the resident was not care planned for medications to be kept at bedside. Further review of the Medical Record revealed no assessment was completed for Resident #7 related to self administration of medications. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2, on [DATE] at 12:08 PM, revealed medication should not have left at Resident #7's bedside. She stated she did not know if Resident #7 had an order for Nyamyc, but stated the label revealed the medication was prescribed for Resident #15. She further stated she did not know how that happened and removed the Nyamyc from the resident's room. Interview with LPN #1, on [DATE] at 2:54 PM, revealed topical medications were not to be left in a resident's room unless there was a Physician's order for the medication to be left at the bedside. LPN #1 further stated if there was an order for medications to be left at bedside, the medications should be properly labeled and in a lock box in the resident's room. Interview with LPN #3, on [DATE] at 3:05 PM, revealed topical medications were not to be left at the bedside. LPN #3 stated if a medication was left at the bedside she expected to see a Physician's Order for bedside storage of a medication and expected the medication to be properly labeled for the correct resident to ensure resident safety. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #2, on [DATE] at 3:18 PM, revealed medications were only left at the bedside if ordered by the provider and care planned. Continued interview revealed she would expect all medications to be labeled with the correct resident's name. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), on [DATE] at 3:36 PM, revealed medications were not usually kept at the bedside. She stated bedside medications were ordered by the physician and should be labeled correctly and secured in a locked area for safety. Per interview, she would not expect another resident's medication to be in Resident #7's room. Interview with the DON, on [DATE] at 3:46 PM, revealed medications were only kept at the bedside for a resident if a self administration of medication assessment was completed and a Physician's Order was obtained for the medication to be stored at the bedside. She further stated if a resident had orders for a medication to be left at bedside, the medication should have the correct labeling for the specific resident and should be secured to ensure other residents could not get to the medication. The DON revealed the topical Nyamyc medication should not have been left in Resident #7's room. Further interview revealed topical medications were to be kept in the Medication or Treatment Cart. Per interview, proper storage of medication was important for resident safety. Interview with the Administrator, on [DATE] at 4:25 PM, revealed it was her expectation for nursing to follow all guidelines for safe bedside medication storage if a resident had Physician's Orders for a medication to be left at the bedside. However, she stated if the resident did not have orders for medication to be left at the bedside, the medication should not be left in their room. Further interview revealed there should not have been another resident's medication left in Resident #7's room. Continued interview revealed the DON had overall responsibility for the process of safe medication storage in the facility. 2. Review of the package insert for Assure Dose Control Solution, copyright 2014 ARKAY, Inc. revealed the manufacturer recommended the date of opening be written on the control solution bottle label. The manufacturer further recommended the glucose control solution be used within ninety (90) days of first opening the solution bottle. The Intended Use of Assure Dose Control Solution was to serve to as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood glucose test results. Interview with the DON, on [DATE] at 3:46 PM, revealed the facility did not have a glucometer policy and relied on the Arkay Assure Platinum User Instruction Manual. Review of the Manual, revealed glucose control solution should be used within ninety (90) days of the opening the solution. The instructions further stated the open date should be written on the control solution bottle as a reminder to dispose of the opened solution within ninety (90) days. Observation on [DATE] at 9:40 AM, of the Medication Cart on the 100 Hall, revealed one (1) box of Assure Dose Control Solutions contained two (2) opened expired bottles marked with an open date of [DATE]; and two (2) control solution bottles which were open and not marked with the open date. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #2, on [DATE] at 9:40 AM, revealed glucose control solutions should be dated when opened. She stated validation of the accuracy of the glucometers and test strips using the glucose control solution was done by the night shift licensed nursing staff and also by other nursing staff when they opened a new bottle of glucose testing strips. RN #2 revealed the Dose Control Solutions (glucose control solutions) were to be discarded ninety (90) days after they were opened. Continued interview revealed expired control solutions could affect readings of the glucometers and test strips. Per interview, accurate control testing was important to ensure the reliability of blood glucose testing for diabetic residents. RN #2 sated nursing staff relied on accurate blood glucose readings to administer correct insulin dosages. Interview with LPN #2, on [DATE] at 2:54 PM, revealed glucose control solutions were to be dated when opened. He stated the controls were to be discarded thirty (30) days after the open date on the solution bottles. LPN #2 further revealed control solution should not be outdated to ensure glucometers were correctly calibrated and produced correct blood glucose readings for residents. He further sated blood glucose readings often determined insulin dosages for residents. Interview with LPN #3, on [DATE] at 3:05 PM, revealed she used glucometers on a routine basis to check blood sugars for residents. She stated when a new box of glucose testing strips was opened she performed control testing using the glucose control solution. She further stated when she opened new glucose control testing solution she dated the bottles so the solution could be discarded upon expiration. LPN #3 stated she discarded control testing solution thirty (30) days after the open date on the bottle. Further interview revealed it was important to ensure the glucose control testing solution used was not expired to ensure the accuracy of blood glucose testing results for resident safety. Interview with the ADON, on [DATE] at 3:36 PM, revealed glucometers were checked using the glucose control testing solution by licensed nursing staff on night shift and results were recorded in the glucometer log. She stated new control solutions were labeled with the open date on the bottles and discarded no later than ninety (90) days after the open date. The ADON further stated the use of expired glucose control solution could result in inaccurate blood glucose readings for residents. Per interview, the glucose readings often dictated insulin dosages; thus, accuracy of readings was essential for resident safety. Interview with the DON, on [DATE] at 3:46 PM, revealed licensed night shift nursing staff performed glucometer testing with control solutions; however, other staff performed glucometer control testing if a new bottle of glucometer testing strips was opened. She stated the results of the testing was recorded in a log book. The DON stated glucose control solutions were dated when opened and were good for ninety (90) days after opening the solution bottle. Per interview, it was her expectation for staff to label solutions with the open date when the bottle was opened, and discard the bottle no later than ninety (90) days after the open date on the solution bottles. Further interview revealed the purpose of performing glucometer control testing was to ensure accurate blood sugar readings and correct dosing of insulin based on blood glucose testing results. Interview with the Administrator, on [DATE] at 4:25 PM, revealed the licensed nursing staff were responsible for ensuring blood glucose readings were accurate for the administration of insulin. She stated glucose control testing ensured blood glucose readings were correct. Per interview, the responsibility for oversight of blood glucose testing and correct administration of insulin belonged to the Director of Nursing. 3. Interview with the DON, on [DATE] at 3:46 PM, revealed the facility did not have a policy or guidelines related to ensuring the Treatment Cart was locked when unattended. Observation of the 200 Hall, on [DATE] at 12:08 PM, revealed the Treatment Cart was left unattended and unlocked outside the Nurse's Station at the end of the hall. Drawer three (3) of the Treatment Cart contained Hydrocortisone 2% (corticosteroid used to treat inflammation) Lotion for Resident #2, and nine (9) bottles of Nyamyc (antifungal) Lotion for residents. Drawer Four (4) contained additional topicals to include Major Prep for hemorrhoids, Balmex (medication used to prevent and treat skin irritation), and Hydrocortisone Cream labeled with resident names. Observation on [DATE] at 8:06 AM, revealed the Treatment Cart was again unlocked and unattended. The Cart was located outside the Nurse's Station at the end of the 200 Hall. Interview with LPN #2/Charge Nurse, on [DATE] at 12:08 PM, revealed the Treatment Cart should always be locked when unattended to ensure resident safety and integrity of the medications. She asked a nurse to immediately lock the Cart. Interview with LPN #1, on [DATE] at 2:54 PM, revealed the Treatment Cart should be locked at all times when unattended. LPN #1 stated the Treatment Cart contained topical medications and was locked to prevent accessibility by residents and other unauthorized individuals. Interview with LPN #3, on [DATE] at 3:05 PM, revealed she, as well as other licensed nursing personnel, used the Treatment Cart. She stated the Cart was to be locked when unattended to protect residents from gaining access to unprescribed topical medications. Interview with RN #2, on [DATE] at 3:18 PM, revealed topical medications were stored in the Treatment Cart. She stated the Cart should always be locked when unattended for resident safety. RN #2 further stated locking the Cart prevented residents and others from having access to prescribed topical medications. Interview with the ADON, on [DATE] at 3:36 PM, revealed prescribed topical medications for residents were stored in the Treatment Cart. She stated the Cart should always be locked when unattended to prevent unauthorized access and for resident safety. Interview with the DON, on [DATE] at 3:46 PM, revealed it was her expectation for the Treatment Cart to be locked at all times when not in use by licensed nursing staff. She stated securing the Cart was important for resident safety. Interview with the Administrator on [DATE] at 4:25 PM, revealed the DON was responsible for oversight of safe medication management. She stated the Treatment Cart had resident medications within the Cart and should always be locked when the staff were not in direct attendance using the Cart. The Administrator stated protecting resident medications from unauthorized access was important for overall resident safety. 4. Review of facility policy titled Refrigerated Storage dated [DATE], revealed no parameters for medication storage. Review of the Post It Note on the front page of the Refrigerator Log Book, revealed the refrigerator thermostat should be adjusted if outside the acceptable range of (36-46 degrees). On [DATE], review of the Medication Refrigerator Log, dated [DATE], revealed missing temperature readings on [DATE]th, 9th, and 25th. Review of the Medication Refrigerator Log dated [DATE], revealed missing temperature readings on [DATE]st, 6th, 7th, 13th, 18th, 19th, 25th, and 29th. Review of the Medication Refrigerator Log dated [DATE], revealed missing temperature readings for [DATE]th and 17th. All other readings for the months of [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE], revealed the medication refrigerator temperatures were between thirty eight (38) and forty (40) degrees Fahrenheit. Interview on [DATE] at 8:15 AM, with the ADON, revealed she could not speak to the missing medication refrigerator temperatures and was unsure if there was a policy for checking temperatures for the medication refrigerator. Interview with LPN #1, on [DATE] at 2:54 PM, revealed night shift licensed nursing staff performed temperature checks on medication refrigerators. He stated if temperatures were out of range maintenance was called or the temperature dial inside the refrigerator could be adjusted and the temperature later rechecked. Continued interview revealed it was important to ensure correct medication refrigerator temperatures to ensure the integrity of the medications for resident safety. Interview with RN #2, on [DATE] at 3:18 PM, revealed night shift nursing staff checked medication refrigerator temperatures each night. Per interview, the temperature checks were completed to ensure the safety of resident medications. Further interview with the ADON, on [DATE] at 3:36 PM, revealed night shift checked medication refrigerator temperatures each night. She further stated staff relied on the Post It Note taped in the front of the Temperature Log Book for parameters of correct temperature ranges. The ADON stated medication refrigerator temperatures were to be monitored to ensure the safety of medication. Interview with the DON, on 08/3018 at 3:46 PM, revealed night shift nursing staff checked the medication refrigerators at the Nurse's Station on a nightly basis. She stated staff were educated related to refrigerator temperatures during orientation. The DON stated the Post It Note in the front of the Temperature Log Book revealed the parameters for correct medication temperatures. Per interview, if staff noted temperatures to be out of range, staff would notify maintenance and all contents of the refrigerator would be discarded. Continued interview revealed it was important for the temperature of the medication refrigerator to be checked nightly to ensure the integrity of medications for resident safety. Interview with the Administrator, on [DATE] at 4:25 PM, revealed it was her expectation that medication refrigerators be monitored daily for correct temperatures and the readings should be recorded. Further interview revealed this was important to ensure the safety of resident medication.
CONCERN (F)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on interview, record review of the facility Temperature Logs for the refrigerators and freezers, and review of facility Policy, it was determined the facility failed to store food in accordance ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review of the facility Temperature Logs for the refrigerators and freezers, and review of facility Policy, it was determined the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Record review of the Dietary kitchen Refrigerator and Freezer Temperature Logs, on 08/28/18, during initial tour of the kitchen, revealed there was no documented evidence of temperatures checked daily. In addition, record review of the Refrigerator and Freezer Temperature Logs, on 08/29/18, for the Kitchenette at the nurse's station for units 100, 200, 300, revealed there was no documented evidence of temperatures checked daily. The findings include: Review of the facility Policy titled Refrigerated Storage, dated 01/01/01, revealed food should be stored, prepared, and served in accordance with Federal, State and local Sanitary Codes. Foods stored under refrigeration are kept at a consistent temperature of forty-one (41) degrees Fahrenheit (F) or below. All refrigerators will have a thermometer and daily documentation of temperatures. Review of the Food Code, dated 2013, revealed refrigerators and/or freezers must be in good working condition to keep foods at or below forty-one (41) degrees Fahrenheit (F) and the freezer must keep frozen foods frozen solid. 1. Record review on 08/28/18 at 10:55 AM, of the Dietary kitchen Temperature Logs for the refrigerator and freezer for the months of June, July, and August 2018, with [NAME] #1, revealed the Logs were incomplete as evidenced by missing temperatures for some dates. However, record review of the Dietary kitchen Temperature Logs, on 08/28/18 at 3:30 PM, revealed the missing temperatures for the dates of 08/09/18 and 08/10/18 had been documented after the initial kitchen tour. 2. Record review on 08/29/18 at 9:31 AM, of the June, July, and August 2018, Nourishment Kitchenette Temperature Logs for the refrigerator and freezer at the nurses station for units 100, 200, and 300, revealed they were incomplete as evidenced by missing temperatures for several dates. The June 2018 Log revealed the refrigeration and freezer temperatures were documented only twenty (20) of thirty (30) days; the July 2018 Log revealed the refrigeration and freezer temperatures were only documented eighteen (18) of thirty-one (31) days; and the August 2018 Log revealed the refrigeration and freezer temperatures were only documented twenty-two (22) of twenty-eight (28) days. Interview on 08/29/18 at 4:43 PM, with [NAME] 1, revealed she checked the temperatures of the refrigeration equipment in the Dietary kitchen, and the Nourishment Kitchenette daily, but often forgot to document the temperatures on the Log. [NAME] #1 revealed the food danger zone for the freezer was thirty-two (32) degrees Fahrenheit and above, and the food danger zone for the refrigerator was forty (40) degrees Fahrenheit and above. Further interview revealed it was facility policy to record all refrigeration equipment temperatures daily, to ensure the equipment was holding temperature, and to ensure the food would not spoil. Additional interview with [NAME] #1, revealed she did fill in the missing temperatures of the Dietary Kitchen refrigeration and freezer Logs after the State Survey Representative had completed the initial tour of the kitchen; however, further interview revealed she did not know what the actual temperatures were for the missing dates, and just documented what the temperature should be. Interview on 08/29/18 at 04:15 PM, with the Dietary Manager, revealed Dietary staff should be checking the refrigerator and freezer temperatures in the kitchen daily and Dietary staff as well as nursing staff should be checking the Nourishment kitchenette refrigerator and freezer temperatures daily and documenting those temperatures. Further interview revealed Dietary staff should not go back to the Temperature Logs on a later date and fill in missing temperatures because these temperatures would not be accurate. Continued interview revealed if temperatures were not obtained and recorded daily for refrigerators and freezers, the equipment could be faulty and staff would be unaware. Per interview, it was important food was stored at the correct temperatures and and in accordance with facility policy. Interview on 08/30/18 at 9:09 AM, with the Registered Dietitian (RD), revealed Dietary Staff was responsible for documentation of the Dietary kitchen and the Nourishment Kitchenette refrigerators and freezers. The RD stated lack of documentation of the refrigerated equipment temperatures had been a on-going issue. Per interview, if the refrigeration and freezer temperatures were not documented, the equipment could malfunction causing the food not to hold at proper temperatures which could allow for bacteria growth, leading to food borne illness. Interview on 08/30/18 at 4:14 PM, with the Director of Nursing (DON), revealed it was her expectation for the night shift nursing staff to obtain and record Nourishment Kitchenette refrigerator and freezer temperatures daily. Further interview revealed if the temperatures were not obtained and documented daily, staff would not know if the equipment was working properly. Per interview, if food was not stored at the correct temperatures, this could cause food borne illness. Interview on 08/30/18 at 4:02 PM, with the Administrator, revealed refrigeration and freezer temperatures in the Dietary Kitchen and in the Nourishment Kitchenette were to be obtained and documented daily to prevent food spoilage and to maintain food at the proper holding temperatures according to policy. Further interview revealed staff should not record temperatures for past dates as these would not be correct temperatures.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kentucky facilities.
  • • 42% turnover. Below Kentucky's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 3 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 16 deficiencies on record, including 3 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
  • • Grade F (30/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 30/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Kentucky, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.

How is Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation Staffed?

CMS rates Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 42%, compared to the Kentucky average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation?

State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation during 2018 to 2024. These included: 3 that caused actual resident harm and 13 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation?

Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by DAVID MARX, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 60 certified beds and approximately 56 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Ashland, Kentucky.

How Does Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation Compare to Other Kentucky Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kentucky, Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (42%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the below-average staffing rating.

Is Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Kentucky. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation Stick Around?

Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation has a staff turnover rate of 42%, which is about average for Kentucky nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation Ever Fined?

Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Boyd Nursing And Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?

Boyd Nursing and Rehabilitation is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.