SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
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 facility failed to: 1) accurately assess, monitor and prevent the development ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review facility failed to: 1) accurately assess, monitor and prevent the development and worsening of pressure ulcers consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent avoidable pressure ulcers; and 2) implement care-planned and non-care-planned interventions for two Residents (R29 and R94) of four reviewed for pressure ulcers, resulting in worsening of pressure wounds requiring re-hospitalization related to wound infection that required use of intravenous antibiotic treatment and multiple debridement's for R94 and development of two facility acquired unstageable deep tissue pressure ulcers, and the increased likelihood for delayed wound healing and/or worsening of wounds and overall deterioration in health status.
Findings include:
Resident #29(R29)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R29 was a [AGE] year old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included alzheimers disease, diabetes, chronic kidney failure, and anxiety. The MDS reflected R29 had a BIM (assessment tool) score of 10 which indicated her ability to make daily decisions was moderately impaired, and he required one person physical assist with locomotion on unit, dressing and toileting.
During an observation and interview on 5/08/23 09:37 AM R29 was sitting on side of bed, appeared well groomed an able to answer questions without difficulty.
Review of EMR, dated 9/22/22 to current 5/15/23, reflected R29 had a stage 3 coccyx pressure ulcer present on admission. Review of the Skin and Wound Evaluation, dated 5/11/23 reflected area with base of wound observed with no slough noted over base and no evidence of depth measurements.
Resident #94(R94)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R94 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with hospital re-admission related to wound infection 2/2/23 to 2/13/23, hospital re-admission 3/21/23 with diagnosis that included wound infection and re-admission 4/18/23, with diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetic (high blood sugar), anemia, malnutrition, obstructive uropathy, stage 4 pressure ulcers, and anxiety. The MDS reflected R94 had a BIM (assessment tool) score of 11 that indicated his ability to make daily decisions was minimally impaired, and he required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, hygiene and bathing and one-person physical assist with locomotion on unit.
During an observation on 5/08/23 at 10:45 AM, R94 was laying on back in air mattress with eyes closed. R94 appears very thin and pale.
Review of the discharge MDS, dated [DATE], reflected R94 had two stage 2 pressure ulcers(partial thickness loss of dermis) on admission [DATE].
Review of the admission MDS, dated [DATE], reflected R94 had two unstageable pressure ulcers, slough and or eschar(non-viable tissue), and two suspected deep tissue injuries on re-admission 1/2/23.
Review of the 5-day re-admission MDS from acute care setting, dated 2/19/23, reflected R94 had two stage 4 pressure ulcers(full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon or muscle) present on admission 2/13/23. Continued review of MDS reflected R94 two suspected deep tissue injuries not present on admission 2/13/23.
Review of the Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 1/18/23, reflected R 94 had 0/10 pain scale.
Review of the Nursing Progress Note, dated 1/19/23 at 12:06 p.m., reflected, Wound rounds completed with [named facility wound physician]. Left thigh sharps debrided. Treatment order updated with changes as recommended. Plan to reassess next week.(Facility wound Physician consult note scanned into EMR 3/7/23).
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 1/25/23, reflected, CHIEF COMPLAINT pain management and blood glucose . HISTORY OF PRESENT ILLNESSES General: Patient is a [AGE] year-old Male with medical history of fall at home with rhabdomyolysis, right sided abdominal mass, HTN and DM. Patient readmitted after hospital stay for respiratory failure and aspiration pneumonia and fecal impaction. Patient is noted with increased pain with movement and was taking Norco in the past and requested to have medication restarted and scheduled twice a day . Noted with DTI to bilateral heels as well, no open areas but heels are boggy. Will start skin prep and off load heels . Pressure-induced deep tissue damage of unspecified heel: Noted on bilateral heels, skin prep and off load heels .
Review of the Nursing Progress Notes, dated 1/30/23 at 1:31 p.m., reflected, wound dressing saturated, large amount of drainage, eschar tissue sloughing off, strong odor. No mention facility wound Physician notified of change in R94's wound.
Review of the Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 1/31/23, reflected, CHIEF COMPLAINT pain management . noted with continued pain with movement and dressing changes . Will add MS at low dose for dressing changes and extensive care, otherwise norco is reducing pain .
Review of the Physician Progress Notes, dated 2/1/23, reflected R94's pain level was 5 out 10 on pain scale.
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Notes, dated 2/2/23, reflected CHIEF COMPLAINT: Change in wounds .Patient was noted with foul smelling wounds with increased purulent drainage and wound physician was in house and did debride thigh wound. Based on clinical presentation of wounds and collaboration with wound physician, decision was made to send patient to the hospital for evaluation and treatment of thigh and buttock wounds and need for extensive I&D .Pain Level: 6 .Pressure ulcer of sacral region, unspecified stage: Noted with increased purulent drainage from both sacral and thigh wounds, foul odor and deterioration, sent to ED for evaluation and debridement .
Review of the EMR, dated 1/19/23 through 3/2/23, reflected no evidence R94's wounds were evaluated by facility wound physician during weekly rounds on 2/26/23 or wound physician was notified of worsening pressure wounds and development of two preventable facility acquired deep tissue injuries. The EMR reflected no visit notes for facility wound physician dated 2/26/23 by time of survey exit on 5/15/23.
Review of R94's Nursing Progress Note, dated 2/13/23 at 11:11 p.m., reflected, Resident admitted from [named] hospital with a sacral and two L hip wounds. A&Ox3, Full code, takes meds whole, house diet, Foley in place(placed on 2/2/23), non-ambulatory,incontinent of bowel . c/o pain of both heels, L hip, and coccyx, PRN medication given, repositioned for some relief of coccyx pain .
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Notes, dated 2/14/23, reflected, CHIEF COMPLAINT: readmission from hospital . Patient readmitted after hospital stay for necrotizing fasciitis and abscess in left thigh and underwent multiple surgical debridements. Patient had coccyx wound debrideded as well and only has wound vac on thigh wound. Will continue with wound team to monitor and finished antibiotics with one dose after admission. Patient states that oxycodone is effective in treating his pain and will continue at this time .Pain Level: 6 .NECROTIZING FASCIITIS: Continues on antibiotics for one day to complete course, will continue with wound team follow and pain medication .
Review of R94's Skin/Wound Progress Note, dated 2/16/23 at 1:48 p.m., reflected, Wound rounds completed with [named facility wound physician] Left thigh wound with wound vac, sacrum is Dakin's packing with gentle foam dressing. Resident also has DTI to bilat heels. Heel boots in place. Plan to reassess next week.
Review of the MDS Progress Note, dated 2/16/23 at 5:45 p.m., reflected R94 had reported 6 out of 10 pain over past five days.
Review of the Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 2/24/23, reflected, Encouraged to ask for pain medications and did not want to schedule any pain medications at this time. Has PRN roxanol if needed prior to treatments .
Review of R94's Progress Note, dated 3/8/23 at 11:07 a.m., reflected, Reviewed Clinical Indicator: Resident receiving antifungal treatment r/t UTI with fungal infection, no adverse effects noted. Resident noted with pressure wound to left thigh with previous necrotizing fasciitis with wound vac in place, wound is improving. Resident with sacral stage4pressure ulcer with slough noted, current progress is stalled, is followed by wound physician, will review potential for woundvac following completion of Santyl treatment for slough. Resident receives multiple supplements to assist in wound management. Resident with right heel DTI,and left heel unstageable wounds. Treatments in place and continues to be followed by wound physician .
Review of R94's Nursing Progress Note, dated 3/14/23 at 7:12 a.m., reflected, Guest sacral wound dressing was off patient when CNA change him. Needed to flush the wound with saline to remove fecal matter. Reapplied dressing and noted change of condition. Notified the physician to assess wound.
Review of the Physician Progress Notes, dated 3/15/23, reflected R94 had 7 out of 10 pain.
Review of R94's facility Wound Physician Consult Note, dated 3/16/23, reflected, A [AGE] year-old male seen and examined at [named] Skilled Nursing Facility with wound care team, wound care nurse, and nurse manager.
1. I was asked to evaluate a sacral area stage 4 pressure area ulceration at 8.9 x 9.4. Black eschar noted. Present on admission. No signs of infection. Periwound area is normal in color and temperature. Antibiotics were started on the patient via primary team undermining noted at 1 o' clock and 4 o' clock. Sloughy tissue noted. Black eschar tissue noted at the wound bed.
2. Left heel deep tissue injury at 3.7 x 3.9. [facility acquired]
3. Right heel deep tissue pressure injury at 3.8 x 4.0. 100% black eschar noted. [facility acquired]
4. Left thigh stage 4 pressure area ulceration at 9.1 x 5.6 with some granulation tissue noted at the wound bed. Treatment currently includes the application of negative pressure wound VAC system. Negative 125 mmHg, negative pressure. Change three times a week and as necessary .
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 3/17/23, reflected, .patient was started on antibiotics for wound infection. Wound on coccyx with purulent drainage and change in odor . No mention facility wound physician was notified of worsening wound changes.
Review of the Infection Progress Note, dated 3/17/23 at 2:34 p.m., reflected, Guest continues on Amoxicillin-Pot Clavulanate Tablet 875-125 MG 1tablet PO Q12 hours for Wound infection for 10 Days. Guest continues to have low BP and little output. Peripheral line placed in L hand and IV fluids started.
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 3/21/23, reflected, CHIEF COMPLAINT Change in condition . Patient was noted to have increased fatigue and decreased appetite/fluid intake. Patient agreed to another bag of IV fluids and D5 ordered. Will obtain labs and continues on antibiotics for wound infection. Patient appears weaker and initially declined going to the hospital and declined to discuss code status with SW/nursing. Contacted by DON later in the day and decision was made to send to Ed for further evaluation and likely will need IV antibiotics .
Review of R94's Progress Note, dated 4/18/23 at 4:33 p.m., reflected, Resident arrived from [named] hospital on hospice, [named} hospice nurse in and assessed resident. Notified hospice nurse of red drainage noted in foley. Notified unit manager of dressings to BLE and wound nurse to assess tomorrow .
Review of R94's Progress Note, dated 4/27/23 at 11:03 a.m., reflected, Resident readmitted from hospital on hospice services with multiple skin integrity concerns. Resident with bilateral heel unstageable pressure ulcers, coccyx is stage 4 with wound vac in place. Left thigh with stage 4 ulcer wound vac present on admission, vac discontinued during wound rounds on 04/20/23. Resident with venous ulcer to right calf with tx in place. Continue with wound physician evaluation for comfort and wound management .
Review of R94's Skin/Wound Progress Note, 4/27/23 3:38 p.m., reflected, Wound rounds completed with Dr [named facility wound physician] Wound vac to sacrum dc'd. New orders in place. Plan to reassess next week. (Same day Progress Note reflected wound vac had been discontinued on 4/20/23.)
Review of the Treatment Administration Record, dated 4/1/23 through 4/30/23, reflected R94's wound vac was discontinued 4/27/23.
Review of R94's Skin/Wound Progress Note, dated 5/4/23 at 11:03 a.m., reflected, Late Entry:Note Text: Wound rounds completed with [named facility wound physician]. Left thigh and bilat heels are improving. Right trochanter deteriorating, sacrum stable .No change to treatment orders. Plan to reassess next week.
On 12/26/2022, the resident weighed 156 lbs. On 04/30/2023, the resident weighed 138 pounds which is a -11.54 % Loss.
Review of Hospice Start of Care Documentation, dated 4/18/23, reflected R94's weight was 135 pounds. Continued review of the documents reflected, .Reason for hospice referral/admission: Patient sent to emergency room with recurring infection leading to sepsis. Patient has multiple [NAME] [wounds] on bilateral lower extremities sacral region and his left hip. Increasing confusion and worsening vital signs. Patient has recurring aspiration leading to change in diet. Is bed bound continuous losing weight .
During an interview on 5/10/23 at 8:22 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) AA reported was R94 nurse, and reported wound rounds were on Thursdays and floor nurse completes daily dressings on other days. LPN AA reported R94 had orders for heels and hip treatments that day.
During an observation on 5/10/23 at 9:40 AM, LPN AA and Assistant Director of Nursing/wound care nurse(WN) X entered R94 after gathering wound care supplies. WN X reported had been facility wound nurse for six months and worked at the facility for about 1 year. Observed bilateral heel dressings with black intact eschar, cleaned with normal saline and covered with iodine soaked gauze, covered with heel foam and secured with gauze wrap. LPN AA also changed dressing to Right trochanter that was dated 5/9/23 and cleaned with normal saline, applied medihoney and alginate and covered with foam border dressing. Reported plan to complete three other wounds the next day.
During an interview on 5/10/23 at 10:00 AM, WN X reported R94's wound vac for sacral and left hip stage 4 pressure ulcers was no longer in place after most recent hospital stay. WN X reported bilateral heels and right trochanter were facility acquired pressure ulcers and reported R94 was admitted with sacral and left hip and right calf wounds. WN X reported R94 had fallen at home and laid in same position for long period of time. WN X reported after admission R94's left hip wound rapid declined and was admitted to the hospital and diagnosed with necrotizing fasciitis after 2/13/23 hospital admission. WN X reported wound measurements taken on every Thursday at wound rounds with use of camera that determines measurements.
During an observation and interview on 5/11/23 at 10:22 AM, WN X and Unit Manager (UM) T entered R94s room after WN X gathered supplies reported today was wound rounds and facility wound physician M was no able to be present this week. R94 appeared alert and oriented and answer questions without issues and was positioned in bed on back on air mattress. Dressings were completed by WC X as follows:
-right heel-dressing was removed that was dated 5/10/23, saline was used to loosen betadine soaked gauze, 100% black eschar observed, picture taken, applied betadine gauze, foam heel, secured with kerlex wrap.
-right calf-old dressing removed, 100% eschar about nectarine size with loose slough edges, picture taken, cleaned with normal saline, applied xeroform, ABD and secured with gauze wrap.
-left heel-old dressing removed dated 5/10/23, 100% eschar about nectarine size with loose slough edges, picture taken, betadine soaked gauze/foam/kling.
-Observed undated dressing on posterior left calf that was not removed or spoke about.
R94 rolled to right side with assist of WN X and UM T and WN X reported R94 had recent bowel movement and staff had reported had removed dressing because it was soiled.
-sacral wound was observed opened, directly against soiled brief that was large(about softball size) dark pink tissue with about 10% slough between 9 o'clock and 12 o'clock with exposed bone. WN X reported R94 had another bowel movement and WN X change brief. WN X took a picture of the wound. (no manual measurements observed.) WN X applied silver alginate to R94s sacral wound with no cleaning of wound observed after direct contact with soiled brief with alginate placed about one inch over periwound between 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock and covered with border dressing.
-left thigh dressing, dated 5/9/23 removed, 2 border dressings with xerofoam removed. (2 open areas), picture taken, normal saline single use sprayed on wound and dripped into brief, xerofoam, covered with border dressing.
-right trochanter-dressing removed dated, dated 5/10/23, picture taken, Normal Saline single use(dripped down to observed open area on right buttock and clean brief, gloved finger applied medihoney to cut alginate placed on wound, and cover border dressing.
-added dressing to left buttock, border dressing.
R94 was rolled to his back, air mattress with rotation observed with no pillows noted in room for positioning except one with no pillowcase. WN X and UM T started pull up R94's covers and R94, stated, you're not done yet, (followed by long pause) with R94 turned and looked at offloading boots that WN X had placed in chair prior to dressing change), heels happed once, I'll be damned if it will happen again. WN X and UM T uncovered R94, applied boots to bilateral heels, covered, and R94 reported a little pain on backside.
During an observation and interview on 5/11/23 at 11:36 am, WN X reported process for wound documentation that included after rounds sit and document same day off phone pictures and paper notes. WN X verified no written notes taken during R94 wound care. WN X reported usually only herself and facility wound physician for rounds unless CNA staff needed for positioning. WN X reported prints off wound notes and provides facility wound physician copy at the following week (Thursday) wound rounds. WN X reported the wound physician then dictates those prior week notes, sends out of the country for dictation and she can obtain notes between 2-3 weeks post actual wound care monitoring. WN X reported measure weekly with picture including height, width and depth. WN X reported depth was observed by eye because she was able to see changes and verified did not obtain manual depth of wounds including R94 sacral wound and reported could start to add to notes. WN X reported did not see that R94 had a dressing on the left posterior calf area and had no knowledge of open area to the left lower leg and WN X asked this surveyor if there was a dressing in place. WN X entered R94's again, observed undated border dressing on R94s posterior left calf. WN X removed border dressing with alginate over appear that appeared very dry but intact at that time. WN X reported unsure why treatment in place with no order and reported may have been in place for protection.
Review of the weekly wound notes, dated 12/26/23 through current (5/11/23), reflected R94 had no evidence of depth measurements including wounds with without eschar or significant slough. Continued review of weekly wound round physician notes reflected the same for the visit notes prior to 3/16/23. Review of the EMR reflected no evidence of facility wound physician notes after 3/16/23.
Review of R94's skin Care Plan, dated 1/11/23, reflected, [named R94] has actual skin impairment and is at risk for further impaired skin integrity/pressure injury: pressure injuries to - sacrum, left thigh, bilateral heels r/t Hx Necrotizing fasciitis to thigh ulcer, hx of debridement to sacral and thigh ulcers injuries .Goals .Will remain free from complications from pressure, dated 1/11/23 .Interventions . Assist with repositioning every 2 hours and prn Date Initiated: 01/11/2023 . Conduct weekly head to toe skin assessments, document and report abnormal
findings to the physician. Date Initiated: 12/22/2022 .Heelz up device to float heels while in bed and assist as needed
Date Initiated: 01/11/2023 . Encourage to float heels while in bed and assist as needed, Date Initiated: 01/11/2023 Heel boots to float heels Date Initiated: 01/11/2023 Revision on: 04/27/2023(Heel boots to float heels verbiage added 4/27/23)
During an interview on 5/11/23 at 1150 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B reported would expect physician documentation to be in resident charts(EMR) within seven days. DON B reported would expect wounds to be measured weekly including length, width and depth measurements and reported depth must be taken manually because the camera does not obtain depth. DON B reported nursing staff are not expected to eye ball wound depth. DON B reported not aware physician was provided copy of nurse wound notes seven days after actual observation to dictate then sent out and reported was aware of long delay but not aware physician going by nurse notes. DON B reported infection control duties performed by herself and ADON/WN X. DON B reported WN X completed facility floor surveillance and DON B oversee WN X and is often present to assist with weekly rounds and would expect WC X to use good infection control practices with wound care.
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
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
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 notify the resident and/or resident's representative o...
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 three (Resident #22, #64, and #317) of four residents reviewed for hospitalization resulting in the potential of residents and/or representatives to be uninformed of the bed hold policy.
Findings include:
Resident #22
Resident # 22 (R22) was readmitted to facility 2/10/2023 with diagnoses including chronic diastolic heart failure, dysphagia, obstructive sleep apnea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, venous insufficiency, lymphedema, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 3/23/23 reflected Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 15 (cognitively intact). Section G of MDS revealed that R22 required two-person extensive assist for bed mobility and toilet use, was independent with eating after set-up and that transfer activity did not occur over the entire 7-day look back period. Review of the Discharge MDS dated [DATE] revealed that R22 had an unplanned discharge to an acute care hospital and that his return to the facility was anticipated.
In an observation and interview on 5/08/23 at 9:34 AM, R22 was observed lying in bed, on back, in facility gown with oxygen in place per nasal cannula. R22 stated that he was hospitalized a few months back for either an infection in the lungs or urine and could not recall whether bed hold information was provided or reviewed prior to or during his hospitalization.
R22's Resident At Risk progress note dated 2/8/23 at 10:18 AM stated, .Resident was sent out to the hospital today for acute neurological change, resident hallucinating, shaking, eyes rolling back into head, slurred speech. NP (Nurse Practitioner) at bedside and gave orders to send to ER (emergency room) .
R22's Physician Order dated 2/8/23 at 9:30 AM stated, Send to ED (emergency department) for evaluation and treatment for AMS (altered mental status) and neurological changes.
Resident #64
Resident # 64 (R64) was readmitted to facility 4/20/2023 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pulmonary nodule, wedge compression fracture of first lumbar vertebra, borderline personality disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorder, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, and alcohol dependence in remission. Review of the MDS with an ARD of 3/31/23 reflected BIMS score of 14 (cognitively intact). Section G of MDS revealed that R64 was independent with bed mobility, transfers, toilet use, and eating. Review of the Discharge MDS dated [DATE] revealed that R64 had an unplanned discharge to an acute care hospital and that her return to the facility was anticipated.
In an observation and interview on 05/09/23 at 8:03 AM, R64 was observed sitting at the edge of the bed, awaiting breakfast, with oxygen in place per nasal cannula. R64 stated that she had been in and out of the emergency room several times since admission, admitted to the hospital at least twice, and was provided the facilities bed hold policy in an envelope prior to being sent to the emergency. Per R64, the bed hold policy was not reviewed nor did she sign a related document prior to the transfer to the hospital nor was she contacted during the hospitalization regarding a bed hold.
R64's Behavior Note dated 4/17/23 at 12:23 PM stated, .guest complained of R (right) sided back and RLE (right lower extremity) pain, and diarrhea, she was persistent she needed to be sent out as her pain treatments were not helping. Writer notified NP and UM (unit manager) of transfer and guest is being sent to (name of local hospital).
Resident #317
Resident # 317 (R317) was readmitted to facility 5/2/2023 with diagnoses including pneumonia, venous thrombosis and embolism, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection, muscle weakness, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, acquired absence of right leg above knee, peripheral vascular disease, and congestive heart failure. Review of MDS with an ARD of 4/18/23 reflected BIMS score of 15 (cognitively intact). Section G of MDS revealed that R317 required one-person limited assist for bed mobility, two-person extensive assist for transfer and toilet use and was independent with eating after set-up. Review of the Discharge MDS dated [DATE] revealed that R317 had an unplanned discharge to an acute care hospital and that his return to the facility was anticipated.
In an observation and interview on 5/08/23 at 11:13 AM, R317 was observed sitting in a bedside recliner chair with oxygen in place by nasal cannula. R317 stated that he was hospitalized approximately one week prior for a lung infection, was informed of and in agreement with the recommendation for hospitalization and was provided a lot of paperwork at time of hospital transfer and that the facilities bed hold policy may have been included. Per R317, the bed hold policy was not reviewed nor did he sign a related document prior to the transfer to the hospital nor was he contacted during the hospitalization regarding a bed hold.
R317's Nurses Notes dated 4/23/23 at 5:58 AM stated, .Guest was send out to (name of local hospital) r/t (related to) hypoxia .
R317's Physician Order dated 4/23/23 at 1:22 AM stated, send out to (name of local hospital) r/t SOB (shortness of breath), hypoxia.
In an interview on 5/9/23 at 4:31 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated that in preparation for a resident transfer to the hospital, an order was received from the primary care physician or on call physician unless there was an emergent situation. Per DON B a resident face sheet, medication list/medication administration record, recent lab work, recent progress notes as well as a change in condition and transfer form were included in the transfer packet. DON B stated that the transfer packet also included a copy of the facilities bed hold policy which was provided to each resident at the time of transfer and that the admissions team followed up with the resident or representative within 24 hours of transfer to review the bed hold policy and determine whether they wanted to hold the bed.
In an interview on 5/10/23 at 10:27 AM, admission Director Q stated that she had been employed at the facility for 8 years and on the admissions team for 5 years. Per Admissions Director Q, when a resident was transferred to the hospital, the resident or responsible party, if warranted, would be contacted to review the facilities bed hold policy and offer a bed hold within 24 hours of the transfer.
admission Director Q referenced each individual resident's medical record and stated that R22 was hospitalized from [DATE] to 2/10/23, R64 from 4/17/23 to 4/20/23, and R317 from 4/23/23 to 5/2/23 and confirmed that neither R22, R64, or R317 nor their responsible party were contacted to offer a bed hold. Per admission Director Q, R22, R64, and R317 were long term care residents with straight Medicaid and that a bed hold would only be offered to these residents when the facility occupancy was above a certain percentage.
In an interview on 5/10/23 at 10:49 AM, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A stated that all residents/responsible parties were notified of the facilities bed hold policy within the admission contract, were provided the bed hold policy in a packet sent with them at the time of a hospital transfer, and that the admission director contacted the resident or responsible party within 24 hours of transfer to the hospital to review the bed hold policy for acceptance or declination and that, when complete, would be documented within the administrative notes section within the individual residents electronic medical record. NHA A further stated that the facility was responsible for reviewing the bed hold policy with all residents that were sent to the hospital including a Medicaid resident or their representative and confirmed that payer source was not taken into consideration as a bed hold should be offered to all residents.
On 5/10/23 at 11:01 AM, NHA A reviewed the facilities bed hold policy with admission Director Q at which time admission Director Q confirmed that she did not contact, review, or obtain a bed hold for any long-term care resident that was straight Medicaid. Upon NHA confirming that all resident's or their responsible parties needed to be contacted within 24 hours of hospital transfer, regardless of payor source, admission Director Q stated, I didn't know that. This was a misunderstanding on my part. I'm going to start calling everyone.
Review of the facility policy titled Bed Hold Policy with a 2/14/22 effective and revised date stated, .Procedure: 1. During admission into the facility the admission Director or designee will explain and provide a copy of the Notice of Bed Hold. 2. Within 24 hours of a hospital transfer the admission Director or designee will contact the Resident and/or Responsible Party regarding the possible length of transfer and offer a bed hold. 3. Document bed hold offer and Resident or Responsible Party decision in the AR section of the medical record .
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
**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 1 (R...
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 1 (Resident #88) of 22 reviewed for comprehensive care planning, resulting in R88 fall from elevated bed and fractures that required hospitalization and surgical intervention.
Findings include:
Resident #88(R88)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R88 was a [AGE] year old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and recent re-admission 3/26/23 post fall with fracture and surgical repair 3/26/23, with diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure), anemia, kidney disease, bipolar disease, anxiety, major depression, displaced fracture of lateral condyle of left femur(3/21/23), displaced fracture of medial condyle of left femur(321/23), and periprosthetic fracture around internal prosthetic left knee joint(3/21/23). The MDS reflected R88 had BIM (assessment tool) score of 15 which indicated her ability to make daily decisions was cognitively intact, and she required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting and one person physical assist with hygiene, locomotion, and bathing.
During an observation and interview on 5/08/23 at 9:40 AM, R88 was laying in elevated bed(above hip level). R88 reported had recent fall with injury to left hip knee and ankle and reported unsure where fall occurred. R88 appeared well groomed and appeared pleasantly confused.
Review of R88 Electronic Medical Record(EMR) Nursing Progress Note, dated 3/21/23 at 6:25am, reflected, Resident yelling Help, Help. Went into resident s room, resident sitting up on floor on right side of bed. Left leg bent under left hip resident unable to extend left leg having pain in left leg. Resident able to move other extremities. Did not move resident called 911 right away and [named provider]. Called the notified [named] friend.
Review of the EMR, dated 3/26/23, reflected R88 return to the facility on 3/26/23 after hospital admission for closed fracture left distal femur and 3/22/23 left retrograde femoral nail to periprosthetic femur fracture.
Requested R88 Incident Accident Report for 3/21/23 fall with complete investigation on 5/10/23 at 4:29 pm via email sent to Director of Nursing (DON) B.
Review of provided Incident/Accident(I/A) reported, provided by DON B on 5/10/23 at 4:46pm reflected I/A report, post fall evaluation and Progress Note with no evidence of staff interviews or witness statements or staff schedules.
During an interview on 5/10/23 at 5:50pm DON B reported R88 fall was not witnesses so no witness statements other than nurse who competed I/A report.
Review of the Fall Incident/Accident form, dated 3/21/23 at 5:35 a.m., reflected R88 had an unwitnessed fall from bed with incident description, Resident yelling Help, Help. Went into residents room, resident sitting up on floor on right side of bed. Left leg bent under left hip resident unable to extend left leg having pain in left leg. Resident able to move other extremities. The report reflected resident description, Resident states I rolled out of bed, I can't move my left leg. The report reflected, R88 was alert and oriented and reported pain 10 out of 10 on pain scale. The report included, Predisposing Environmental Factors, with marked area, Bed height not appropriate. Notes included, ER reports noted with left femur fracture, did go in for surgical repair, plan to return to facility when stable.
Review of the Care Plans, dated 11/2/23 through 3/21/23(date of fall), reflected, [named R88] has an ADL self-care performance deficit and requires assistance with ADL's and mobility r/t: UTI .Bed mobility: resident requires extensive assist of 2 staff to reposition and turn in bed .Resident to have enabler bars to improved resident ability to perform bed mobility. Date initiated: 11/3/22 Date revised 11/11/22 .TRANSFER: Resident requires total assist of hoyer mechanical lift to transfer. Date initiated: 11/3/2022 .[named R88] is at risk for fall related injury and falls R/T: Date initiated 11/2/22 . Keep the resident's environment as safe as possible with: even floors free from
spills and/or clutter; adequate lighting; call light within reach, commonly used items
within reach, avoid repositioning furniture and keep the bed in the appropriate
position. Date Initiated: 11/02/2022 .
During an observation on 5/11/23 at 2:08 PM, observed R88 laying in elevated bed above hip level with scoop mattress in place and eyes closed.
During an interview on 5/11/23 at 9:58 AM, Director of Nursing(DON) B reported R88's fall with fracture on 3/21/23 was not reported to the state of Michigan because R88 was alert and oriented at time and could say how it happened.
During an interview and observation on 5/11/23 at 3:30 pm, Certified Nurse Aid (CNA) DD reported familiar with R88 and often works on that unit. CNA DD reported R88 often confused including prior to 3/21/23 fall from bed including R88 history of seeing kittens under bed. CNA DD reported present on day shift on 3/21/23 after R88 fall but arrived for shift prior Emergency Medical Service transport. CNA DD reported assisted R88 off the floor with several other staff to gurney. CNA DD reported R88's bed should have been in low position. CNA DD reported after fall education to keep R88 bed in low position, and reported that meant between knees and hip level (top of mattress) and perimeter mattress to prevent falls. CNA DD entered R88 room and verified R88 bed was elevated at a height greater than hip level and verified was positioned too high and reported should be lower. CNA DD reported R88 had history of elevating bed really high and adjusted head of bed on own as well as height. CNA DD reported fall precautions on [NAME] and reported low bed position should be below knees and reported Registered Nurse (RN) Y was also present at the time of R88 fall for day shift. CNA DD reported R88 required check and change every 2 hours and Hoyer for transfers prior to 3/21/23 fall with one to two person assist for position changes.
During an interview on 5/11/23 at 3:40 PM, RN Y reported working at the facility for about six years and was familiar with R88. RN Y reported worked day shift on 3/21/23 and had arrived after R88 fall but was present to assist EMS staff transfer R88 off floor onto gurney. RN Y reported staff know resident care needs by reviewing [NAME] to see interventions for safety. RN Y entered R88 room and verified bed in low position which meant knees to hips and reported had last observed R88 about 1pm for medication pass.
During an interview on 5/11/23 at 4:40 PM, DON B reported R88 fall on 3/21/23 was not reported to the state of Michigan because R88 was able to report what happened and reported complete investigation was not completed for that reason. DON B verified R88 Care Plan was not being followed because R88 bed was found to be elevated greater than hip level at the time of the fall. DON B reported was present at the time of the fall and responded to R88 room and observed bed elevated above hip level position. DON B reported did not ask R88 if she had elevated bed to elevated height and reported was unsure who had left bed positioned at inappropriate level(as indicated on I/A report).
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
During observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents receive showers according to their plan of care for one resident (#51) of three residents reviewed for hygiene ...
Read full inspector narrative →
During observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents receive showers according to their plan of care for one resident (#51) of three residents reviewed for hygiene and grooming, resulting in missed showers and the potential for inadequate hygiene and feelings of embarrassment.
Findings Included:
Resident #51 (R51)
Review of the medical record revealed R51 was admitted to the facility 01/27/2021 with diagnoses that included fracture of left femur, type 2 diabetes, polyneuropathy (simultaneous malfunction of many peripheral nerves throughout the body), pain in left and right hand, insomnia, anxiety, abnormal posture, lack of coordination, Charcot's joint (bone and joint change that occur secondary to loss of sensation) of left foot and ankle, Charcot's joint of right foot and ankle, hypertension, depression, morbid obesity, and pain in left hip. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD of 02/04/2023 demonstrated R51 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 14 (cognitively intact) out of 15. Section G0120A: bathing of the MDS, with the same ARD, demonstrated that 51 required physical help in part of bathing activity.
During observation and interview on 05/08/2023 at 08:58 a.m. R51 was observed lying in bed. R51's was observed in a facility gown and hair appeared to be unkept. R51 explained that she was supposed to have a shower twice per week but many times she only was offered a shower once per week. R51 explained that she had a shower in her bathroom, which was in the room. She further explained that she required assistance to get into the shower and needed some assistance with a shower. A shower was observed in R51's bathroom.
During review of R51's medical record, her care plan intervention demonstrated that she required one-person extensive assistance and used a shower chair and grab bars for assistance. That intervention had a revision date of 06/25/2021. Review of R51's Point of Care Shower Schedule (POC-computerized medical record that allows care givers to document resident care that had been provided) demonstrated that R51 was to have a shower every week on Tuesday during the 12-hour day shift and every week on Friday during the 12-hour night shift. R51's POC documentation for showers demonstrated that she had not received a shower on the following Tuesdays: 04/04/2023 (documentation blank), 04/11/2023 (documentation blank), 04/18/2023 (documentation blank), 04/25/2023 (documentation blank), and 05/09/2023 (documentation blank). R51's POC documentation for showers demonstrated that she had not received a shower on the following Fridays: 04/07/2023 (documentation blank), 04/14/2023 (documentation blank), 04/21/2023 (documentation blank), and 04/28/2023 (documentation blank).
In an interview on 05/10/2023 at 02:58 p.m. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) R explained that showers are given according to the Point of Care Shower Schedule (POC-computerized medical record that allows care givers to document resident care that had been provided). The POC will notify the CNA's which residents require a shower on that day and which shift it is to be provided. CNA R explained that there is also a shoer schedule that was in a binder at the nursing station. She explained that the POC documentation for showers would be documented as R for refused and Y for given. She further explained that the documentation should not be left blank. CNA R explained that if the shower is refused by a resident that CNAs are required to tell the nurse.
In an interview on 05/11/2023 at 10:41 a.m. Registered Nurse (RN) S demonstrated a shower schedule that demonstrated R51 was to have a shower on Tuesday during the day shift and Friday during the afternoon shift. RN S explained that all resident were to have a schedule two times per week.
In an interview on 05/11/2023 at 11:24 a.m. Registered Nurse (RN) Manager T explained that if showers are not completed that an alert would show on the facility dashboard. He further explained that the dashboard would demonstrate areas that were not completed or areas of concerns. RN Manager T confirmed that R51 had not received showers for the dates listed in her Point of Care Shower Schedule documentation. RN Manager T could not explain why R51's showers had not been completed for those days and shifts as listed in her Point of Care Shower Schedule.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
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 provide indwelling urinary catheter care for one reside...
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 provide indwelling urinary catheter care for one resident (#96) of four residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter care resulting in urinary tract infection for resident #96 and the potential to cause infection in 15 other residents with an indwelling or external urinary catheter.
Finding Included:
Resident #96 (R96)
Review of the medical record revealed R96 was admitted to the facility 01/16/2023 with diagnoses that included encephalopathy (brain disease that alters brain function), atrial fibrillation, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), unstageable pressure ulcer of sacrum, adult failure to thrive, hypertension, hypothyroidism (low thyroid hormone), insomnia, vascular dementia, mood disturbance, and anxiety. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD of 04/23/2023 demonstrated R96 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 99 (cognitively unable to complete the review) out of 15. Section H0100A: Appliances of the MDS, with the same ARD, demonstrated that R96 had an indwelling urinary catheter.
During observation and interview on 05/09/2023 AT 02:59 p.m. R96 was observed lying in bed. A urinary catheter drainage bag was observed hanging on the side of her bed. The urine in the catheter collection tubing and the collection bag was observed to be light yellow with white sediment present. R96's daughter G was at her bedside. R96 did not answer questions but acknowledged that her daughter G could answer questions. R96's daughter G explained that R96 had a urinary catheter because she had pressure ulcer on her sacrum. R96's daughter G explained that R96 had a urinary tract infection in April of 2023 but that is was resolved at this time, after receiving antibiotics.
During review of R96's medical record it was revealed that R96 had a urinary analysis with a [NAME] and sensitivity test, collected on 04/04/2023 and reported 04/13/2023, that demonstrated R96's urine contained Klebsiella Pneumoniae greater that 100,000 colony -forming unit (CFU)/ milliliter (ml). R96's medical record revealed that on 04/12/2023 she was started on Ceftriaxone Sodium (antibiotic for urinary tract infection) intravenous reconstituted one gram (GM) intravenously every 12 hours for five days.
During review of 96's Point of Care (POC-computerized medical record that allows care givers to document resident care that had been provided) for indwelling catheter care demonstrated that R51 was to have a shower every week on Tuesday during the 12-hour day shift and every week on Friday during the 12-hour night shift. R51's POC documentation for indwelling catheter care demonstrated was not completed, on three shifts, for 04/072023, 04/08/2023, 04/09/2023, and 04/10/2023.
In an interview on 05/10/2023 at 03:53 p.m. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) R explained that indwelling urinary catheter care is performed during each shift and is performed by the Certified Nursing Assistants that are assigned to the resident. CNA R' explained that once the urinary catheter care is completed it is charted in the residents Point of Care (POC).
In an interview on 05/10/2023 at 02:42 p.m. Director of Nursing (DON) B explained that indwelling catheter care is to be completed every shift. She explained that the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) was responsible for the indwelling catheter care and would document completion of the task in the residents Point of Care (POC). DON B reviewed R96 POC indwelling catheter care for April 2023. DON B could not explain why indwelling urinary catheter care was not completed, for R96, as identified on R96's POC. DON B explained that R96 had a urinary tract infection (UTI), that was identified 04/13/2023. She explained that R96 was started on an antibiotic at that time and the UTI was resolved at the time of interview. DON B explained that R96's UTI was an facility acquired urinary tract infection.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0710
(Tag F0710)
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 notify 1 Resident's (R 94) facility wound physician o...
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 1 Resident's (R 94) facility wound physician of change in condition(wound status) of 2 Residents reviewed for pressure ulcers, resulting in R 94 having delayed treatment and physician consultation related to his skin break down and infection.
Findings include:
Resident #94(R94)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R94 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with hospital re-admission related to wound infection 2/2/23 to 2/13/23, hospital re-admission 3/21/23 with diagnosis that included wound infection and re-admission 4/18/23, with diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetic (high blood sugar), anemia, malnutrition, obstructive uropathy, stage 4 pressure ulcers, and anxiety. The MDS reflected R94 had a BIM (assessment tool) score of 11 that indicated his ability to make daily decisions was minimally impaired, and he required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, hygiene and bathing and one-person physical assist with locomotion on unit.
During an observation on 5/08/23 at 10:45 AM, R94 was laying on back in air mattress with eyes closed. R94 appears very thin and pale.
Review of the discharge MDS, dated [DATE], reflected R94 had two stage 2 pressure ulcers(partial thickness loss of dermis) on admission [DATE].
Review of the admission MDS, dated [DATE], reflected R94 had two unstageable pressure ulcers, slough and or eschar(non-viable tissue), and two suspected deep tissue injuries on re-admission 1/2/23.
Review of the 5-day re-admission MDS from acute care setting, dated 2/19/23, reflected R94 had two stage 4 pressure ulcers(full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon or muscle) present on admission 2/13/23. Continued review of MDS reflected R94 two suspected deep tissue injuries not present on admission 2/13/23.
Review of the Nursing Progress Note, dated 1/19/23 at 12:06 p.m., reflected, Wound rounds completed with [named facility wound physician]. Left thigh sharps debrided. Treatment order updated with changes as recommended. Plan to reassess next week.(Facility wound Physician consult note scanned into EMR 3/7/23).
Review of the Nursing Progress Notes, dated 1/30/23 at 1:31 p.m., reflected, wound dressing saturated, large amount of drainage, eschar tissue sloughing off, strong odor. No mention facility wound Physician notified of change in R94's wound.
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Notes, dated 2/2/23, reflected CHIEF COMPLAINT: Change in wounds .Patient was noted with foul smelling wounds with increased purulent drainage and wound physician was inhouse and did debride thigh wound. Based on clinical presentation of wounds and collaboration with wound physician, decision was made to send patient to the hospital for evaluation and treatment of thigh and buttock wounds and need for extensive I&D .Pain Level: 6 .Pressure ulcer of sacral region, unspecified stage: Noted with increased purulent drainage from both sacral and thigh wounds, foul odor and deterioration, sent to ED for evaluation and debridement .
Review of the EMR, dated 1/19/23 through 3/2/23, reflected no evidence R94's wounds were evaluated by facility wound physician during weekly rounds on 2/26/23 or wound physician was notified of worsening pressure wounds and development of two preventable facility acquired deep tissue injuries. The EMR reflected no visit notes for facility wound physician dated 2/26/23 by time of survey exit on 5/15/23.
Review of R94's Nursing Progress Note, dated 2/13/23 at 11:11 p.m., reflected, Resident admitted from [named] hospital with a sacral and two L hip wounds. A&Ox3, Full code, takes meds whole, house diet, Foley in place(placed on 2/2/23), non-ambulatory,incontinent of bowel . c/o pain of both heels, L hip, and coccyx, PRN medication given, repositioned for some relief of coccyx pain .
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Notes, dated 2/14/23, reflected, CHIEF COMPLAINT: readmission from hospital . Patient readmitted after hospital stay for necrotizing fasciitis and abscess in left thigh and underwent multiple surgical debridements. Patient had coccyx wound debrideded as well and only has wound vac on thigh wound. Will continue with wound team to monitor and finished antibiotics with one dose after admission. Patient states that oxycodone is effective in treating his pain and will continue at this time .Pain Level: 6 .NECROTIZING FASCIITIS: Continues on antibiotics for one day to complete course, will continue with wound team follow and pain medication .
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 3/17/23, reflected, .patient was started on antibiotics for wound infection. Wound on coccyx with purulent drainage and change in odor . No mention facility wound physician was notified of worsening wound changes.
Review of the Infection Progress Note, dated 3/17/23 at 2:34 p.m., reflected, Guest continues on Amoxicillin-Pot Clavulanate Tablet 875-125 MG 1tablet PO Q12 hours for Wound infection for 10 Days. Guest continues to have low BP and little output. Peripheral line placed in L hand and IV fluids started.
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 3/21/23, reflected, CHIEF COMPLAINT Change in condition . Patient was noted to have increased fatigue and decreased appetite/fluid intake. Patient agreed to another bag of IV fluids and D5 ordered. Will obtain labs and continues on antibiotics for wound infection. Patient appears weaker and initially declined going to the hospital and declined to discuss code status with SW/nursing. Contacted by DON later in the day and decision was made to send to Ed for further evaluation and likely will need IV antibiotics .
Review of R94's Progress Note, dated 4/18/23 at 4:33 p.m., reflected, Resident arrived from [named] hospital on hospice, [named} hospice nurse in and assessed resident. Notified hospice nurse of red drainage noted in foley. Notified unit manager of dressings to BLE and wound nurse to assess tomorrow .
Review of R94's Progress Note, dated 4/27/23 at 11:03 a.m., reflected, Resident readmitted from hospital on hospice services with multiple skin integrity concerns. Resident with bilateral heel unstageable pressure ulcers, coccyx is stage 4 with wound vac in place. Left thigh with stage 4 ulcer wound vac present on admission, vac discontinued during wound rounds on 04/20/23. Resident with venous ulcer to right calf with tx in place. Continue with wound physician evaluation for comfort and wound management .
Review of R94's Skin/Wound Progress Note, 4/27/23 3:38 p.m., reflected, Wound rounds completed with Dr [named facility wound physician] Wound vac to sacrum dc'd. New orders in place. Plan to reassess next week. (Same day Progress Note reflected wound vac had been discontinued on 4/20/23.)
Review of the Treatment Administration Record, dated 4/1/23 through 4/30/23, reflected R94's wound vac was discontinued 4/27/23.
Review of R94's Skin/Wound Progress Note, dated 5/4/23 at 11:03 a.m., reflected, Late Entry:Note Text: Wound rounds completed with [named facility wound physician]. Left thigh and bilat heels are improving. Right trochanter deteriorating, sacrum stable .No change to treatment orders. Plan to reassess next week.
On 12/26/2022, the resident weighed 156 lbs. On 04/30/2023, the resident weighed 138 pounds which is a -11.54 % Loss.
Review of Hospice Start of Care Documentation, dated 4/18/23, reflected R94's weight was 135 pounds. Continued review of the documents reflected, .Reason for hospice referral/admission: Patient sent to emergency room with recurring infection leading to sepsis. Patient has multiple [NAME] [wounds] on bilateral lower extremities sacral region and his left hip. Increasing confusion and worsening vital signs. Patient has recurring aspiration leading to change in diet. Is bed bound continuous losing weight .
During an interview on 5/10/23 at 10:00 AM, WN X reported bilateral heels and right trochanter were facility acquired pressure ulcers and reported R94 was admitted with sacral and left hip and right calf wounds. WN X reported after admission R94's left hip wound rapid declined and was admitted to the hospital and diagnosed with necrotizing fasciitis after 2/13/23 hospital admission. WN X reported wound measurements taken on every Thursday at wound rounds with facility wound physician and use of camera that determines measurements.
During an interview on 5/11/23 at 10:22 AM, WN X and Unit Manager (UM) T entered R94s room after WN X gathered supplies reported today was wound rounds and facility wound physician M was no able to be present this week.
During an observation and interview on 5/11/23 at 11:36 am, WN X reported process for wound documentation that included after rounds sit and document same day off phone pictures and paper notes. WN X verified no written notes taken during R94 wound care. WN X reported usually only herself and facility wound physician for rounds unless CNA staff needed for positioning. WN X reported prints off wound notes and provides facility wound physician copy at the following week (Thursday) wound rounds. WN X reported the wound physician then dictates those prior week notes, sends out of the country for dictation and she can obtain notes between 2-3 weeks post actual wound care monitoring. WN X reported measure weekly with picture including height, width and depth. WN X reported depth was observed by eye because she was able to see changes and verified did not obtain manual depth of wounds including R94 sacral wound and reported could start to add to notes. WN X reported did not see that R94 had a dressing on the left posterior calf area and had no knowledge of open area to the left lower leg and WN X asked this surveyor if there was a dressing in place. WN X entered R94's again, observed undated border dressing on R94s posterior left calf. WN X removed border dressing with alginate over appear that appeared very dry but intact at that time. WN X reported unsure why treatment in place with no order and reported may have been in place for protection.
Review of the weekly wound notes, dated 12/26/23 through current (5/11/23), reflected R94 had no evidence of depth measurements including wounds with without eschar or significant slough. Continued review of weekly wound round physician notes reflected the same for the visit notes prior to 3/16/23. Review of the EMR reflected no evidence of facility wound physician notes after 3/16/23.
Review of R94's skin Care Plan, dated 1/11/23, reflected, [named R94] has actual skin impairment and is at risk for further impaired skin integrity/pressure injury: pressure injuries to - sacrum, left thigh, bilateral heels r/t Hx Necrotizing fasciitis to thigh ulcer, hx of debridement to sacral and thigh ulcers injuries .Goals .Will remain free from complications from pressure, dated 1/11/23 .Interventions . Conduct weekly head to toe skin assessments, document and report abnormal findings to the physician. Date Initiated: 12/22/2022 .
During an interview on 5/11/23 at 1150 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B reported would expect physician documentation to be in resident charts(EMR) within seven days. DON B reported would expect wounds to be measured weekly including length, width and depth measurements and reported depth must be taken manually because the camera does not obtain depth. DON B reported nursing staff are not expected to eye ball wound depth. DON B reported not aware physician was provided copy of nurse wound notes seven days after actual observation to dictate then sent out and reported was aware of long delay but not aware physician going by nurse notes. DON B reported infection control duties performed by herself and ADON/WN X. DON B reported WN X completed facility floor surveillance and DON B oversee WN X and is often present to assist with weekly rounds and would expect WC X to use good infection control practices with wound care.
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
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician ordered parameters upon the administration of blood pressure medications for one (R38) of six residents revi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician ordered parameters upon the administration of blood pressure medications for one (R38) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the potential for unnecessary medications and adverse reactions.
Findings include:
Review of the medical record revealed that Resident #38 (R38) was readmitted to facility 3/16/23 with diagnoses including multiple myeloma not having achieved remission, chronic diastolic heart failure, and essential hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/27/23 revealed Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 14 (cognitively intact). Section G of MDS revealed that R38 required two-person extensive assist with bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use, and supervision with eating after setup.
In an observation on 05/08/23 at 4:02 PM, R38 was observed to be sleeping in bed, on back, with head of bed elevated at an approximate 45-degree angle. R38's bilateral lower extremities and feet were noted to be edematous with gauze wraps extending from mid foot to just below knee on the left and from just above ankle to just below knee on the right.
Review of R38's medical record reflected orders for multiple cardiac medications including amlodipine 10mg (milligrams) daily for hypertension (elevated blood pressure), Lasix 20mg twice daily (diuretic used to treat fluid build-up), and metoprolol tartrate 25mg twice daily with instruction to give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for hypertension with parameters to hold if systolic blood pressure (the top number in a blood pressure reading) was less than 120 or heart rate was less than 60.
Review of R36's Blood Pressure (BP) and Pulse (P) documented within the vital sign section of the medical record reflected:
3/31/23 6:15 AM BP 136/55, P 66
3/31/23 6:50 PM BP 109/61, P 59
4/1/23 7:11 AM BP 122/57, P 60
4/2/23 1:24 AM BP 100/62, P 74
4/2/23 7:20 AM BP BP 121/66, P 62
4/3/23 12:29 AM BP 110/74, P 71
4/3/23 11:11 AM BP 106/68, P 62
4/3/23 11:44 PM BP 117/63, P 64
4/4/23 6:39 AM BP 121/63, P 65
4/5/23 12:19 AM BP 111/72, P 65
4/5/23 8:07 AM BP 133/65, P 97
4/6/23 1:07 AM BP 142/78, P 65
4/7/23 8:33 AM BP 119/61, P 70
4/7/23 8:51 PM BP 130/71, P 77
4/9/23 7:42 AM BP 134/70, P 82
4/9/23 7:47 PM BP 130/72, P 71
4/10/23 10:19 AM BP 116/57, P 73
4/11/23 7:10 AM BP 111/57, P 72
4/12/23 10:10 AM BP 137/82, P 130
4/12/23 2:12 PM BP 137/82, P 67
4/12/23 7:33 PM P 67
4/13/23 8:51 AM BP 114/64, P 78
4/14/23 7:44 AM BP 110/58, P 84
4/14/23 6:23 PM BP 123/49, P 102
4/15/23 8:22 AM BP 125/65, P 96
4/15/23 10:40 AM P 70
4/16/23 7:43 AM BP 149/64, P 92
4/16/23 6:40 PM BP 114/51, P 78
4/17/23 8:00 AM BP 110/51, P 83
4/17/23 8:22 PM BP 139/62, P 70
4/18/23 10:19 AM BP 103/64, P 73
4/18/23 10:40 AM BP 110/60, P 70
4/19/23 7:14 AM BP 100/54, P 87
4/19/23 7:41 PM BP 131/71, P 92
4/20/23 9:31 AM BP 117/73, P 85
4/20/23 3:40 PM BP 107/55, P 97
4/20/23 8:06 PM BP 117/58, P 90
4/21/23 7:40 AM BP 108/56, P 82
4/21/23 6:45 PM BP 105/61, P 94
4/22/23 6:02 PM BP 101/59, P 82
4/22/23 8:07 PM BP 99/62, P 65
4/23/23 7:17 AM BP 103/68, P 70
4/23/23 7:38 PM BP 105/54, P 89
4/24/23 7:18 AM BP 114/52, P 83
4/25/23 9:35 AM BP 91/52, P 60
4/26/23 7:17 AM BP 107/54, P 75
4/26/23 8:21 PM BP 110/63, P 86
4/27/23 10:41 AM BP 124/63, P 89
4/27/23 8:39 PM BP 111/58, P 82
4/28/23 7:29 AM BP 108/52, P 84
4/29/23 1:59 PM BP 98/58, P 73
4/29/23 7:23 PM BP 105/67, P 77
4/30/23 3:23 PM BP 98/55, P 83
4/30/23 7:57 PM BP 106/56, P 91
5/1/23 7:41 AM BP 132/59, P 97
5/2/23 7:05 AM BP 115/54, P 80
5/3/23 8:20 AM BP 105/46, P 70
5/4/23 11:10 AM BP 110/53, P 79
5/5/23 7:40 AM BP 119/67, P 94
5/5/23 5:30 PM BP 110/60
5/6/23 7:30 AM BP 126/69, P 92
5/6/23 6:11 PM BP 110/54, P 71
5/7/23 12:15 PM BP 93/50, P 62
5/7/23 8:28 PM BP 103/50, P 76
5/8/23 10:12 AM BP 99/62, P 79
5/8/23 6:59 PM BP 91/53, P 65
5/9/23 6:45 AM BP 102/53, P 73
5/9/23 8:40 PM BP 101/49, P 85
5/10/23 7:17 AM BP 111/61, P 85
5/10/23 11:14 AM BP 109/55, P 85
5/10/23 7:16 PM BP 99/57, P 92
5/11/23 6:46 AM BP 96/57, P 87
5/11/23 7:39 PM BP 106/2, P 81
5/12/23 9:09 PM BP 105/66, P 89
5/13/23 7:27 AM BP 103/57, P 92
5/14/23 7:12 AM BP 110/71, P 100
Review of R38's Medication Administration Record (MAR) from March 27, 2023, through May 15, 2023, reflected R38's corresponding metoprolol order with 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM administration times but included no area to document the associated blood pressure or pulse.
Metoprolol Tartrate 25mg was documented as administered on 3/31/23 5:00 PM dose although 3/31/23 6:50 PM BP documented to be 109/61 and P 59; 4/2/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the only documented BP, P that date was at 1:24 AM and 7:20 AM; 4/3/23 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM doses were documented as administered although the only documented BP, P that date was for 12:29 AM with BP 110/74, P 71 and 11:11 AM with BP 106/68, P 62 and 11:44 PM with BP 117/63, P 64; 4/4/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the only documented BP, P that date was at 6:39 AM; 4/6/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the only documented BP, P that date was at 1:07 AM; 4/8/23 9:00 AM and 7:00 PM doses were documented as administered although no BP or P noted to be recorded in medical record for that date; 4/13/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the only recorded BP, P in medical record on that date was 8:51 AM, 4/16/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the recorded BP, P from 4/16/23 at 6:40 PM was BP 114/51, P 78; 4/19/23 9:00 AM dose was documented as administered although the recorded 4/19/23 7:14 AM BP 100/54, P 87; 4/22/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the only recorded BP, P that date was from 6:02 PM BP 101/59, P 82 and 8:07 PM BP 99/62, P 65; 4/24/23 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM doses were both documented as administered although the only recorded BP, P from that date was 4/24/23 7:18 AM BP 114/52, P 83; 4/26/23 9:00 AM dose was documented as administered although the recorded BP, P from 4/26/23 7:17 AM BP 107/54, P 75; 4/28/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the only recorded BP, P from that date was 4/28/23 at 7:29 AM with BP 108/52, P 84; 4/30/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although the recorded BP, P from that date reflected 3:23 PM BP 98/55, P 83 and 7:57 PM BP 106/56, P 91; 5/2/23 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM doses were documented as administered although the only recorded BP, P for that date was at 5/2/23 7:05 AM BP 115/54, P 80; 5/3/23 9:00 AM dose was documented as administered although 5/3/23 8:20 AM BP 105/46, P 70; 5/4/23 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM doses were documented as administered although the only recorded BP, P from that date was 5/4/23 11:10 AM BP 110/53, P 79; 5/6/23 5:00 PM dose was documented as administered although 5/6/23 6:11 PM BP 110/54, P 71; 5/7/23 9:00 AM dose was documented as administered although the 5/7/23 12:15 PM BP 93/50, P 62; 5/13/23 9:00 AM dose was documented as administered although the recorded 5/13/23 7:27 AM BP 103/57, P 92; 5/13/23 5:00 PM administration box was noted to be blank reflecting that the medication was not administered; 5/14/23 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM doses were documented as administered although the only recorded 5/13/23 7:27 AM BP 103/57, P 92.
In an interview on 05/15/23 at 10:28 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated that when a cardiac medication order contained parameters the associated vital signs should be documented directly on the MAR to correspond to the related order. Upon review of R38's metoprolol order, DON B confirmed that the order contained parameters for both the blood pressure and pulse and that these should be obtained twice daily and recorded on the MAR but stated when R38 was readmitted from the hospital at the end of March, the order was not written so the a BP or P could be recorded on the MAR at the time of the metoprolol administration. Upon further review, DON B acknowledged that R38's metoprolol was administered multiple times when the blood pressure was less than the indicated parameter to hold and stated that she would be updating the metoprolol order so that the nurse would be prompted to record the blood pressure and pulse at the time of metoprolol administration.
In a telephone interview on 5/15/23 at 11:14 AM, RN Y confirmed familiarity with R38 and that he had been her assigned nurse on 5/14/23 for both the scheduled 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM medication pass. When questioned regarding associated parameters for R38's metoprolol, RN Y stated that he was not comfortable answering that question without the medical record in front of him but stated that if it was signed as administered, it was administered.
Review of the facility policy titled Medication Administration with an 10/14/2022 effective date indicated, Guest/resident medications are administered in an accurate, safe, timely, and sanitary manner .Procedure .2. Verify the medication label against the medication administration record for guest/resident name, time, drug, dose, and route .a. The nurse is responsible to read and follow precautionary instructions on the prescription labels .5. If applicable and/or prescribed, take vital signs or tests prior to administration of the dose, e.g. (such as), pulse with digitalis, blood pressure with anti-hypertensive, etc .
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
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent when two medication errors were observed from a total of twenty-seve...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent when two medication errors were observed from a total of twenty-seven opportunities for two (Resident #101 and #365) of three residents reviewed for medication administration, resulting in a medication error rate of 7.41% and the potential for reduced efficacy of medications and increased risk of adverse reactions/side effects.
Findings include:
Resident #101 (R101)
Review of R101's medical record revealed a facility admission date of 3/18/2023 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. Active orders noted to include Lantus SoloStar (Insulin Glargine Injection) Pen-injector 100 unit/ml (units per milliliter) 35 units upon rising.
On 5/10/23 at 8:06 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) Z was observed to prepare multiple oral medications and a Glargine Insulin Pen for administration to R101. RN Z was observed to remove the cap from the Glargine Insulin Pen, cleansed the rubber hub at the top of the pen with an alcohol swab, placed a disposable needle to the top of the pen, primed (removed the air from the pen vial) the pen with 1 unit of insulin with the pen held in a lateral position, and then dialed the pen to the ordered 35 unit dose. RN Z entered R101's room and after obtaining blood sugar value, was observed to cleanse R101's right upper arm with an alcohol swab and then inject the Glargine Insulin. RN Z was then observed to administer R101's oral medications, exited room, returned to medication cart, and documented all oral medications and Glargine Insulin as administered in R101's electronic medical record.
Resident #365 (R365)
Review of R365's medical record revealed a facility admission date of 5/5/2023 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension. Active orders noted to include Insulin Glargine 26 units every morning.
On 5/10/23 at 8:18 AM, RN Z was observed to prepare multiple medications including a Glargine Insulin Pen for administration to R365. RN Z was observed to remove the cap from the insulin pen, cleansed the rubber hub at the top of the pen with an alcohol swab, placed a disposable needle on the pen, primed the pen with 1 unit of insulin with the pen held in a lateral position, and then dialed the pen to the ordered 26 units. RN Z entered R365's room with prepared medications, washed hands, placed gloves, administered eye drops, cleansed R365's right lower abdomen with an alcohol swab and then proceeded to inject the Glargine Insulin. Upon completion of medication administration, RN Z was observed to return to medication cart and document all medications including the Glargine Insulin as administered in R365's electronic medical record.
In an interview completed during the observed medication pass, RN Z stated that she routinely primed insulin pens with 1 unit of insulin but that if any air bubbles were seen, would then prime the insulin pen with 2 units of insulin.
In an interview on 5/10/23 at 9:22 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated that the steps to preparing an insulin pen for administration included cleaning the top of the pen with an alcohol swab, applying a disposable needle, and priming the pen with 2 units of insulin while holding the pen in an upright position.
Review of the facility policy titled Using Insulin Pen Delivery Systems dated 2022 indicated, Attach .Scrub rubber stopper. Attach new safety needle .Prime .Before each injection, hold upright and prime the pen* (* indicated to mean Per manufacturer's instructions) to remove air bubbles and to ensure the needle is open and working
Instructions on Lantus Solostar (insulin glargine) injection at https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/search.cfm?labeltype=all&query=lantus+solostar within section titled Instructions for Use under Step 3: Perform a safety test included, Always perform the safety test before each injection. Performing the safety test ensures that you get an accurate dose by: ensuring that pen and needle work properly, removing air bubbles .A. Select a dose of 2 units by turning the dosage selector .B. Take off the outer needle cap .C. Hold the pen with the needle pointing upwards .D. Tap the insulin reservoir so that any air bubbles rise up toward the needle . E. Press the injection button all the way in. Check if insulin comes out of the needle tip .
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to 1) appropriately clean a glucometer (a blood glucose ...
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 1) appropriately clean a glucometer (a blood glucose monitoring system) after checking a blood sugar for 1 resident (# 101) of 1 reviewed for blood glucose monitoring and 2) maintain appropriate infection control practices during wound care for 1 resident (#94) from a total sample of 22 residents, resulting in the potential for cross-contamination, spread of blood borne pathogens, and increased risk of infection.
Findings include:
During a medication pass observation on 5/10/23 at 8:06 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) Z was observed to enter R101's room with prepared oral medications, an insulin pen, and a disposable plastic cup which contained a glucometer, test strip, lancet, and alcohol swabs. RN Z was observed to cleanse R101's left fifth finger with an alcohol swab, poked same finger with a lancet, placed a drop of blood from the poked finger onto the test strip, and obtained a blood sugar reading. RN Z was then observed to administer R101's ordered insulin and oral medications, exited room, returned to medication cart, cleansed glucometer with a single alcohol swab, and then immediately placed glucometer into the top, right drawer of the medication cart. When questioned, RN Z confirmed that she routinely cleaned the facility glucometers with an alcohol swab prior to checking the next residents blood sugar or returning the glucometer to the medication cart and questioned whether an alternative cleanser should be used.
In an interview on 5/10/23 at 9:22 AM, Director of Nursing (DON) B stated that bleach wipes were available on all medication carts for the cleaning of the glucometers and that the glucometers should be cleaned with the available bleach wipes between each resident use and prior to storage in the medication cart. Per DON B, a glucometer should be cleaned with a bleach wipe and allowed to remain wet for one full minute as this was the kill time for bacteria and then placed in a plastic cup or barrier tray to allow to dry prior to placement back into the medication cart.
Review of the facility policy titled Glucometer and PT/INR Decontamination with a 6/24/2022 effective date stated, POLICY: To implement a safe and effective process for decontaminating glucometers & PT/INRs after use on each guest/resident. Since glucometers & PT/INRs may be contaminated with blood and body fluids as well as other pathogens, such as would be encountered in contact precautions, this facility has chosen a disinfectant wipe that is EPA (environmental protection agency) registered as tuberculocidal; therefore, it is effective against HIV (human immunodeficiency virus), HBV (hepatitis B virus), and a broad spectrum of bacteria. The glucometer & PT/INR shall be decontaminated with the facility approved wipes following use on each guest/resident. Gloves will be worn and the manufacturer's recommendations will be followed .PROCEDURE .Cleaning and disinfecting the glucometer: II. After performing the glucometer or PT/INR testing, the nurse shall perform hand hygiene, apply gloves, and use the disinfectant wipe to clean all external parts of the glucometer or PT/INR machine allowing the meter to remain wet for the contact time required by the disinfectant label. III. The clean glucometer or PT/INR will be placed on another paper towel/or barrier surface .V. The glucometer or PT/INR will be placed in the appropriate storage location until needed .
Review of the Blood Glucose Monitoring System user's guide provided by DON B indicated, .4. To disinfect your meter, clean the meter with one of the validated disinfecting wipes listed .Clorox Healthcare Bleach Germicidal and Disinfectant wipes .Wipe all external areas of the meter or lancing device including both front and back surfaces until visibly clean .Allow the surface of the meter or lancing device to remain wet at room temperature for the contact time listed on the wipe's directions for use .
Review of the product label on the Clorox Healthcare Bleach Germicidal Wipes confirmed to be located in the bottom drawer of the medication carts on the facilities Sycamore and Grand Avenue Units indicated, Special Instruction for use against HIV-1, HBV and HCV (hepatitis C virus): This product kills HIV-1, HBV and HCV on precleaned hard, nonporous surfaces/objects, previously soiled with blood/body fluids in healthcare setting .Special Instruction for Using This Product to Clean and Decontaminate Against HIV-1, HBV and HCV on Surfaces/Objects Soiled with Blood/Body Fluids .Cleaning Procedure: Blood and other body fluids must be thoroughly cleaned from surfaces and other objects before applying this product. Contact Time: Allow surfaces to remain wet for 1 minute, let air dry .
Resident #94(R94)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R94 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with hospital re-admission related to wound infection 2/2/23 to 2/13/23, hospital re-admission 3/21/23 with diagnosis that included wound infection and re-admission 4/18/23, with diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetic (high blood sugar), anemia, malnutrition, obstructive uropathy, stage 4 pressure ulcers, and anxiety. The MDS reflected R94 had a BIM (assessment tool) score of 11 that indicated his ability to make daily decisions was minimally impaired, and he required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, hygiene and bathing and one-person physical assist with locomotion on unit.
During an observation on 5/08/23 at 10:45 AM, R94 was laying on back in air mattress with eyes closed. R94 appears very thin and pale.
Review of the discharge MDS, dated [DATE], reflected R94 had two stage 2 pressure ulcers(partial thickness loss of dermis) on admission [DATE].
Review of the admission MDS, dated [DATE], reflected R94 had two unstageable pressure ulcers, slough and or eschar(non-viable tissue), and two suspected deep tissue injuries on re-admission 1/2/23.
Review of the 5-day re-admission MDS from acute care setting, dated 2/19/23, reflected R94 had two stage 4 pressure ulcers(full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon or muscle) present on admission 2/13/23. Continued review of MDS reflected R94 two suspected deep tissue injuries not present on admission 2/13/23.
Review of R94's Nursing Progress Note, dated 3/14/23 at 7:12 a.m., reflected, Guest sacral wound dressing was off patient when CNA change him. Needed to flush the wound with saline to remove fecal matter. Reapplied dressing and noted change of condition. Notified the physician to assess wound.
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 3/17/23, reflected, .patient was started on antibiotics for wound infection. Wound on coccyx with purulent drainage and change in odor . No mention facility wound physician was notified of worsening wound changes.
Review of the Infection Progress Note, dated 3/17/23 at 2:34 p.m., reflected, Guest continues on Amoxicillin-Pot Clavulanate Tablet 875-125 MG 1tablet PO Q12 hours for Wound infection for 10 Days. Guest continues to have low BP and little output. Peripheral line placed in L hand and IV fluids started.
Review of R94's Nurse Practitioner Progress Note, dated 3/21/23, reflected, CHIEF COMPLAINT Change in condition . Patient was noted to have increased fatigue and decreased appetite/fluid intake. Patient agreed to another bag of IV fluids and D5 ordered. Will obtain labs and continues on antibiotics for wound infection. Patient appears weaker and initially declined going to the hospital and declined to discuss code status with SW/nursing. Contacted by DON later in the day and decision was made to send to Ed for further evaluation and likely will need IV antibiotics .
During an observation and interview on 5/11/23 at 10:22 AM, WN X and Unit Manager (UM) T entered R94s room after WN X gathered supplies reported today was wound rounds and facility wound physician M was no able to be present this week. R94 appeared alert and oriented and answer questions without issues and was positioned in bed on back on air mattress. Dressings were completed by WC X as follows:
-right heel-dressing was removed that was dated 5/10/23, saline was used to loosen betadine soaked gauze, 100% black eschar observed, picture taken, applied betadine gauze, foam heel, secured with kerlex wrap.
-right calf-old dressing removed, 100% eschar about nectarine size with loose slough edges, picture taken, cleaned with normal saline, applied xeroform, ABD and secured with gauze wrap.
-left heel-old dressing removed dated 5/10/23, 100% eschar about nectarine size with loose slough edges, picture taken, betadine soaked gauze/foam/kling.
-Observed undated dressing on posterior left calf that was not removed or spoke about.
R94 rolled to right side with assist of WN X and UM T and WN X reported R94 had recent bowel movement and staff had reported had removed dressing because it was soiled.
-sacral wound was observed opened, directly against soiled brief that was large(about softball size) dark pink tissue with about 10% slough between 9 o'clock and 12 o'clock with exposed bone. WN X reported R94 had another bowel movement and WN X change brief. WN X took a picture of the wound. (no manual measurements observed.) WN X applied silver alginate to R94s sacral wound with no cleaning of wound observed after direct contact with soiled brief with alginate placed about one inch over periwound between 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock and covered with border dressing.
-left thigh dressing, dated 5/9/23 removed, 2 border dressings with xerofoam removed. (2 open areas), picture taken, normal saline single use sprayed on wound and dripped into brief, xerofoam, covered with border dressing.
-right trochanter-dressing removed dated, dated 5/10/23, picture taken, Normal Saline single use(dripped down to observed open area on right buttock and clean brief, gloved finger applied medihoney to cut alginate placed on wound, and cover border dressing.
-added dressing to left buttock, border dressing.
R94 was rolled to his back, air mattress with rotation observed with no pillows noted in room for positioning except one with no pillowcase. WN X and UM T started pull up R94's covers and R94, stated, you're not done yet, (followed by long pause) with R94 turned and looked at offloading boots that WN X had placed in chair prior to dressing change), heels happed once, I'll be damned if it will happen again. WN X and UM T uncovered R94, applied boots to bilateral heels, covered, and R94 reported a little pain on backside.
During an observation and interview on 5/11/23 at 11:36 am, WN X reported process for wound documentation that included after rounds sit and document same day off phone pictures and paper notes. WN X verified no written notes taken during R94 wound care. WN X reported usually only herself and facility wound physician for rounds unless CNA staff needed for positioning. WN X reported prints off wound notes and provides facility wound physician copy at the following week (Thursday) wound rounds. WN X reported the wound physician then dictates those prior week notes, sends out of the country for dictation and she can obtain notes between 2-3 weeks post actual wound care monitoring. WN X reported measure weekly with picture including height, width and depth. WN X reported depth was observed by eye because she was able to see changes and verified did not obtain manual depth of wounds including R94 sacral wound and reported could start to add to notes. WN X reported did not see that R94 had a dressing on the left posterior calf area and had no knowledge of open area to the left lower leg and WN X asked this surveyor if there was a dressing in place. WN X entered R94's again, observed undated border dressing on R94s posterior left calf. WN X removed border dressing with alginate over appear that appeared very dry but intact at that time. WN X reported unsure why treatment in place with no order and reported may have been in place for protection.
During an interview on 5/11/23 at 1150 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B reported infection control duties performed by herself and ADON/WN X. DON B reported WN X completed facility floor surveillance and DON B oversee WN X and is often present to assist with weekly rounds and would expect WC X to use good infection control practices with wound care.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
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 ensure updated and accurate advance directive informa...
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 updated and accurate advance directive information was in place for four residents (Resident #2, #13, #78 and #94) of five 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, or other healthcare providers.
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.
Review of the facility, Advanced Directives Policy, revised 11/2016, reflected, .Procedure .All Advanced Directives (including guardian documentation and out of state forms) will be reviewed by the Admissions Department when received prior to or on admission. The Social Services Department will review Advanced Directives after admission and start advanced care planning .If the advanced directive document is found to be insufficient, the resident responsible party and/or the party claiming to be a healthcare legal decision maker will be notified and the document will be placed on file and the medical record noted that the advance directive was not sufficient .If the advanced directive document is found to be sufficient, a copy of the advance directive will be made and placed in the miscellaneous section of the resident's chart .For court appointed Guardians/Conservators, a copy of the guardian appointment orders or documents will be placed in the miscellaneous section of the resident's chart .Mental illness or a diagnosis of dementia alone, even having a legal guardian, does not necessarily mean that the resident is not of sound mind or not competent for the purposes of executing an Advance Directive .If there is a question about whether a resident is competent to complete an Advance Directive, an assessment of the resident's specific capacity to complete an Advance Directive should be referred to a physician before completing an Advance Directive and document in the medical record .
Review of the facility, Code Status policy, dated 11/2017, reflected, A Guardian can designate a ward a DNR status only when (MI Only): It does not conflict with the prior wishes of the resident/patient or Patient Advocate .Judicial review by the probate court may be initiated by the facility, in cooperation with the appropriate parties if there is confusion or disagreement about the resident's wishes or if there are any concerns regarding whether the Guardian/Conservator is acting in the best interest of the resident. The written wishes of the resident made while the resident is able to participate in medical decisions, are presumed to be in the resident's best interests .
Resident #2(R2)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R2 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included diabetic, dementia, bipolar disorder, and depression. The MDS reflected R2 had a BIM (assessment tool) that indicated her ability to make daily decisions was severely impaired, and she required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing and one-person physical assist with locomotion on unit, eating, hygiene, and bathing.
Review of R2 Face Sheet on [DATE] at 11:00 a.m., reflected R2's code status was DNR (Do Not Resuscitate).
Review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR), on [DATE] at 11:01 a.m., reflected no evidence of a completed, Do Not Resuscitate Order form.
During an interview on [DATE] at 5:00 PM Social Service Director (SSD) L reported upon admission staff complete resident code status. SSD L reported if residents choose to be DNR a Do Not Resuscitate Order should be complete, including two witness signatures and dates. Social Service Staff (SS) P verified R2's code status was DNR and verified was unable to locate R2's completed, Do-Not-Resuscitate Order document in R2's EMR. SS P reported R2 had a guardian and would expect R2 to have completed, Do-Not-Resuscitate Order in the EMR signed by guardian.
During an interview on [DATE] at 11:02 AM SS P reported located R2's Code Status form completed on [DATE] with no staff signature along with DNR order located on the crash cart. SS P reported a completed and accurate, Resident Code Status form and Do-Not-Resuscitate Order form should be located on the crash cart and in the residents' EMR.
Review of the Progress Notes, dated [DATE] at 11:35 a.m., completed by SS U, reflected, This writer got a hold of resident's guardian about code status. Guardian made arrangements with social service worker to come in.
Resident #13(R13)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R13 was a [AGE] year old female originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with re-admission [DATE], with diagnoses that included hypertension(high blood pressure), diabetic(high blood sugar), legally blind, osteoporosis, chronic pain, bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder and depression. The MDS reflected R13 had a BIM (assessment tool) score of 15 that indicated her ability to make daily decisions was cognitively intact, and she required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing and one-person physical assist with locomotion on unit, hygiene, and bathing. The MDS indicated R13 did not have behaviors.
Review of the EMR on [DATE] at, 10:33 AM, reflected R13's code status was Full code by default as indicated on Face Sheet. Continued review of the Physician orders, dated [DATE], reflected Full Code. Continued review of the EMR reflected a completed, Do-Not-Resuscitate Order document, signed by R13 on [DATE].
Review of R13's Care Conference notes, dated [DATE], reflected, Social worker called resident's guardian outside of care conference time. Resident is requesting to be DNR. Guardian is working on this to fulfill.
During an interview on [DATE] at 4:41 PM, SS U reported R13's current code status was Full code by default. SS U reported R13 wishes to be DNR but had a guardian. SS U reported guardian had said had to get two physicians to sign off to be DNR according to the guardian group policy. SS U reported R13 was deemed incompetent to make medical decisions [DATE] and had court appointed guardianship. SS U was queried about the delay between [DATE] and current ([DATE]) and reported had communicated with the guardian group several times with no follow up and verified was not present for R13's care conference and unsure last time guardian had visited R13. SS U reported did not document reported communication in R13's medical record. SS U reported Social Services should function as residents advocate. SS U verified notes in R13's EMR that reflected on [DATE] R13 continued to wanted code status to be changed to DNR. SS U reported if resident deemed to lack capacity and was Full Code resident could not change code status without responsible party consent. SS U verified R13 had a completed, Do-Not-Resuscitate order form, signed by R13, dated [DATE] in the EMR (prior to R13 being deemed to lack capacity).
During an interview and record review on [DATE] at 11:05 a.m., SS P reported R13 had court appointed guardian and provided current guardianship documents with highlighted areas. Review of the highlighted Guardianship documents, dated [DATE], reflected, Full guardianship of R13. The document reflected, Having filed an acceptance of appointment, and you have all of the below listed powers and duties, and all those allowed under the law(as indicated by checked box) .the power to give the consent or approval that is necessary to enable the ward to receive medical or other professional care, counsel, treatment, or service .
During an interview and observation on [DATE] 1:18 PM, R13 was laying in bed, appeared calm and able to answer questions without difficulty. R13 reported recent room change related to very nagative roommate and reported was effecting her own mental health. R13 reported her code status was DNR that meant if her heart stopped she did not want CPR to keep her alive. R13 reported she had a court appointed guardian and stated name and reported had not shown up for last two care conferences and was unsure why.
Resident #78(R78)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R78 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetic (high blood sugar), dementia, cerebral vascular accident, and depression. The MDS reflected R78 had a BIM (assessment tool) score of 6 that indicated his ability to make daily decisions was moderately impaired, and he required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, hygiene and bathing and one-person physical assist with locomotion on unit and eating.
Review of R78's, Do-Not-Resuscitate Order, on [DATE] at 10:21 AM, reflected the document was signed by R78's responsible party on [DATE] with two witness signatures that were undated.
During an interview on [DATE] at 5:15 PM, SS P verified R78's DNR document was missing witness dates. SS P reported documents should be complete including all required signatures and dates, reviewed by unit managers, and returned to Social Service Department for review then added to EMR.
During an interview on [DATE] at 11:06 AM, SS P reported plan of action to have R78's responsible party complete a new order. SS P reported completed facility audit after [DATE] interview with surveyor and identified additional incomplete documentation and corrections were made.
Resident #94(R94)
Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], reflected R94 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with re-admission [DATE], with diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetic (high blood sugar), anemia, malnutrition, obstructive uropathy, stage 4 pressure ulcers, and anxiety. The MDS reflected R94 had a BIM (assessment tool) score of 11 that indicated his ability to make daily decisions was minimally impaired, and he required two-person physical assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, hygiene and bathing and one-person physical assist with locomotion on unit.
Review of the EMR on [DATE] at 11:35 AM, reflected R94 had physician order for DNR, dated [DATE], Face sheet, dated [DATE] indicated, No CPR/DNR. Continued review of the EMR reflected completed, Resident Code Status document, dated [DATE] that reflected Full Code. Continued review of R94's medical record reflected, Michigan Do-Not-Resuscitate Order, dated [DATE], signed by R94's family with no witness signatures or dates. Continued review of R94's EMR reflected no evidence R94 had been deemed incapable of making own medical choices.
Review of the Social Work Progress Note, dated [DATE], reflected R94's code status as Full Code.
During an interview on [DATE] at 5:07 PM, SS P reported R94's code status was DNR and reported had been completed by Hospice services [DATE]. SS P reviewed R94's DNR order in the EMR and verified document was missing two required witness signatures.
During an interview and record review on [DATE] at 8:34 AM, SS P provided, complete Resident Code Status form, signed by R94, dated [DATE]. SS P also provided completed, Do-Not-Resuscitate Order, dated [DATE], signed by R94 along with two witnesses. SS P reported both documents were located on the crash cart and verified had not been part of the EMR and was working to correct that. SS P reported documents should have been part of the medical record.
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
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, the facility failed to 1. label open multi-dose tuberculin vial with open da...
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 1. label open multi-dose tuberculin vial with open date in 2 of 2 medication room and 1 of 4 medication carts reviewed for labeling, dating and expiration of medications; and 2. Dispose of expired over the counter medication after manufacture expiration dates, resulting in the potential for medications given to residents to have decreased potency, reduced strength, effect, and medication errors.
Findings include:
Medication vials should always be discarded whenever sterility is compromised or questionable. In addition, the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) General Chapter 797 [16] recommends the following for multi-dose vials of sterile pharmaceuticals: ?If a multi-dose has been opened or accessed (e.g., needle-punctured) the vial should be dated and discarded within 28 days unless the manufacturer specifies a different (shorter or longer) date for that opened vial.
?If a multi-dose vial has not been opened or accessed (e.g., needle-punctured), it should be discarded according to the manufacturer ' s expiration date.
The manufacturer ' s expiration date refers to the date after which an unopened multi-dose vial should not be used. The beyond-use-date refers to the date after which an opened multi-dose vial should not be used. The beyond-use-date should never exceed the manufacturer ' s original expiration date. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/injectionsafety/providers/provider_faqs_multivials.html
During an observation on [DATE] at 1:30 PM, Registered Nurse (RN) BB reported had worked at facility for about 6 months. RN BB unlocked the Grand #3 medication cart with an opened box of Allegra with manufacturer expiration date of 4/2023 was noted. RN BB verified medication had expired last month.
During an observation and interview on [DATE] 145 PM, RN BB unlocked the Grand Medication room. An opened undated multi-dose bottle of Tuberculin was observed in the refrigerator. RN BB reported nights administered TB and was aware of two residents who received dose last night and verified open undated and reported should be labeled with open date and good for 30 days. RN BB reported was unsure when opened.
During an interview on [DATE] at 3:45 PM, RN Yreported had worked at the facility for six years. RN Y was queried what the facility process was if new bottle of Tuberculin serum was opened and reported would have to check and follow up with surveyor.
During an interview on [DATE] at 4:40 PM, Director of Nursing (DON) B reported would expect multi-dose bottles of tuberculin serum to be dated when opened and disposed of within 30 days.
During an observation and interview on [DATE] at 3:24 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) CC unlocked Sycamore medication room. Observed open undated multi-dose vial of Tuberculin bottle in refrigerator. LPN CC verified bottle was open and undated and reported should be dated when opened.
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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and sanitize food service equipment effecting 108 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and sanitize food service equipment effecting 108 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage, decreased interior food service equipment illumination, and cross-connections between the potable (drinking) and non-potable (non-drinking) water supplies.
Findings include:
On 05/09/23 at 09:15 A.M., An initial tour of the food service was conducted with Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) C. The following items were noted:
The Victory 2-door reach-in cooler interior light bulb was observed non-functional.
The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 6-303.11 states: The light intensity shall be: (A) At least 108 lux (10 foot candles) at a distance of 75 cm (30 inches) above the floor, in walk-in refrigeration units and dry FOOD storage areas and in other areas and rooms during periods of cleaning; (B) At least 215 lux (20 foot candles): (1) At a surface where FOOD is provided for CONSUMER self-service such as buffets and salad bars or where fresh produce or PACKAGED FOODS are sold or offered for consumption, (2) Inside EQUIPMENT such as reach-in and under-counter refrigerators; and (3) At a distance of 75 cm (30 inches) above the floor in areas used for handwashing, WAREWASHING, and EQUIPMENT and UTENSIL storage, and in toilet rooms; and (C) At least 540 lux (50 foot candles) at a surface where a FOOD EMPLOYEE is working with FOOD or working with UTENSILS or EQUIPMENT such as knives, slicers, grinders, or saws where EMPLOYEE safety is a factor.
The soda machine dispensing spout assemblies were observed being cleaned weekly instead of daily (every 24 hours). (CDM) C stated: The dispensing spouts are cleaned weekly.
The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 4-601.11 states: (A) EQUIPMENT FOOD-CONTACT SURFACES and UTENSILS shall be clean to sight and touch. (B) The FOOD-CONTACT SURFACES of cooking EQUIPMENT and pans shall be kept free of encrusted grease deposits and other soil accumulations. (C) NonFOOD-CONTACT SURFACES of EQUIPMENT shall be kept free of an accumulation of dust, dirt, FOOD residue, and other debris. The objective of cleaning focuses on the need to remove organic matter from food-contact surfaces so that sanitization can occur and to remove soil from nonfood contact surfaces so that pathogenic microorganisms will not be allowed to accumulate, and insects and rodents will not be attracted.
Janitor Closet: The inlet pipe of the Walk-In Cooler and Walk-in Freezer condensate drain lines were observed less than 1-inch from the flood plane level of the mop sink basin. (CDM) C indicated she would contact maintenance for necessary repairs as soon as possible.
The overhead spray arm spring was observed weak, allowing the manual activated valve assembly to invade the flood plane level of the sink basin. (CDM) C indicated she would contact maintenance for necessary repairs as soon as possible.
The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 5-202.13 states: An air gap between the water supply inlet and the flood level rim of the PLUMBING FIXTURE, EQUIPMENT, or nonFOOD EQUIPMENT shall be at least twice the diameter of the water supply inlet and may not be less than 25 mm (1 inch).
Sycamore Unit (200)
On 05/09/23 at 09:55 A.M., The Nourishment Room ice machine filter was observed leaking water onto the top of the ice machine. (CDM) C indicated she would contact maintenance for filter replacement as soon as possible.
The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 5-205.15 states: A PLUMBING SYSTEM shall be: (A) Repaired according to LAW; and (B) Maintained in good repair.
Grand Unit (100)
On 05/09/23 at 10:05 A.M., The Nourishment Room overhead plastic light lens cover interior was observed with numerous dead insect carcasses. The Nourishment Room vanity base cabinet interior was also observed soiled with paper straw wrappers and accumulated dust and dirt deposits.
The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 6-501.12 states: (A) PHYSICAL FACILITIES shall be cleaned as often as necessary to keep them clean. (B) Except for cleaning that is necessary due to a spill or other accident, cleaning shall be done during periods when the least amount of FOOD is exposed such as after closing.
On 05/09/23 at 10:10 A.M., The Nourishment Room refrigerator appliance light bulb mounting bracket was observed broken and loose-to-mount.
The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 4-501.11 states: (A) EQUIPMENT shall be maintained in a state of repair and condition that meets the requirements specified under Parts 4-1 and 4-2. (B) EQUIPMENT components such as doors, seals, hinges, fasteners, and kick plates shall be kept intact, tight, and adjusted in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. (C) Cutting or piercing parts of can openers shall be kept sharp to minimize the creation of metal fragments that can contaminate FOOD when the container is opened.
On 05/09/23 at 10:15 A.M., The Nourishment Room refrigerator appliance light bulb was observed without tough coating to prevent glass breakage.
The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 6-202.11 states: (A) Except as specified in (B) of this section, light bulbs shall be shielded, coated, or otherwise shatter-resistant in areas where there is exposed FOOD; clean EQUIPMENT, UTENSILS, and LINENS; or unwrapped SINGLE-SERVICE and SINGLE-USE ARTICLES.
On 05/11/23 at 08:00 A.M., Record review of the Policy/Procedure entitled: Dietary Cleaning and Sanitation dated 11/19/2021 revealed under Policy: It is the policy of this facility to maintain the sanitation of the kitchen through proper cleaning and sanitizing stationary food service equipment and food-contact surfaces to minimize the growth of microorganisms that may result in food contamination. Food-contact surfaces are washed, rinsed, and sanitized: (1) after each use, (2) before switching preparation to another food type, and (3) when the tool or items being used may have been contaminated.
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and maintain the physical plant effecting 108 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and maintain the physical plant effecting 108 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage, decreased illumination, and cross-connections between the potable (drinking) and non-potable (non-drinking) water supplies.
Findings include:
On 05/10/23 at 09:25 A.M., A common area environmental tour of the facility was conducted with Director of Maintenance E and Housekeeping and Laundry Supervisor D. The following items were noted:
Grand Unit (100)
Occupational Therapy/Physical Therapy:
Therapy Storage Room: The two overhead light lens covers were observed soiled with accumulated dust and dirt deposits.
Clean Utility Room: One of two overhead light lens covers were observed loose-to-mount. Housekeeping and Laundry Supervisor D stated: I am going to contact (maintenance staff name) now.
Sycamore Unit (200)
The emergency exit door was observed with an ill-fitting threshold seal sweep, creating an opening between the metal threshold plate and the threshold seal sweep. The observed opening measured approximately 1-2 inches long.
Red Cedar Unit (300)
Cart Storage Room: 3 of 4 overhead light assemblies were observed non-functional.
Nursing Station: 2 of 4 overhead light assemblies were observed non-functional.
Spa: The hand sink (hot and cold) water supply was observed non-functional.
Soiled Utility Room: The waste hopper faucet assembly and atmospheric vacuum breaker were both observed leaking water. The waste hopper faucet handles were also observed out-of-adjustment.
On 05/10/23 at 12:45 P.M., An environmental tour of sampled resident rooms was conducted with Housekeeping and Laundry Supervisor D. The following items were noted:
127: Low water pressure was observed at the hand sink faucet assembly.
235: The Heating Ventilation Air Conditioning (HVAC) wall mounted unit filters were observed soiled with accumulated dust and dirt deposits. Housekeeping and Laundry Supervisor D indicated she would have maintenance clean the soiled filters as soon as possible.
330: The flooring carpet was observed separated at the seam, adjacent to the Bed 1 headboard.
342: The Bed 2 overbed light assembly pull string extension was observed missing.
352: The Bed 2 seven inch-wide desk fan was observed soiled with accumulated dust and dirt deposits.
354: The flooring carpet was observed separated at the seam, adjacent to the Bed 1 headboard. The flooring carpet was also observed torn and separated at the seam, adjacent to the Bed 2 headboard.
355: The Bed 1 overbed light assembly pull string extension was observed missing. The restroom hand sink faucet assembly was also observed non-functional. The hand sink faucet assembly water supply was additionally observed dripping water and could not be completely shut off.
357: The restroom drywall surface was observed etched, scored, particulate, adjacent to the entrance door. The damaged drywall surface measured approximately 12-inches-wide by 24-inches-long.
358: The drywall surface was observed etched, scored, particulate, adjacent to the Bed 2 headboard. The damaged drywall surface measured approximately 12-inches-wide by 24-inches-long.
On 05/15/23 at 08:00 A.M., Record review of the Policy/Procedure entitled: Housekeeping Services dated 02/22/2023 revealed under Policy: To promote a sanitary environment. (I) Frictional Cleaning (A) Thorough scrubbing will be used for all environmental services that are being cleaned in guest/resident care areas. (B) Mop heads, cleaning cloths and cleaning solutions will be changed routinely and regularly and when obviously soiled. Mop heads and water are to be changed after each contact isolation room cleanup.
On 05/15/23 at 08:30 A.M., Record review of the Policy/Procedure entitled: Maintenance and Repairs of Equipment dated 11/19/2021 revealed under Policy: It is the policy of this facility that all malfunctions and need for repairs are reported to the Maintenance Department and the Administrator in a timely manner. Record review of the Policy/Procedure entitled: Maintenance and Repairs of Equipment dated 11/19/2021 further revealed under Procedure: (4) Preventative maintenance will be completed for major equipment at regular intervals. The Dietary Manager or Dietitian and Maintenance Department will be responsible to coordinate these projects.
On 05/15/23 at 09:00 A.M., Record review of the Direct Supply TELS Work Orders for the last 30 days revealed no specific entries related to the aforementioned maintenance concerns.
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0577
(Tag F0577)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure information within the Survey Book was up to d...
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 information within the Survey Book was up to date and maintained to include reports of respective surveys and the facility plan of correction for identified deficiencies, resulting in the potential for residents, visitors, and families to be uninformed of the facility's deficient practices in a current facility census of 108 residents.
Findings include:
During the initial tour of the facility on 5/8/23 at 1:54 PM, a black binder labeled Regency At [NAME] Survey Results for the Public was noted on a table in the lobby with what appeared to be survey results from 2018 to February 2021 available for public review.
In an interview on 5/8/23 at 3:18 PM with both Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A and Director of Nursing B, NHA A reviewed the facility survey book, confirmed absence of facility survey results completed since February 2021, and stated that he had an issue accessing the government site on his computer and thought that someone else was accessing, printing, and placing them in the survey book. DON B stated that she had the ability to access and print all surveys, confirmed that the prior 3 years should be available in the survey book to review and verbalized plan to print the facility's recertification surveys from March 2021 and May 2022 and the facility's complaint surveys from December 2022 and January 2023 and organize and update the survey book.