CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident 57 (R57)
Review of the medical record reflected R57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of progressiv...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident 57 (R57)
Review of the medical record reflected R57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of progressive neurological condition, paraplegic from multiple sclerosis and was bedbound.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/02/2023, revealed R57 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R57 to dependent of all care, and can verbalize his needs.
During a record review of code status on 02/21/23, revealed R57 had signed his name and dated under the code status of full code. Witnesses and physician signed and dated under do not resuscitate section.
During an interview with Social Worker (SW) C, stated the Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) was signed and dated by witnesses and the physician under DNR. When noting R57 signed higher on the form under full code. Also stated, this is not right, I will have him complete a new form today.
During an interview on 02/28/23 with SW C, presented an updated, clear copy of R57 code status revealing all parties signed under the DNR section and dated.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure accuracy of advance directives for two (Resident #1 and #57) of two reviewed for advance directives (legal documents that allow a person to identify decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time), resulting in the potential for a resident's preferences for medical care to not be followed by the facility.
Findings include:
Review of the MICHIGAN DO-NOT-RESUSCITATE PROCEDURE ACT, Act 193 of 1996 (Revised 3-25-14), revealed that, An order executed under this section shall be on a form described in section 4. The order shall be dated and executed voluntarily and signed by each of the following persons:
(a) The declarant, the declarant's patient advocate, or another person who, at the time of the signing, is in the presence of the declarant and acting pursuant to the directions of the declarant.
(b) The declarant's attending physician.
(c) Two witnesses [AGE] years of age or older, at least 1 of whom is not the declarant's spouse, parent, child,
grandchild, sibling, or presumptive heir.
(3) The names of all signatories shall be printed or typed below the corresponding signatures. A witness shall not sign an order unless the declarant or the declarant's patient advocate appears to the witness to be of
sound mind and under no duress, fraud, or undue influence.
Further review of this Act revealed, Sec. 4. A do-not-resuscitate order executed under section 3 or 3a shall include, but is not limited to, the following language, and shall be in substantially the following form:
DO-NOT-RESUSCITATE ORDER
This do-not-resuscitate order is issued by _______________________________________, attending physician for _________________________________________. (Type or print declarant's or ward's name)
Use the appropriate consent section below:
A. DECLARANT CONSENT
I have discussed my health status with my physician named above. I request that in the event my heart and breathing should stop, no person shall attempt to resuscitate me. This order will remain in effect until it is revoked as provided by law. Being of sound mind, I voluntarily execute this order, and I understand its full import. _______________________________________ _______________
(Declarant's signature) (Date)
_______________________________________ _______________
(Signature of person who signed for (Date) declarant, if applicable)
_______________________________________
(Type or print full name)
B. PATIENT ADVOCATE CONSENT
I authorize that in the event the declarant's heart and breathing should stop, no person shall attempt to resuscitate the declarant. I understand the full import of this order and assume responsibility for its execution. This order will remain in effect until it is revoked as provided by law.
_______________________________________ _______________
(Patient advocate's signature) (Date)
_______________________________________
(Type or print patient advocate's name)
C. GUARDIAN CONSENT
I authorize that in the event the ward's heart and breathing should stop, no person shall attempt to resuscitate the ward. I understand the full import of this order and assume responsibility for its execution. This order will remain in
effect until it is revoked as provided by law.
_______________________________________ _______________
(Guardian's signature) (Date)
_______________________________________
(Type or print guardian's name)
_______________________________________ _______________
(Physician's signature) (Date)
_______________________________________
(Type or print physician's full name)
ATTESTATION OF WITNESSES
The individual who has executed this order appears to be of sound mind, and under no duress, fraud, or undue influence. Upon executing this order, the declarant has (has not) received an identification bracelet.
______________________________ ______________________________
(Witness signature) (Date) (Witness signature) (Date)
______________________________ ______________________________
(Type or print witness's name) (Type or print witness's name)
THIS FORM WAS PREPARED PURSUANT TO, AND IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH, THE MICHIGAN DO-NOT-RESUSCITATE PROCEDURE ACT.
Resident #1 (R1)
Review of the medical record revealed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's Disease, dementia with behavioral disturance, delusional disorder, diabetes, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/12/23 revealed R1 scored 8 out of 15 (moderate cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS).
On 2/27/23 at 8:27 AM R1 was observed asleep in bed.
Review of R1's Code Status Form revealed R1's Guardian chose Do Not Resuscitate and signed the form on 5/18/20. Two witnesses signed the form on 5/26/20, which was same date the physician signed the form.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 11:29 AM, Social Worker (SW) C could not explain why the two witnesses signed eight days after R1's Guardian. SW C reported the witnesses should have signed the same time/date as the Guardian.
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to MI00130722
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to MI00130722
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident #17) was free from abuse of one reviewed, resulting in Resident #17 being abused by a staff member.
Findings include:
Review of the medical record revealed Resident #17 (R17) was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included anemia, dysphagia, vascular dementia with other behavioral disturbances, major depressive disorder, and anxiety.
Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/28/22 revealed R17 scored 9 out of 15 (moderate cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool).
On 02/21/23 11:04 AM, R17 was observed lying in bed. R17 was unable to recall the incident with Registered Nurse (RN) K. R17 reported she had one or two occasions where a staff member had yelled at her and stated, they just got mad at me for some reason.
Review of the facility reported incident and investigation revealed Based upon the investigation and witness statements, the allegations of mistreatment has been substantiated. Nurse K's employment with the facility has been terminated and her license has been reported.
According to the Investigation Report, on 6/30/22 the RN assigned to care for R17 was heard having an exchange with R17 in an elevated tone. The RN was suspended, all notifications were completed, and a full investigation into the occurrence is in process.
According to the Investigation Report, R17 was interviewed by Former Director of Nursing (DON) M. R17 reported she was rude to me when she was taking care of me. I got mad and threw a cup at her. Then she said f*ck. I have a problem with my stomach. I told her to get out of my room. She gave me two pills. She told me I needed to give the pills time to make me feel better. I'm not scared or anything, I just want her fired.
RN K was interviewed by former DON, M. RN K reported I was trying to give R17 simethicone tablet (a medication that aids in alleviating discomfort caused by bloating and gas). I said here (R17) this well help. Then she started arguing with me. I have been trying to keep the residents medicated and I had enough.
According to the same Investigation Report, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 'L reported she observed R17 come out of her room to tell RN K that she can't take this (the pill) like that. RN K said what do you mean? R17 said I can't take this pill whole. RN K offered to crush the pill but stated you always take this pill whole. R17 disagreed and said she always gets it crushed. CNA L then reported she heard RN K say what do you want me to do, chew it up and spit it in your mouth for you? CNA L said they began yelling at each other and heard RN K tell R17 to just shut the f*ck up. R17 become more upset and stated she wanted another nurse and told RN K she was going to report her to a person in charge. R17 was quite upset and threw her can of pop at RN K.
In an interview on 02/27/23 at 01:39 PM, CNA L reported she was nearby when she heard the verbal argument, R17 was telling RN K that she gets her pills crushed up, and RN K told R17 that she does not get her pills crushed up. R17 and RN K proceeded to get into a verbal argument. CNA L reported she heard RN K say to R17, what do you want me to do, chew them up and spit them into your mouth. CNA L witnessed R17 throw a can of soda at RN K.
In a telephone interview on 02/28/23 at 08:31 AM, former DON M reported R17 had asked that her medication be crushed and a CNA overheard RN K tell R17 to shut the f*ck up. Former DON M asked RN K what was going on and RN K reported to her that R17 was arguing with her. Former DON M told RN K you cannot tell a resident to shut the f*ck up, RN K responded with I know, I should not have said that.
In a telephone interview on 02/28/23 at 11:59 AM, RN K reported [R17] was already worked up about her stomach hurting . she was complaining about bloating, so I medicated her first and told her that should help. I continued with medication pass . [R17] got louder and was screaming, and if she's not addressed she will get up and try to walk, so I kept going back and forth . [R17] had gotten upset after so many times of trying to explain to her that it is gas, I gave her chewable simethicone .she insisted it was not gas and started screaming again . I went back in there a final time and let her know they were chewable . that's when [R17] threw an open can of soda at me. It was a knee jerk reaction when I said what the eff . enough! I realized afterwards that it was an accident, and it should not have happened, but it was heard down the hall and reported that I said shut the eff up, which I would never do that in front of residents. I took a break to go change clothes . when I came back, [management] didn't let me go to the floor . I was suspended and went home . 5 or 6 days went by, I called and requested to speak with the [Nursing Home Administrator]. I asked for an explanation [at the meeting] . they told me about the cussing and something about chewing up and a baby bird, I'm unsure about that part, that was the first time I heard about that I regret cussing in front of her, it was response to a can being thrown at me.
The following Past Non-Compliance was reviewed and accepted at the time of the survey:
ELEMENT 1:
On 6/30/22, upon identification of potential abuse, RN K was immediately suspended pending investigation. She was ultimately terminated, and her license was reported.
R17 was assessed and monitored by nursing and social work for seven consecutive days following the occurrence, no psychosocial changes noted.
ELEMENT 2:
All 500 hall residents were interviewed for abuse, no further concerns identified.
ELEMENT 3:
All staff were re-educated on the abuse policy and questioned regarding allegations of abuse. The Plan of Correction contained proof of staff reeducation in the form of in-services and Abuse and Neglect Quizzes.
ELEMENT 4:
The facility Administrator or designate will interview 10 residents weekly regarding abuse for 12 weeks to ensure the facility continues to address allegations according to facility policy and reporting guidelines and to ensure employees allegedly involved have been suspended pending completion of investigation and further disciplinary actions have been taken if indicated. Audits were performed from 7/7/22 until 2/24/2023.
Any non-adherence will result in 1:1 education. All audits will be taken to QA committee for review.
The facility alleges substantial compliance on 8/15/2022.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to completed transfer documents, documentation of communication, nor do...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to completed transfer documents, documentation of communication, nor documentation of information that was provided to the residents and to the receiving hospital for four of four (R11, R50, R57 and R72) reviewed for transfers and discharge. Findings Include.
Resident #11 (R11)
Review of the medical record reflected R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of cerebrovascular accident (CVA-stroke), falls and back pain.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/24/2023, revealed R11 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R11 is independent of care and uses a walker to ambulate.
During an interview and observation on 02/22/23 at 08:40 AM, R11 stated he was in the hospital in 01/23 due to respiratory infection. When asked if he received information on bed hold policy, discharge/transfer, he stated no, had never heard of anything about that. R11 was given a verbal explanation of these forms and stated, he had not been given one or had one explained to him.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R11 received this information or understood the bed hold policy at the time of his departure from the facility to the hospital.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 12:22 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated he did not know who provided this information to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
Resident #50 (R50)
Review of the medical record reflected R50 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of dementia, cognitive communication deficit, compression fracture of the first and third lumbar vertebra and decreased functional mobility.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/29/2022, revealed R50 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R50 needed limited assistance of all care and can verbalize her needs.
During an interview and observation on 02/22/23 at 07:36 AM, R50 stated she had been hospitalized for urinary tract infection and sepsis (infection throughout her body) on 02/06/23 through 02/11/23. Also stated she is still on antibiotics for the infection. Inquired if R50 had received a bed hold policy and information on transfers and discharge when she went to the hospital. R50 stated, she had no idea what this was and has never seen these forms before.
During a record review of nursing progress notes and hospital discharge notes revealed R50 was hospitalized for abdominal pain, sepsis and urinary tract infection.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R50 received this information or understood the bed hold policy with transfer/discharge information at the time of her departure from the facility to the hospital.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 12:22 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated he did not know who provided this information to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
Resident #57 (R57)
Review of the medical record reflected R57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of progressive neurological condition, paraplegic with multiple sclerosis and was bedbound.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/02/2023, revealed R57 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R57 to dependent of all care, and can verbalize his needs.
During an interview and observation on 02/21/23 at 12:42 PM, R57 stated he went to hospital for pneumonia and kidney stones.
During record review of nursing notes and hospital discharge orders, revealed R57 went to the hospital for sepsis, urinary tract infection, chronic suprapubic catheter, nausea and vomiting, muscular sclerosis (MS) and chronic indwelling catheter on 11/01/22 (10/28/22-11/01/22), 09/08/22 (09/03/22-09/08/22), and 02/18/23 (02/14/23-02/18/23).
Record review of nursing note dated 02/14/23, reveals R57 had been sent out to the emergency department twice before sent to a different hospital that hospitalized him.
Record review also revealed, resident returned to the facility on [DATE] at 18:55pm.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R57 received this information or understood the bed hold policy at his departure from the facility to the hospital on the three listed hospitalizations.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 12:22 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated he did not know who provided this information to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
Resident #72 (R72)
Review of the medical record reflected R72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, cerebrovascular accident (CVA-stroke) and dementia.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/03/2023, revealed R72 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 10 (moderately impaired) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R57 required extensive assistance of all care, is unable to make needs known and uses a wheelchair.
During an interview and observation on 02/21/23 at 01:01 PM, R72 stated he had a bad fall and had to go to the hospital. R72 was sitting in his wheelchair at the dining room table following lunch.
During a record review of admission notes and nursing progress notes, revealed R72 fell backwards while ambulating independently, was sent to the hospital for posterior head laceration evaluation.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R57 received this information or understood the bed hold policy at his departure from the facility to the hospital.
During an interview on 2/27/23 at 11:51 AM, DON B stated after every fall we updated his plan of care, he was a tricky guy, we would try to sit him in a high traffic area to keep an eye on him. DON B stated that he also made rounds on him, and a lot of his falls were in the dining room. Staff had caught him from literally falling to the floor. He hasn't had any falls with those interventions in place. DON B also stated he did not know who provided information on bed hold, transfer/discharges to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
According to a document titled DISCHARGE OR TRANSFER OF RESIDENT dated 08/01/2008, revision date of 08/05/2021, under KEY TERMS:
Emergency Transfer/discharge: for medical reasons, or immediate safety and welfare of the resident, initiated by the facility.
Purpose: To provide a safe departure from the center and provide sufficient information for alter care of the resident.
Procedure: Emergency Transfer/Discharges
1)
Obtain physician order for transfer.
2)
Call ambulance/911 for transfer
3)
Explain the process and reason for transfer to the resident/representative.
4)
Initiate the eINTERACT transfer form and print when completed.
5)
Print any portion of the medical record necessary for care of resident, Physician orders,
History and Physical, Advanced Directives
6)
Print completed eINTERACT Transfer form, send the printed form and copied medical
record with the resident.
7)
Charge Nurse is to call and give report to hospital emergency room or admit nurse.
8)
Provide a notice of the resident's bed hold policy to the resident at time of transfer,
as possible but no later than 24 hours of transfer.
9)
Social Service Director/Designee shall provide a notice of transfer to a representative of
the State Long Term Care Ombudsman.
10)
Notify all departments and pharmacy thru EMR system
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure chewing tobacco products were stored in a secured and locked location for one resident (Resident # 46), resulting in t...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure chewing tobacco products were stored in a secured and locked location for one resident (Resident # 46), resulting in the potential for other residents to access and ingest the chewing tobacco products.
Findings include:
Resident # 46 (R46) was admitted to facility 2/19/2019 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, end stage renal disease, chronic atrial fibrillation, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/19/2022 revealed that R46 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (cognitively intact). Section G of MDS revealed that R46 required extensive two-person assist with bed mobility and toilet use, two-person total dependence with transfer, and was independent with eating after setup. Section J of same MDS indicated that R46 currently used tobacco products.
In an observation and interview on 2/21/23 at 1:24 PM, R46 was observed to be lying in bed, on back, with an open container of chewing tobacco positioned on his chest. R46 stated that the chewing tobacco was provided by his friend, that he was allowed to keep both opened and unopened containers in his room, and that excess supply was stored in the top drawer of his nightstand which was located out of resident reach. With R46's permission, top drawer of nightstand opened with five unopened containers of chewing tobacco noted in top drawer. Although top drawer noted with built-in lock, R46 stated that the drawer was never locked and that he did not have a key to the drawer. R46 stated that when he left the facility every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for dialysis and monthly for vision appointments, that he would take the open container of chewing tobacco with him but that the unopened containers remained in the unlocked drawer in his room. R46 stated that when he requested, a certified nurse aide or nurse would retrieve a new container from the top drawer, as he could not access the bedside dresser independently, and would open it prior to providing it to him. Throughout the interview, R46 was observed to pick up the open container of chewing tobacco from his chest with his left hand and use his tongue to bring the tobacco from the container into his mouth. He was then observed to spit into a spill proof receptacle located on his over the bed table that was positioned to the left of his bed. R46 stated that the facility staff emptied and cleaned the container daily or whenever he requested.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 9:54 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) G confirmed that she was familiar with R46 as stated that she worked with him often. Per CNA G, R46 required complete assist with oral care, shaving, bathing, and dressing but was able to feed self after meal tray set up. CNA G stated that she would retrieve, open, and provide a new container of chewing tobacco for R46 whenever he requested. CNA G stated that she had never seen the top drawer of his dresser unlocked unless a staff member was in the room with him stating that R46 kept the key on a bracelet on his right wrist and that he provided the key to staff with each request for a new container of chewing tobacco. CNA G further stated that R46 kept the open container of chewing tobacco on his person but would provide it to staff to lock up prior to leaving the facility for dialysis and eye appointments.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 10:01 AM, CNA F confirmed familiarity with R46 and stated that he required complete care for bathing and dressing and a mechanical lift for transfer. CNA F stated that R46 placed his open container of chewing tobacco in the bag that he took to dialysis with him and that, to her knowledge, the unopened containers were locked in his top dresser drawer although she stated that she had never been requested by R46 to access the drawer to obtain a new container.
On 2/27/23 at 10:07 AM, knocked on closed door and entered room with R46 noted to be sleeping in bed with approximately half full container of chewing tobacco observed on over the bed table with lid positioned next to container. Top drawer of dresser opened, as was not noted to be locked as previous confirmed by staff, with 4 unopened containers of chewing tobacco noted in drawer. No bracelet or key noted to R46's right wrist.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 10:14 AM, DON B stated that R46 had utilized chewing tobacco since admission and that he believed he had a lock box or drawer in his room where it was stored. DON B stated that he believed that the drawer in R46's room that contained the chewing tobacco should always be locked, if not in use, but that he couldn't confirm this without first checking the policy. In the presence of DON B, knocked on closed door and entered room with R46 observed to be sleeping with same open container of chewing tobacco on over the bed table. R46 awakened after name was called, shouted What?, and then was observed to shut eyes, and turn head to left without further acknowledgement. DON B confirmed presence of 4 unopened containers of chewing tobacco in unlocked top drawer of dresser in R46's room.
In a follow up interview on 2/27/23 at 10:24 AM, DON B stated that after conferring with the facilities Regional Clinical Director that there were no additional policies regarding smoking other than what was already provided, and that the facility had no policy regarding smokeless tobacco. DON B did acknowledge the safety aspect of other residents having access to the chewing tobacco in an unlocked drawer in a resident's room but stated that R46's door remained closed when he was out of the facility.
In a follow up interview on 2/27/23 at 12:54 PM, CNA G stated that the white mesh banners with a stop sign that extended across the doorway of rooms 406, 407, 411, 412, and 417 were used to keep the residents that wander off the 500 unit (Dementia Unit) from entering these rooms. CNA G stated that approximately 1 to 2 times per day, a resident from the dementia unit would wander onto the 400 unit and that the banners were effective as decreased the frequency of the wandering residents from entering other rooms and would give staff time to redirect the resident back to the dementia unit. R46's room was located on the 400 unit which CNA G confirmed that dementia residents wandered onto on a daily basis.
Review of R46's medical record complete with the following findings noted:
Review of Social Work, Life Enrichment, Nutritional, and Nursing Notes from 4/1/2022 to current date complete all of which included no indication of ongoing tobacco usage.
Review of prior assessments titled Safe Smoking Assessment complete which made mention of R46's chewing tobacco usage but included no additional details with no assessment noted to be complete since 9/27/2021.
Review of Comprehensive Care Plans included a Care Plan Focus with 2/26/2019 created date that stated, I have an alteration in my MOOD/POTENTIAL FOR BEHAVIOR state r/t (related to) Depression and Anxiety .I use chewing tobacco and manage my own supplies while here . with a Care Plan Intervention which stated, Offer cup for chewing tobacco or anything else I may need to keep my area clean with 6/4/2019 initiated date. Further review of all care plans revealed no additional care plans or interventions that addressed R46's ongoing chewing tobacco usage or storage of the chewing tobacco.
On 2/22/23 at 2:45 PM, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A requested to provide facility smoking policy including any that addressed use of smokeless tobacco within the facility. A facility policy titled NON-SMOKING CENTERS with an 11/30/2017 origination and effective date was received which included no mention of chewing tobacco.
On 2/22/23 at 5:03 PM, NHA A requested to provide any facility protocols that were followed for a resident that utilized smokeless tobacco/chewing tobacco with no additional policies provided by date of survey exit.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
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 the facility failed to ensure one out of one resident (Resident #87) was prop...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure one out of one resident (Resident #87) was properly positioned while receiving enteral (food provided via a tube in the stomach) tube feeding, resulting in risk of aspiration (food that gets into the airway and down into the lungs).
Findings included:
Resident #87 (R87):
Per R87's face sheet in an electronic medical record (EMR) R87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with 2/13/2023 being the most recent admission. The face sheet also revealed R87 had diagnoses of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD-stomach acid that flows back up into the esophagus toward the mouth causing a burning sensation), and dysphasia (difficultly in swallowing).
In an observation and interview on 2/21/2023 at 1:13 PM, Clinical Care Coordinator (CCC) D, who was the Unit Manager, was observed attempting to assist R87 to eat orally solid food. Also observed was a bottle of tube feeding on a pole infusing at 70 milliliters (ML) per hour with water in a separate bag infusing at 50 ML per hour. CCC D stated that both the tube feeding and the water infuse for 20 hours a day.
During the same observation and interview, R87 was observed lying on her left side while bed. The head of the bed was elevated up to approximately 30 degrees, however R87 was observed to have slid down from the head of the bed, with her head resting at the bottom of the raised portion in the area where the bed bent when the head of he bed was elevated. CCC D was observed to exit R87's room, however did not re-adjust R87 in her bed so that she was sitting up at about 30 degrees to prevent aspiration.
On 2/21/2023 at 2:46 PM, Resident #87 was observed with the head of the bed up at approximately 30 degrees, however R87 remained with her head in the bend area of the bed, and lying on her left side. R87's tube feeding and water was observed to be infusing into her feeding tube in her stomach, with no change in the rates of infusion.
Record review of Physician's orders dated 1/5/2023, revealed and order to, Ensure HOB (head of bed) is elevated 30-45 degrees while tube feed being administered and for at least 30 minutes after tube feeding is completed.
Record review of Physician's orders dated 2/5/2023, revealed and order to, Ensure HOB (head of bed) is elevated 30-45 degrees while tube feed being administered and for at least 30 minutes after tube feeding is completed.
Record review of a Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for the month of February revealed that on 2/5/2023 the order to assure R87's HOB was up at 30 degrees while infusing and for 30 minutes after tube feeding was completed, was documented to have been assured for the day shift, however per the observation on 2/21/2023 at 1:13 PM, the order was not followed, but was documented to have been completed, including R87's order to remain up at 30 degrees for 30 minutes due to her GERD diagnosis.
In an interview on 2/27/2023 at 1:14 PM, Registered Dietician (RD) H stated that R87's tube feeding was to infuse 70 ML per hour with a water flush at 50 ML per hours for 20 hours a day. RD H stated that Director of Nursing (DON) B put in an order for R87's head of the bed to be a 30 degrees while tube feeding and water infusing, and for 30 minutes afterwards. RD H said she updated R87's care plan based the order. RD H stated that her expectation was R87's head of the bed be at 30-45 degrees while receiving her tubing infusions.
In an interview on 2/28/2023 at 10:39 AM, DON B was asked what his expectation was regarding R87's tube feeding and head of the bed up 30 degrees while infusing and for 30 minutes after the feeding was completed. DON B stated that he expected staff to do their job.
Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Enteral Nutritional Feeding dated 7/1/2008 with the last revision dated of 9/23/2019, revealed on page #2 under, MONITORING THE RESIDENTS ON ENTERAL FEEDINGS: .#3 Head of bed must be elevated 30-45 degrees at all times during feeding and for at least 30 minutes after the feeding unless otherwise indicated per order/plan or care.
CONCERN
(D)
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 record review, the facility failed to routinely change oxygen tubing for three (Resident # 28, #49, and #95) of 6 residents reviewed for infection control standard...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to routinely change oxygen tubing for three (Resident # 28, #49, and #95) of 6 residents reviewed for infection control standards resulting in the potential for increased risk of facility acquired infections.
Findings include:
Resident # 28
Resident # 28 (R28) admitted to facility 10/29/2021 with diagnoses including essential hypertension, unspecified intellectual disabilities, and fracture of upper and lower end of right fibula. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/23/23 revealed that R28 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5 (severe cognitive impairment). Section G of MDS revealed that R28 required extensive two-person assist with bed mobility, two-person total dependence with transfer and toilet use and was independent with eating after set up. Section O of same MDS indicated that R28 utilized oxygen while a resident at the facility.
In an observation on 2/21/23 at 10:35 AM, R28 was observed to be lying in bed, on back, with head of bed at an approximate 60-degree angle. R28 was noted to have nasal cannula oxygen tubing positioned just to the left of her nares with tubing connected to oxygen concentrator, at bedside, set at 2 liters/minute (liters per minutes). The oxygen tubing was labeled with a handwritten date of 2/9/23. R28 shook head to acknowledge name but verbal response was garbled and unclear.
In an observation on 2/27/23 at 1:15 PM, R28 was observed sitting upright in bed with head of bed at an approximate 90-degree angle, meal tray was positioned in front of resident on an over the bed table with R28 observed to be feeding self lunch. R28 was noted to have nasal cannula oxygen tubing positioned at nares with tubing connected to oxygen concentrator, at bedside, set at 2 liters/minute. The oxygen tubing was labeled with a handwritten date of 2/9/23.
Review of R28's medical record completed with the following findings noted:
Nurses Note dated 1/6/23 at 11:21 AM stated, While assessing residents vital signs residents O2 (oxygen) level was 87 percent on room air. Supplemental O2 was placed at 2 L (liters) via NC (nasal cannula). Residents O2 rose to 94 percent with the O2 in place. Doctor was informed and auscultated resident lung sounds .
Physician's Note dated 1/7/23 at 5:54 AM stated, Seen d/t (due to) nursing notification of O2 sats (saturations) of 87% (percent). Improved to 96% with low dose O2 .a/p) (action/plan) acute hypoxic respiratory failure possibly d/t atelectasis .p) (plan) supplemental O2 as needed .
Order dated 1/6/23 at 11:58 AM stated, O2 at 2L (liters) continuously via nasal cannula every shift for Hypoxia.
Order dated 1/6/23 at 11:58 AM stated, LN (licensed nurse) to change & date oxygen tubing every day shift every Thu (Thursday) for Infection control.
Treatment Administration Record (TAR) dated 2/1/2023 to 2/28/2023 reflected order for LN to change & date oxygen tubing every day shift every Thu for Infection control with corresponding documentation on February TAR for 2/16/23 and 2/23/23 noted to have been initialed as treatment complete although oxygen tubing dated 2/9/23 remained in place per 2/27/23 1:15 PM observation.
Resident # 49
Resident # 49 (R49) admitted to facility 10/3/2019 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, emphysema, and dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/6/2023 revealed that R49 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 (cognitively intact). Section G of MDS revealed that R49 required extensive two-person assist with bed mobility and transfers, extensive one-person assist with toilet use, and was independent with eating after set up. Section O of same MDS indicated that R49 utilized oxygen while a resident at the facility.
In an observation and interview on 2/21/23 at 11:03 AM, R49 was observed to be sitting at edge of bed with nasal cannula oxygen tubing positioned at nares with tubing connected to oxygen concentrator, at bedside, set at 3 liters/minute. The oxygen tubing was labeled with a handwritten date of 2/9/23. A portable oxygen tank was noted on wheelchair, at resident bedside, which resident confirmed to be hers with oxygen tubing attached labeled with a handwritten date of 2/2/23. R49 confirmed that she always wore oxygen for my COPD.
Review of R49's medical record completed with the following findings noted:
Order dated 1/20/22 at 2:36 PM stated, O2 at 3 L/min (liters per minute) via NC (nasal cannula) continuous related to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, as needed to maintain O2 sats (saturations) > (greater than) 88% (percent).
Order dated 10/12/22 at 2:42 PM stated, LN to change and date O2 tubing every day shift every Thu for infection control.
Treatment Administration Record (TAR) dated 2/1/2023 to 2/28/2023 reflected order for LN to change and date O2 tubing every day shift every Thu for infection control with corresponding documentation on February TAR for 2/9/23 and 2/16/23 noted to have been initialed as treatment complete although oxygen tubing dated 2/9/23 remained in place at concentrator and 2/2/23 at portable wheelchair oxygen tank per 2/21/23 11:03 AM observation.
Resident # 95
Resident # 95 (R95) admitted to facility 12/16/2022 with diagnoses including acute and chronic respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and heart failure. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/16/2023 revealed that R95 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 (cognitively intact). Section G of MDS revealed that R95 required limited one-person assist with bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use; and was independent with eating after set up. Section O of same MDS indicated that R95 utilized oxygen while a resident at the facility.
In an interview and observation on 2/21/23 at 12:09 PM, R95 was observed lying in bed, on back, with nasal cannula oxygen tubing positioned at nares with tubing connected to oxygen concentrator, at bedside, set at 2 liters/minute. The oxygen tubing was labeled with a handwritten date of 2/9/23. R95 stated that he always wore oxygen because of my lung problems.
Review of R95's medical record completed with the following findings noted:
Order dated 12/16/22 at 10:16 AM stated, O2 at 2L/min via NC continuous related to Acute and chronic respiratory failure .
Order dated 12/16/22 at 10:31 AM stated, LN to change & date O2 tubing every day shift every Thu for Infection control.
Treatment Administration Record (TAR) dated 2/1/2023 to 2/28/2023 reflected order for LN to change & date O2 tubing every day shift every Thu for Infection control with corresponding documentation on February TAR for 2/16/23 noted to have been initialed as treatment complete although oxygen tubing dated 2/9/23 remained in place at concentrator per 2/21/23 12:09 PM observation.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 1:43 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated that the facilities oxygen policy indicated that all oxygen tubing should be changed weekly and that it was his expectation that the tubing by changed every Thursday, as indicated within the physician orders.
Facility policy titled Oxygen Administration & Safety with an 6/7/17 effective date stated, .4. Oxygen tubing will be labeled with date, changed weekly and as needed .
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
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, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or resident's representative ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or resident's representative of the facility policy for bed hold for five (Resident #11, #50, #57, #72, and #82) of six residents reviewed for hospitalization resulting in the potential of residents and/or representatives to be uninformed of the bed hold policy. Findings include:
Resident #82
Resident # 82 (R82) initially admitted to facility 1/13/23 with subsequent rehospitalization and facility readmission on [DATE] with diagnoses including urinary tract infection, encephalopathy, delirium due to known physiological condition, gastrostomy status, pharyngeal phase dysphagia, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, seizure, heart failure, dementia, and schizoaffective disorder. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/19/2023 reflected Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13. Section G of MDS revealed that R82 required two-person total dependence for bed mobility and transfer, one-person total dependence with toilet use, and supervision with eating after set up. Review of the Discharge MDS dated [DATE], revealed that R82 had an unplanned discharge to an acute care hospital with return to the facility anticipated.
In an observation and interview on 2/21/23 at 2:08 PM, R82 was observed to by lying on left side, in bed, with foley catheter tubing noted to extend from under blanket toward foot of bed on left side. R82 stated that he had been hospitalized recently for an urinary infection that required surgery but was unable to provide additional details nor did he recall or seem to understand what a bed hold policy was or whether one was reviewed with him prior to hospitalization.
Review of R82's medical record completed with the following findings noted:
Physician's Order dated 2/1/2023 at 5:04 PM stated, Send to (name of hospital).
Nurses Note dated 2/1/2023 at 5:22 PM stated, Sending to ER (emergency room), Notified (name of nurse), ER [NAME]. Family notified. (Name of Physician) notified.
Nurses Note dated 2/1/2023 at 5:40 PM stated, EMS (Emergency Medical Services) arrived to transport resident to (name of hospital), Step-daughter (name) notified of departure per her request.
Hospital Discharge Summary reflected hospital admit date of 2/1/2023 and hospital discharge date of 2/14/2023.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 10:36 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated that there were individual packets, at each nurse's station, that contained the facilities bed hold policy/procedure, involuntary transfer/discharge paperwork, and the Ombudsman contact information. Per SW C, the assigned nurse reviewed the information within the packet, which included the bed hold policy, with the resident/responsible party at the time of the hospital transfer and that the packet was then sent with the resident to the hospital. SW C stated that the nurse would then document either within the nurses notes or in the section titled Additional relevant information within the Nursing Home to Hospital Transfer Form that this informational packet was sent. Upon review of R82's nurses notes and Nursing Home to Hospital Transfer Form, SW C stated that there was no documentation noted that the required information, including bed hold notification, was reviewed, or provided to the resident or responsible party at the time of or after the 2/1/23 hospital transfer.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 1:40 PM, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A confirmed that upon the review of R82's record that no documentation regarding bed hold notification could be found within the medical record that indicated that the bed hold policy was reviewed with R82 or the responsible party at the time of or following R82's 2/1/23 hospital transfer.
Facility policy titled Discharge or Transfer of Resident with an 8/5/21 revision dated stated, .PURPOSE: To provide safe departure from the Center, and provide sufficient information for after care of the resident .PROCEDURE .Emergency Transfer/Discharges .8. Provide a notice of the resident's/guest bed hold policy to the resident and representative at the time of transfer, as possible but no later than 24-hours of transfer .
Resident #11 (R11)
Review of the medical record reflected R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of cerebrovascular accident (CVA-stroke), falls and back pain.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/24/2023, revealed R11 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R11 is independent of care and uses a walker to ambulate.
During an interview and observation on 02/22/23 at 08:40 AM, R11 stated he was in the hospital in 01/23 due to respiratory infection. When asked if he received information on bed hold policy, he stated no, had never heard of anything about that. R11 was given a verbal explanation of these forms and stated, he had not been given one or had one explained to him.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R11 received this information or understood the bed hold policy at the time of his departure from the facility to the hospital.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 12:22 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated he did not know who provided this information to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
Resident #50 (R50)
Review of the medical record reflected R50 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of dementia, cognitive communication deficit, compression fracture of the first and third lumbar vertebra and decreased functional mobility.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/29/2022, revealed R50 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R50 needed limited assistance of all care and could verbalize her needs.
During an interview and observation on 02/22/23 at 07:36 AM, R50 stated she had been hospitalized for urinary tract infection and sepsis (infection throughout her body) on 02/06/23 through 02/11/23. Also stated she is still on antibiotics for the infection. Inquired if R50 had received a bed hold policy when she went to the hospital. R50 stated, she had no idea what this was and has never seen these forms before.
During a record review of nursing progress notes and hospital discharge notes revealed R50 was hospitalized for abdominal pain, sepsis and urinary tract infection from 02/06/23 through 02/11/23.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R50 received this information or understood the bed hold policy with transfer/discharge information at the time of her departure from the facility to the hospital.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 12:22 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated he did not know who provided this information to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
Resident #57 (R57)
Review of the medical record reflected R57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of progressive neurological condition, paraplegic with multiple sclerosis and was bedbound.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/02/2023, revealed R57 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R57 to dependent of all care, and can verbalize his needs.
During an interview and observation on 02/21/23 at 12:42 PM, R57 stated he went to hospital for pneumonia and kidney stones. When asked if he received a bed hold policy, R57 stated, I have no idea what that is.
During record review of nursing notes and hospital discharge orders, revealed R57 went to the hospital for sepsis, urinary tract infection, chronic suprapubic catheter, nausea and vomiting, muscular sclerosis (MS) and chronic indwelling catheter on 11/01/22 (10/28/22-11/01/22), 09/08/22 (09/03/22-09/08/22), and 02/18/23 (02/14/23-02/18/23).
Record review of nursing note dated 02/14/23, reveals R57 had been sent out to the emergency department twice before sent to a different hospital that hospitalized him from 02/14/23 through 02/18/23.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R57 received this information or understood the bed hold policy at his departure from the facility to the hospital on the three listed hospitalizations.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 12:22 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated he did not know who provided this information to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
Resident #72 (R72)
Review of the medical record reflected R72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, cerebrovascular accident (CVA-stroke) and dementia.
The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/03/2023, revealed R72 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 10 (moderately impaired) out of 15. Section G, functional status reveals R57 required extensive assistance of all care, is unable to make needs known and uses a wheelchair.
During an interview and observation on 02/21/23 at 01:01 PM, R72 stated he had a bad fall and had to go to the hospital. R72 was sitting in his wheelchair at the dining room table following lunch.
During a record review of admission notes and nursing progress notes, revealed R72 fell backwards while ambulating independently, was sent to the hospital for posterior head laceration evaluation. R72 wsa hospitalized on [DATE] through 11/04/22 for frequent falls and hallucinations.
During an interview on 02/27/23 at 09:18 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated a bed hold policy with transfer/discharge sheet is sent with residents when they go out to the hospital. Also handing surveyor the transfer packet that is sent to the hospital. SW C observed looking through electronic medical records (EMR), could not locate any documentation to support R57 received this information or understood the bed hold policy at his departure from the facility to the hospital.
During an interview on 2/27/23 at 11:51 AM, DON B stated after every fall we updated his plan of care, he was a tricky guy, we would try to sit him in a high traffic area to keep an eye on him. DON B stated that he also made rounds on him, and a lot of his falls were in the dining room. Staff had caught him from literally falling to the floor. He hasn't had any falls with those interventions in place. DON B also stated he did not know who provided information on bed hold, transfer/discharges to the residents when they transferred out of the facility.
According to a document titled DISCHARGE OR TRANFER OF RESIDENT dated 08/01/2008, revision date of 08/05/2021, Attachment G, specifies Bed Hold's and Readmissions. When a resident is discharged to the hospital for further care and evaluation, [NAME] Senior Care and Rehab Center are required by Michigan law to offer the resident, resident representative, and/or Guarantor the opportunity to pay privately to hold a bed for at least 10 days.
Procedure:
1)
Within 24 hours of discharge from the facility, the resident will be contacted by
a representative of the facility via phone and/or letter to determine if a bed hold is desired.
This notification and the decision will be documented in the medical record.
2)
If bed hold is desired, a bed hold agreement will need to be signed and an initial
seven-day deposit will be required within 48 hours.
MEDICAID Bed Hold Rules are stated as follows. Medicaid reimburses a nursing home facility to hold a bed for up to ten days during a beneficiary's temporary absent from the facility only when there is a 98% occupancy.
Facility would follow same procedure as private pay.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
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 the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for fou...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for four (Resident #1, #3, #40, and #87) of 21 reviewed, resulting in care planned interventions that were not in place and the potential for unmet care needs.
Findings include:
Resident #1 (R1)
Review of the medical record revealed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's Disease, dementia with behavioral disturbance, delusional disorder, history of falls, diabetes, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/12/23 revealed R1 scored 8 out of 15 (moderate cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), had a significant weight loss, and needed supervision for transfers and walking in the room.
Review of R1's fall care plan revealed interventions that included call light accessible (initiated 12/16/19) and gripper strips on the floor next to the bed (initiated 4/7/22).
On 2/21/23 at 12:26 PM, R1 was observed in bed with her door closed. The bed was positioned at an angle. One gripper strip was observed under the bed and the other was approximately two feet away from the bed. R1's call light was on the floor. At 12:27 PM, a staff member delivered R1's lunch and placed the tray on the overbed table. The staff member rearranged R1's oxygen tubing so that it was not wrapped around her feet. The call light was not placed within R1's reach.
On 2/27/23 at 08:27 AM, R1 was observed asleep in bed. The bed was positioned at an angle. New gripper strips were observed to each side of the bed along with the previously observed gripper strips.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 10:19 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) I reported R1's bed had been at an angled position for approximately a year.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 10:43 AM, Unit Manager (UM) J reported R1 was care planned to have gripper strips to both sides of the bed. R1 reported maintenance placed new gripper strips to both sides of R1's bed on 2/22/23.
Review of R1's nutritional risk care plan revealed an intervention of provide nutrition supplement as ordered, record % consumed (initiated 1/13/23).
Review of the Physician's Order dated 1/13/23 revealed R1 had an order for vanilla Glucerna (nutrition shake) every day at bedtime.
Review of the medical record revealed the percentage consumed was not documented.
In an interview on 2/28/23 at 10:32 AM, Registered Dietitian (RD) H reported the percentage consumed was previously documented under the tasks section, but there was no longer an option to document there. RD H reported she thought the nurses documented the percentage on the Medication Administration Record (MAR), but reported she did not have access to those documents to review. RD H reported she was never shown how to access the MARs. RD H reported the percentage consumed of R1's Glucerna should be documented.
Resident #3 (R3)
Review of the medical record revealed R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included bipolar disorder, morbid obesity, diabetes, epilepsy, bilateral above the knee amputations, and pressure ulcer sacral region stage 4. The MDS with an ARD of 12/16/22 revealed R3 scored 13 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the BIMS and had a stage 4 pressure ulcer present on admission.
On 2/21/23 at 10:55 AM, R3 was observed lying in bed. R3 reported she had a pressure ulcer that gets better then worse. R3 reported her wheelchair cushion did not hold enough air. When a hand was placed on R3's roho cushion, the wheelchair seat could be felt as the cushion deflated. R3 stated I can feel my butt bone hitting the seat.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 9:42 AM, UM J reported R3 often got up in her wheelchair and pressure ulcer interventions included a roho cushion to R3's wheelchair. When asked about any issues with the roho cushion, UM J reported a new cushion was ordered for R1 approximately one month ago because the previous cushion was uncomfortable. Upon observation of R3's roho cushion with UM J, UM J reported the roho cushion was definitely losing air. R3 stated It's always lost air. R3 reported the new cushion was still in the box in her closet because it was the incorrect size. UM J reported therapy was in charge of roho cushions.
On 2/27/23 at 10:02 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) N entered R3's room with a pump. CNA N was able to pump over forty times, but the cushion still lost air.
On 2/27/23 at 11:38 AM, UM J reported she had not been back into R3's room to notice that the roho cushion was once again deflated. UM J reported she was going to check with therapy to see if they had the correct size roho cushion.
On 2/27/23 at 11:40 AM, R3 was observed sitting in her wheelchair. R3 reported the cushion was still the same and was deflated. A box was observed in R3's closet that contained a new 18-inch roho cushion. R3 reported she needed a 16-inch roho cushion.
On 2/27/23 at 11:53 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) B reported he was not aware of R3's wheelchair cushion issues prior to today.
Review of R3's pressure ulcer care plan revealed R3 had a stage 4 pressure ulcer. Interventions included a roho cushion to R3's wheelchair.
Resident #40 (R40)
Review of the medical record revealed R40 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included left femur fracture (12/5/22), anxiety, retention of urine, and Alzheimer's Disease. The significant change MDS with an ARD of 12/11/22 revealed R40 scored 3 out of 15 (severe cognitive impairment) on the BIMS, required extensive assist of two for transfers, did not walk, total dependence of two for toileting, and had one fall without injury.
On 2/21/23 at 11:52 AM, R40 was observed in the dining room. At 12:59 PM. R40 stood up from her wheelchair, and took a couple shuffled steps before staff redirected her back to the wheelchair. R40 stated she had to go to the bathroom. A staff member then transported R40 out into the hallway without the use of footrests for the wheelchair. The footrests were observed in a bag on the back of the wheelchair. Once in the hallway, another staff member was observed pulling R40 in her wheelchair by holding on to the left armrest. R40's left foot was dragging on the floor. The staff member then asked R40 if she wanted to walk, assisted R40 to a standing position by holding onto R40's left hand. R40 was then ambulated to her room without the use of a walker or gait belt.
Review of R40's care plans revealed R40 was a one person assist with a rolling walker for ambulation.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 09:42 AM, UM J reported R40 should have wheelchair footrests in place when being transported in her wheelchair.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 12:25 PM, DON B reported he was not sure on the facility's policy for wheelchair footrest and gait belt use.
Resident #87 (R87):
Per R87's face sheet in an electronic medical record (EMR) R87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with 2/13/2023 being the most recent admission. The face sheet also revealed R87 had diagnoses of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD-stomach acid that flows back up into the esophagus toward the mouth causing a burning sensation), and dysphasia (difficultly in swallowing).
In an observation and interview on 2/21/2023 at 1:13 PM, Clinical Care Coordinator (CCC) D, who was the Unit Manager, was observed attempting to assist R87 to eat orally solid food. Also observed was a bottle of tube feeding on a pole infusing at 70 milliliters (ML) per hour with water in a separate bag infusing at 50 ML per hour. CCC D stated that both the tube feeding and the water infuse for 20 hours a day.
During the same observation and interview, R87 was observed lying on her left side while bed. The head of the bed was elevated up to approximately 30 degrees, however R87 was observed to have slid down from the head of the bed, with her head resting at the bottom of the raised portion in the area where the bed bent when the head of he bed was elevated. CCC D was observed to exit R87's room, however did not re-adjust R87 in her bed so that she was sitting up at about 30 degrees to prevent aspiration.
On 2/21/2023 at 2:46 PM, Resident #87 was observed with the head of the bed up at approximately 30 degrees, however R87 remained with her head in the bend area of the bed, and lying on her left side. R87's tube feeding and water was observed to be infusing into her feeding tube in her stomach, with no change in the rates of infusion.
Record review of Physician's orders dated 1/5/2023, revealed and order to, Ensure HOB (head of bed) is elevated 30-45 degrees while tube feed being administered and for at least 30 minutes after tube feeding is completed.
Record review of Physician's orders dated 2/5/2023, revealed and order to, Ensure HOB (head of bed) is elevated 30-45 degrees while tube feed being administered and for at least 30 minutes after tube feeding is completed.
Record review of R87's care plan that was created on 10/19/2022, with a Focus of NUTRITIONAL PREFERENCES/HYDRATION. revealed for the Focus R87's list of diagnoses that included gastrostomy status, dysphasia, and GERD, and pertaining to R87's tube feeding, Gastrostomy status, monitor toleration of feeds ., Swallowing difficulty r/t (related to) dysphasia, PEG (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy), tube placed, mechanically altered diet texture . The care plan revealed the latest revision dated was 2/5/2023. Under Interventions R87's care plan revealed, Feeding tube, gastrostomy status. Provide enteral nutrition as ordered, adjust PRN (as needed) ., date initiated was 2/5/2023, and Keep HOB elevated, not less that 30 degrees during and 1 hour after tube feeding ., date initiated was 2/5/2023. Therefore, R87's plan of care did include the interventions to keep her head of bed elevated during and after completion of her daily tube feeding infusion until 2/25/2023.
Record review of a Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for the month of February revealed that on 2/5/2023 the order to assure R87's HOB was up at 30 degrees while infusing and for 30 minutes after tube feeding was completed, was documented to have been assured for the day shift, however per the observation on 2/21/2023 at 1:13 PM, the order was not followed, but was documented to have been completed, including R87's order to remain up at 30 degrees for 30 minutes due to her GERD diagnosis.
In an interview on 2/27/2023 at 1:14 PM, Registered Dietician (RD) H stated that R87's tube feeding was to infuse 70 ML per hour with a water flush at 50 ML per hours for 20 hours a day. RD H stated that Director of Nursing (DON) B put in an order for R87's head of the bed to be a 30 degrees while tube feeding and water infusing, and for 30 minutes afterwards. RD H said she updated R87's care plan based the order. RD H stated that her expectation was R87's head of the bed be at 30-45 degrees while receiving her tubing infusions.
In an interview on 2/28/2023 at 10:39 AM, DON B was asked what his expectation was regarding R87's tube feeding and head of the bed up 30 degrees while infusing and for 30 minutes after the feeding was completed. DON B stated that he expected staff to do their job.
Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Enteral Nutritional Feeding dated 7/1/2008 with the last revision dated of 9/23/2019, revealed on page #2 under, MONITORING THE RESIDENTS ON ENTERAL FEEDINGS: .#3 Head of bed must be elevated 30-45 degrees at all times during feeding and for at least 30 minutes after the feeding unless otherwise indicated per order/plan or care.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident # 28
Resident # 28 (R28) admitted to facility 10/29/2021 with diagnoses including essential hypertension, unspecified i...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident # 28
Resident # 28 (R28) admitted to facility 10/29/2021 with diagnoses including essential hypertension, unspecified intellectual disabilities, and fracture of upper and lower end of right fibula. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/23/23 revealed that R28 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5 (severe cognitive impairment). Section G of MDS revealed that R28 required extensive two-person assist with bed mobility, two-person total dependence with transfer and toilet use and was independent with eating after set up. Section O of same MDS indicated that R28 utilized oxygen while a resident at the facility.
In an observation on 2/21/23 at 10:35 AM, Resident # 28 (R28) was observed to be lying in bed, on back, with head of bed at an approximate 60-degree angle. R28 was noted to have nasal cannula oxygen tubing positioned just to the left of her nares with tubing connected to oxygen concentrator, at bedside, set at 2 liters/minute (liters per minutes). The oxygen tubing was labeled with a handwritten date of 2/9/23. R28 shook head to acknowledge name but verbal response was garbled and unclear.
Review of R28's medical record completed with the following findings noted:
Nurses Note dated 1/6/23 at 11:21 AM stated, While assessing residents vital signs residents O2 (oxygen) level was 87 percent on room air. Supplemental O2 was placed at 2 L (liters) via NC (nasal cannula). Residents O2 rose to 94 percent with the O2 in place. Doctor was informed and auscultated resident lung sounds .
Physician's Note dated 1/7/23 at 5:54 AM stated, Seen d/t (due to) nursing notification of O2 sats (saturations) of 87% (percent). Improved to 96% with low dose O2 .a/p) (action/plan) acute hypoxic respiratory failure possibly d/t atelectasis .p) (plan) supplemental O2 as needed .
Order dated 1/6/23 at 11:58 AM stated, O2 at 2L (liters) continuously via nasal cannula every shift for Hypoxia.
Order dated 1/6/23 at 11:58 AM stated, Room air trial every shift starting on the 15th and ending on the 15th every month for evaluation of O2 use; LN (licensed nurse) to remove O2 for 15 minutes & document SPO2 (oxygen saturation) on room air.
Treatment Administration Records (TARs) dated 1/1/2023 to 1/31/2023 and 2/1/2023 to 2/28/2023 reflected order for Room air trial starting on the 15th and ending on the 15th every month with corresponding documentation on January TAR for 1/15/23 under O2 Sats (saturation) noted to reflect 81 for day shift, 85 for evening shift and 88 for night shift and on February TAR for 2/15/23 under O2 Sats noted to reflect 84 for day shift, NA (not applicable) for evening shift, and 89 for night shift.
TARs dated 1/1/2023 to 1/31/2023 and 2/1/2023 to 2/28/2023 also reflected order for O2 at 2L continuously via nasal cannula with all corresponding day, evening, and night shift administration boxes noted to be signed out starting evening shift of 1/6/2023 and continuing to present date.
Review of all care plans contained within Care Plan tab completed with no respiratory or oxygen related care plan noted to indicate R28's oxygen needs and related orders. Cardiac Care Plan was noted although was not noted to include oxygen needs.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 11:05 AM, Resident Assessment Instrument Coordinator/Registered Nurse (RN) E confirmed familiarity with R28 and upon review of orders, confirmed that R28 had oxygen initiated on January 6, 2023. RN E also confirmed that 1/23/2023 quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment included coding for oxygen usage. Upon review of the comprehensive care plans, RN E confirmed that no care plan had been developed to reflect initiation of oxygen therapy and that there was still no care plan in place to reflect R28's ongoing oxygen needs. RN E stated that since R28 received oxygen therapy, that a corresponding care plan should have been formulated at the time of oxygen initiation by the assigned nurse or within 24 to 48 hours by the Clinical Care Coordinator or MDS nurse.
On 2/27/23 at 11:30 AM, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A was requested to provide the facility care planning policy with a facility policy titled Baseline Care Plans received from NHA A.
On 2/27/23 at 11:45 AM, NHA A was requested to provide the facility policy for care plan updates/revisions or any other policy regarding the facilities care planning process at which time NHA A confirmed that the facility did not have a specific care plan policy that addressed the initiation of a new care plan or the revision of an existing care plan.
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to revise care plans for four (Resident #21, #26, #28, and #75) of 21 reviewed, resulting in the potential for unmet care needs.
Findings include:
Resident #26 (R26)
Review of the medical record revealed R26 admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, diabetes, and major depressive disorder. The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 1/20/23 revealed R26 scored 3 out of 15 (severe cognitive impairment on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and required extensive assist of one to two people for activities of daily living. R26 was admitted to hospice services on 1/12/23.
Review of the Physician's Order dated 2/3/23 revealed carrot to left hand on at all times as tolerated.
Review of R26's care plans revealed the hand carrot was not added to R26's care plans.
On 2/21/23 at 10:37 AM, R26 was observed lying in bed awake. Two hand carrots were observed on R26's overbed table. A hand carrot was not in place in R26's left hand.
On 2/21/23 at 12:36 PM, R26's hand carrot was still not in place. Two hand carrots were observed on the overbed table.
On 2/21/23 at 01:09 PM, staff had finished feeding R26 lunch. The hand carrot was not in place. Two hand carrots were observed on the overbed table.
Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed R26 was marked as using the hand carrot on 2/21/23. No refusals were documented.
In an interview on 2/27/23 at 12:18 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B reported he was not able to locate the care plan update to include R26's hand carrot.
Resident #21 (R21):
Per the facility face sheet R21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure.
Record review of the Physician's orders dated 12/20/2022, revealed R21 was to have oxygen (02) two liters of oxygen placed on during the night shift and check SP02 (oxygen levels) every night. The order also revealed that a licensed nurse was to change the 02 tubing and date the tubing every Thursday. The order also dated 12/20/2022 revealed that R21 was to have trial periods of being on room air (no 02 on) and check 02 level on the 15 of every month.
Record review of R21's care plans that were active revealed that there was no care plan in place regarding R21's 02 use, nor were there any interventions related to the room air 02 trials. and none of the ordered specifics were placed as an intervention on any of R21's care plans.
Review of a care plan dated 12/16/2022, that was in place for respiratory issues related to complications of COPD, did not have any interventions in place pertain to R21's 02 use, and the perform trial room air 02 checks. The last added interventions that were on the care plan were dated 12/16/2022.
Review of another care plan dated 12/16/2022, revealed R21 was at risk for cardiac complications. The care plan did not have any interventions in place regarding R21's use of 02, nor to perform trials of room air 02 checks. The care plan had no new or revised interventions since 12/16/2022.
Resident #75 (R75):
Per the facility face sheet R75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had a diagnosis of heart failure.
In an interview on 2/21/2023 at 11:02 AM, R75 stated he never had received an invitation, attended, nor was notified of a care plan conference since his admission, and therefore had not ever had a care conference.
In an interview on 2/27/2023 at 10:21 AM, Social Worker (SW) C stated that she did not find in R75's electronic medical record (EMR) that he had ever had a care conference (CC), and confirmed that a CC should have been conducted seven days after R75's admission and Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed.
Record review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, CARE PLAN CONFERENCES: SCHEDULING AND RESIDENTIAL/FAMILY INVITATION dated 7/1/2008 with no revision dates, revealed under, Policy: the facility should involved the resident, resident's family or representative in the care planning, Their attendance and participation in the care plan conference must be encouraged trough timely invitation. Under Protocol: #2a. The Care Plan Conference for long term care residents must be scheduled at least seven (7) days after the ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of scheduled MDS., and b. The Care Plan Conference for newly admitted resident/s must be schedules within the first 21 days from admission. Under 3. The facility designee shall generate the following: a, Care Plan Conference letters addressed to the following recipients (as appropriate): i. Family Member/Responsible Party, ii. Guardian, b. invitation addressed to the resident. The policy further stated under #4. The Care Plan Conference letters shall be sent two (2) weeks prior to the month of the scheduled meeting. In cases of new admissions, re-admissions ., letters shall be sent simultaneous to scheduling of the meeting.
In another interview on 2/21/2023 at 10:47 AM, R75 stated that a nurse (could not recall nurses' name) about three days prior checked his 02 level which was 85% and one like 89/90%. R75 said the nurse put me on 02 at about 2 liters.
During the interview an 02 concentrator was observed in R75's room with a nasal cannula (tubing goes in the nose to deliver 02) on the floor. R75 stated he turned his 02 on and off himself.
Record review a care plan in place for R75's cardiac issues dated 1/19/2023, revealed no intervention in place addressing R75's oxygen use or 02 room air trials.
No other care plan was found in R75's EMR that addressed R75's 02 use or trial 02 room checks.
In an interview on 2/28/2023 at 10:33 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated his expectations were that when a nurse wrote a new Physician's order that nurse would add or revise the residents care plan at that time also.