CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review of Resident #84's admission Record showed he/she admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnose...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review of Resident #84's admission Record showed he/she admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses:
-Essential primary hypertension (high blood pressure).
-Acute kidney failure, unspecified.
-Cardiac arrhythmia (irregular or abnormal heart beat) unspecified.
-Rheumatic multiple valve disease (a condition in which there is permanent damage to heart valves), unspecified.
-Unspecified hypothyroidism (abnormally low activity of the thyroid, a gland that regulates growth and development).
-Morbid obesity (extreme amount of excess body weight), due to excess calories.
-Acute and chronic respiratory failure (a condition in which the blood doesn't have enough oxygen or has too much carbon dioxide), with hypoxia, (absence of enough oxygen to sustain bodily functions).
Record review of the resident's Care Plan completed 5/15/20 and reviewed 3/22/21 showed:
-He/she had high blood pressure and received medications to treat high blood pressure.
-He/she had a goal to remain free of complications related to high blood pressure.
-He/she was to be monitored for edema, which was to be documented. The physician was to be notified of any edema.
-He/she had a potential for fluid deficit due to taking diuretic medication.
-He/she was to be weighed and weight recorded as ordered.
-The physician was to be notified of weight loss greater than five pounds.
-He/she was to be monitored for weight loss due to hyperthyroidism due to medication.
-He/she was on Furosemide related to edema and would exhibit fluctuations in weight.
-He/she had a potential nutrition problem related to obesity.
-He/she had a goal to maintain weight within five pounds of current weight.
-He/she had unplanned/unexpected weight gain related to hypertension and edema.
-He/she was to be weighed at the same time of day, in the morning, on the south side scale.
-Reasons for weight gain or significant weight changes were to be monitored, recorded and reported to the physician.
Record review of the resident's current Physician's Order Summary Report dated 4/6/21 showed he/she had the following orders:
-Daily weight, if weight gain of greater than two pounds in 24 hours or greater than five pounds in one week, call doctor. Every day shift for CHF.
-Furosemide, tablet 80 mg by mouth, two times a day for fluid retention.
-Diltiazem HCL (a medication used to treat high blood pressure), ER Capsule Extended Release 24 hour, 120 mg, one capsule by mouth, one time a day for hypertension.
-Levothyroxine Sodium, (a medication that treats underactive thyroid function), tablet 150 micrograms (mcg), one tablet by mouth, one time a day for hypothyroidism.
Record review of the resident's Weights and Vitals Summary dated 4/14/21 showed:
-From 8/1/20 to 8/31/20, his/her weights were not documented 7 times.
-Documented weights from 8/30/20 to 8/31/20, showed he/she had a weight loss of 29.2 pounds.
-From 9/1/20 to 9/30/20, his/her weight were not documented 22 times.
-From 10/1/20 to 10/31/20, his/her weights were not documented 28 times.
-From 11/1/20 to 11/30/20, his/her weights were not documented 18 times.
-Documented weights from 11/18/20 to 11/25/20, showed he/she had a weight loss of 6.52 pounds.
-From 12/1/20 to 12/31/20, his/her weights were not documented 27 times.
-From 1/1/21 to 1/31/21, his/her weights were not documented 25 times.
-From 2/1/21 to 2/28/21 his/her weights were not documented 20 times.
-Documented weights from 2/20/21 to 2/22/21, showed he/she had a weight gain of 26.8 pounds.
-From 3/1/21 to 3/31/21 his/her weights were not documented 17 times.
-From 4/1/21 to 4/14/21 his/her weights were not documented 5 times.
Record review of the resident's Physician Progress Notes dated 8/12/20 through 3/19/21 showed:
-There was no documentation the physician was notified, as ordered, of weight changes of greater than two pounds in 24 hours or greater than five pounds in one week.
-There were no changes made in ordered medications since 5/15/20.
4. During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:55 A.M., LPN A said:
-The charge nurse transcribes all orders for new admits and re-admits.
-He/she put the orders into the computer.
-ADON goes in and does order audit the next day after he/she puts the orders in the computer.
-He/she does not know who audits the MARS and TARS.
-He/she would notify the physician if a resident had too much weight gain, especially if they have a diagnosis of heart failure.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 12:11 P.M., the resident's Physician and Nurse Practitioner (NP) said:
-He/she would expect the nursing staff to follow the physician's orders.
-Nurses should be documenting and assessing the residents.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:40 A.M., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) said:
-Nurses were responsible to make sure orders were transcribed and entered into the computer.
-The ADONs monitor the orders.
-He/she and other staff review MAR and Treatments Administration Record (TAR) in morning meeting.
-He/she notified the Director of Nursing (DON), physician and Nurse Practitioner.
-He/she would notify the physician if a resident had a weight change of two pounds in one day, five pounds in five days if there was an order.
-He/she would look at the resident's diagnosis and assess the resident.
-Weight change of 3% in thirty days and 5% in 60 days.
-For daily weights the residents weight was recorded on the TAR.
-The nurse was to make sure the resident was weighed daily.
-The TAR would flag the residents that needed daily weights.
-When a resident was admitted , the nurse would familiarize himself/herself with the resident.
-If a resident had a large weight gain, the resident should be reweighed and the physician should be contacted.
-The physician should be notified if a resident had a weight change over 2 pounds in a day or over 5 pounds in a month.
NOTE: At the time of the survey, the violation was determined to be at the immediate jeopardy level J. Based on observation, interview and record review completed during the onsite visit, it was determined the facility had implemented corrective action to remove the IJ violation at the time. A final revisit will be conducted to determine if the facility is in substantial compliance with participation requirements.
At the time of exit, the severity of the deficiency was lowered to the D level.
MO00183026
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to monitor and assess for signs and symptoms of infection which lead to one resident (Resident #97) acquiring osteomyelitis and necrosis and eventually partial amputation of his/her finger; failed to follow discharge orders including daily weights, failed to follow subsequent physician's orders for weekly weights, failed to get clarification on conflicting orders for obtaining weights, and failed to notify the physician of excessive weight gain which resulted in one closed record sampled resident (Resident #501) who gained a total of 112.5 pounds (lbs.) from 1/7/21 to 2/1/21 and failed to follow physician orders including daily weights and notifying the physician of weight changes for one sampled resident (Resident #84) out of 22 sampled residents and 16 closed record sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
The Administrator was notified on 5/27/21 at 12:56 P.M. of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) which began on 4/5/21. The IJ was removed on 4/14/21 as confirmed by surveyor onsite verification.
Record review of the facility Assessment and Management of Resident Weights policy revised June 2020 showed:
-Staff were to ensure that each resident maintains acceptable parameters of weight and nutrition.
-Weights were obtained upon admission and/or re-admission, then weekly for four weeks and monthly thereafter.
-Additional weights may be obtained at the discretion of the licensed nurse or the interdisciplinary team (IDT).
-A licensed nurse or designee will weigh residents.
-If the weight is less than or greater than five lbs. from the previous weight, immediately re-weigh and have a licensed nurse verify the accuracy of the weight.
-Weights will be entered into the clinical record on that shift.
-Significant weight change management:
--Will be reviewed by a licensed nurse.
--Significant weight changes are less than or more than 5% in one month, 7.5% in three months or 10% in six months.
-Report weight change in the medical record and on the 24-hour report.
-Notify the physician and dietitian of significant weight changes and document notification in the nurse's notes.
-Residents with significant weight changes will be weighed at least weekly and discussed at the Resident at Risk or other clinical meeting to determine possible causes of weight gain or loss including goals for care.
-The care plan will be updated to reflect individualized goals and approaches for managing the weight change.
Record review of the facility Physician Order Policy revised on June 2020 showed:
-This will ensure that all physician orders are complete and accurate.
-The Medical Records Department will verify that physician orders are complete, accurate and clarified as necessary.
-A licensed nurse will transcribe orders with date, time and signature of the person receiving the order.
-Licensed nurse receiving the order will be responsible for documenting and implementing the orders.
-Documentation pertaining to physician orders will be maintained in the resident's medical record.
1. Record review of Resident #97's Face Sheet showed the resident was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of:
-Unspecified Dementia (a condition in which a person has an impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that is severe enough to interfere with everyday activities) without Behavioral Disturbance.
-Fracture of Unspecified Phalanx (bone) of Left Index Finger, Subsequent Encounter with Routine Healing.
-Cognitive Communication Deficit (difficulty communicating related to cognitive issues).
-Partial Traumatic Metacarpophalangeal (joint closest to the hand rather than the nail) Amputation of Left Index Finger.
-Cellulitis (a potentially serious bacterial skin infection which can spread rapidly) of Left Finger .
-Unspecified Open Wound of Unspecified Finger with Damage to Nail.
Record review of the resident's 3/8/21 Progress Notes showed at the start of the shift the off-going nurse found the resident had a wound to the index finger of his/her left hand. The wound was covered and a call was placed to the on-call Nurse Practitioner (NP) and the resident's family member. Orders were obtained to send the resident to the emergency room (ER) for evaluation and treatment. The resident returned with a fractured finger and orders for (ABT) for an open wound. The resident was to get Cephalexin (generic for Keflex, an antibiotic) 500 milligrams (mg) twice daily for 14 days.
Record review of the resident's medical records for his/her ER visit on 3/7/21 showed:
-The resident's hospital face sheet showed he/she was admitted for evaluation and treatment on 3/7/21.
-The Patient Visit Information, dated 3/7/21 at 9:41 P.M. showed:
--The resident was seen for a closed fracture of the tuft (small fragments chipped off the bone edge) of the distal (situated away from the center of the body) phalanx, avulsion (separation of part or all) of nail plate, and avulsion (wound with pulled off or torn away tissue) of soft tissue.
--The resident was to take the prescribed antibiotic Cephalexin, 500 mg capsule orally twice daily for 14 days.
Record review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 3/2021 showed the following orders:
-Cephalexin, 500 mg tablet two times daily for broken finger, left index finger starting 3/8/21.
Record review of the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for March, 2021 showed orders for:
-Cephalexin, 500 mg tablet two times daily for broken left index finger starting 3/8/21. Documentation for this medication showed:
--On 3/8/21 for the 8:00 A.M. administration a 7 was indicated on the TAR. The chart key code showed code showed 7 meant the resident was sleeping.
--Spaces for documenting the 3/10/21 morning and afternoon doses of Cephalexin and for documenting the morning dose of Cephalexin on 3/11/21 were left blank.
--Documentation showed the resident received this medication five out of nine opportunities.
--Staff documented they gave the 4:00 P.M. dose of Cephalexin on 3/13/21 even though a 6 was documented the morning of 3/13/21. The key code for 6 indicated the resident was in the hospital.
---NOTE: Further record review showed the resident was hospitalized on [DATE] and returned to the facility on 3/17/21.
Record review of the resident's nursing notes for 3/8/21 through 3/12/21 showed:
-No documentation by the facility staff why the resident's Cephalexin doses on 3/8/21, 3/10/21, and 3/11/21 were left blank.
-No assessment of the resident's left index finger.
Record review of the resident's hospital records, dated 3/12/21 through 3/17/21 showed:
-The hospital admission History and Physical showed the resident presented to the ER because of a red inflamed left index finger with an avulsion of the left index nail plate and soft tissue avulsion of the pad of the finger. The pad of the finger was blackish brown, concerning of necrosis (dead tissue). The resident was discharged from another hospital on 3/7/21 with orders for Keflex, 500 mg twice daily, but the antibiotic was not given. The left second finger gradually became more erythematous (reddened), painful and swollen. The resident was sent to be seen by the hand surgeon.
-The resident was given a diagnosis of cellulitis of the left second finger and received intravenous (administered through the veins) ABT. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI - device that uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to scan the body or body parts and produce images) was being considered to rule out osteomyelitis (a bacterial or fungal infection that requires antimicrobial (kills micro-organisms) treatment and often surgery).
-The resident, who is severely demented, presented to the ER due to worsening finger infection after fracturing it in his/her wheelchair (WC) a few days ago. After the initial injury he/she presented to another hospital ER where he/she was diagnosed with a fracture and prescribed Keflex. Per report the nursing home did not receive this medication and was not giving the resident his/her antibiotic. A large portion of overlying skin around the nail bed was lifted and dangling. The pulp of the finger was hyper-pigmented and had an open wound surrounding the entire nail bed that had purulent (thick yellow, green or brown colored pus) and sanguineous (thin, pale red or pink) drainage.
-An operative report, dated 3/14/21 showed:
--The resident's injury involved a partial amputation of the tip of the finger. He/She subsequently had increasing redness and drainage from the finger. The patient (resident) presented with a significantly erythematous finger with quite a bit of swelling. He/She seeks revision of the amputation and drainage of any abscess.
--The soft tissue of the second digit was amputated and a significant amount of purulence was noted, including the area of the bone. The tissues and bone were consistent with osteomyelitis. Cultures were obtained. Increasing amounts of purulence from the dorsal aspect (back portion) of the finger was noted. As much purulence (a milky or thick green, brown, yellow or white colored drainage with a distinct odor, indicative of infection) material was expressed as possible which extended to about the Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP - second joint from the nail) joint. The bone was quite nauseous. The wound was debrided (a procedure in which damaged tissue or foreign objects are removed from a wound) back to healthy-looking bone, taking the amputation site into the mid area of the middle phalanx. Then the wound was thoroughly irrigated (a process where a steady flow of solution is used across an open wound surface to hydrate and remove debris). The wound was sutured and dressed.
-A Discharge summary, dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was admitted for inpatient service for management of finger cellulitis and osteomyelitis.
-He/She was treated with intravenous antibiotic therapy and was ordered six more days of oral antibiotics and follow up with the physician in plastic surgery in two weeks.
-Discharge orders included Cephalexin, 250 mg every eight hours for six days and Doxycycline Hyclate (an antibiotic used to treat bacterial infection), 100 mg, twice daily for six days.
Record review of the resident's nurses' notes, dated 3/17/21 through 3/19/21 showed:
-There was no nursing note on 3/17/21 showing the resident had returned to the facility on 3/17/21.
-On 3/19/21 there was a late entry skin wound note showing the nurse had assessed the resident's left index finger and confirmed the resident had a partial amputation to the left index finger. The area had three stitches and had light serosanguineous drainage (clear, pale red or pink colored drainage). The area was closed and intact with no signs of infection such as odorous drainage, redness or swelling.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 12:01 P.M., the resident's legal representative said:
-He/She was contacted by the facility a month ago and was told the resident's had an accident in which the resident's index finger had been torn. The accident also tore up the resident's index finger nail.
-The resident went to the ER and was put on an antibiotic.
-Approximately three to four days later he/she received a call from a doctor at the hospital who was following up on the injury. He/She was told there were problems with the resident's finger because the facility forgot to give the resident his/her antibiotic.
-While at the facility the index finger became infected and was amputated three weeks ago.
During a telephone interview on 4/8/21 at 12:11 P.M., the resident's physician and Nurse Practitioner (NP) said:
-He/She expected the resident's antibiotic to be given as ordered. If medications were not given as ordered there was an increased risk of infection.
-He/She expected the nurses to monitor for signs and symptoms of infection.
-All staff should be following Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines related to medication administration and monitoring wounds.
--The hospitals had recommended ABT treatment. The resident had orders for ABT and the nurses were responsible for ensuring physician orders were followed.
--They expected physician orders for antibiotics to be followed exactly as ordered to decrease risk of infection. If there were any problems related to the ABT medications, they expected nurses to notify them.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 10:34 A.M., Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) B said:
-The resident was on Keflex after returning from the ER following the injury to the second finger and was also on ABT after his/her finger amputation.
-Nurses are expected to follow the physician orders as written and nurses are responsible for administering the antibiotic medications and documenting the administration on the MAR.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 1:01 P.M., Certified Medication Technician (CMT) A said:
-The nurse was responsible for giving antibiotic medications and for ensuring the resident received it.
-Antibiotics are kept on the nurses' medication cart.
-If the nurse was too busy to give the antibiotic, he/she might ask the CMT to give it.
-Antibiotic medication administration should be documented on the MAR like any other medication.
-He/She didn't know if the resident missed any of his/her antibiotic medications.
-The CMT is supposed to report to the nurse if a resident's medication had not been delivered to the facility, if his/her scheduled medication was missing, or if he/she refused the medication,
-He/She didn't know who the nurse reported to regarding any missed antibiotics or other medications.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 12:37 P.M., LPN B said:
-The charge nurse is responsible for ensuring the resident received their antibiotic medications. If the medication is not available from the pharmacy it should be taken out of the Emergency kit (E-kit - contains small quantities of medications which can be dispensed when pharmacy services are not available).
-Most types of antibiotics were available in the E-kit, including Keflex.
-If a resident refused his/her antibiotic the nurse should report it to the physician.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:35 P.M. the Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) B, and the Corporate Nurse Consultant were interviewed and said the following:
-If there were holes in the MARs, the ADON should talk to the charge nurse to verify whether or not the resident received his/her medication. There should not be any blank spaces in the MAR. If the medication was refused the refusal can be documented on the MAR. The electronic dashboard should show which scheduled medications were not given and flag it. The charge nurse, ADON and DON could see that it is flagged and the ADON and DON were responsible for monitoring medication administration issues.
-The charge nurse was responsible for ensuring antibiotic medications are given as ordered. The nurse should call the physician if an antibiotic was not available or was refused. If an antibiotic was only given half the time it was prescribed and the resident wasn't refusing the medication, it is considered a medication error.
-The risk of not giving an antibiotic was that it could result in a potentially worsened infection. It would require the physician to be contacted. The charge nurse should follow up by notifying the physician at the time if a resident's ABT was not available at the facility or was refused.
-The ADON and DON were responsible for auditing to ensure medications are administered as ordered.
-The physician does rounds at the facility weekly and the Nurse Practitioner is at the facility at least two to three days per week. Physicians can be notified when there are concerns about the residents' medications by telephone or when the physician or Nurse Practitioner are at the facility.
2. Record review of Resident #501's New admission paperwork dated 12/24/20 showed:
-Weight on 12/9/20 was 276 pounds (lbs.).
-CHF: Lasix (diuretic - increase the amount of water and salt expelled from the body as urine) appears euvolemic (appears to have a normal circulatory or blood fluid volume within the body).
Record review of the resident's Discharge Order Summary from the sister facility dated 12/24/20 showed weekly weight times 4 weeks, every day shift, every seven days for weight monitoring for four weeks, start on 12/11/20.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated 12/24/20 showed:
-Daily weights for three days every shift for three days' start 12/24/20 and end 12/27/20.
-Weekly weight times four weeks, every day shift every seven days start on 12/25/20.
Record review of the resident's Weight Monitoring dated 12/24/20 showed the resident weighed 276 lbs.
Record review of the resident's Weight Monitoring dated 12/25/20 showed:
-Weekly weight times four weeks, every day shift, every seven days start on 12/25/20 and end on 1/22/21.
-The resident weighed 274 lbs.
-The absence of any requested clarification related to the change in the order or an order to discontinue the previous order for daily weights for three days.
Record review of the resident's Weight Monitoring dated 12/27/20 showed the resident weighed 276 lbs.
Record review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, is a federally mandated assessment instrument to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 12/30/20 showed:
-The resident was admitted on [DATE].
-Was cognitively intact, able to make his/her needs known and able to understand others.
-CHF was not marked/noted as a diagnosis.
Record review of the resident's Weight Monitoring dated 1/7/21 showed:
-Weekly weight times four weeks, every day shift every seven days start on 12/25/20 and end on 1/22/21.
-The resident weighted 273.6 lbs.
Record review of the resident's Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] showed:
-Resident's weight was 273.6 lbs., dated 1/7/21.
-Resident's weight fluctuates some, suspected in part due to fluid shift.
-Right arm was currently edematous (swelling with an excessive accumulation of fluid), monitoring.
Record review of the resident's Weight Monitoring dated 1/21/21 showed:
-Weekly weight times four weeks, every day shift, every seven days, start on 12/25/20 and end on 1/22/21.
-The resident weighed 366.4 lbs.
-The resident had a 92.8 lb. (25%) weight gain in 14 days.
-Record review of the nurse's notes showed no documentation the nurses had assessed the resident for the rapid weight gain or notified the resident's physician.
Record review of the resident's complete weight monitoring showed the absence of:
-The daily weight to be completed on 12/26/20.
-The first weekly weight to be completed on 1/3/21.
-The daily weight that would have been due on 1/14/21.
-The daily weight for 1/28/21.
Record review of the resident's Nursing Note dated 2/1/21 showed:
-The resident complained of chest pain and left arm pain, abdominal breathing, pulse was irregular, difficulty breathing with speaking.
-Call placed to the physician, received new order to send the resident to the hospital.
-Daughter was notified of the transfer.
Record review of the resident's Hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] showed:
-admission Diagnosis:
--Acute on chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia and hypercapnia (acute respiratory failure occurs when fluid builds up in the air sacs in your lungs. Chronic respiratory failure the airways that carry air to your lungs become narrow and damaged. Hypoxia is not enough oxygen in the blood. Hypercapnia is too much carbon dioxide in the blood).
--Acute or chronic CHF.
--Acute Kidney injury (the kidney suddenly cannot filter waste from the blood develops rapidly over a few hours or days, it can be fatal).
--Anasarca (the whole body is swollen from head to their feet).
-admission weight on 2/1/21 was 386.1 lbs. (a 112.5 lb., 29% weight gain in one month).
-Discharge weight on 2/8/21 was 366.9 lbs. (a 19.2 lb, 5% weight loss while in the hospital for seven days).
-Resident was discharged on Lasix ((Furosemide) a diuretic - increase the amount of water and salt expelled from the body as urine) 40 milligrams (mg) twice a day.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated 2/8/21 showed Furosemide (Lasix) 80 mg, give one tablet twice a day for edema, start 2/8/21.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan related to his/her CHF diagnosis put into place after the resident was readmitted on [DATE] showed:
-Resident was on diuretic therapy (Lasix) related to edema.
-Monitor and document intake and output as per facility policy.
-Administer medication as ordered by the physician.
-Encourage compliance with fluid restriction as ordered.
-May require modification in order to achieve desired effects while minimizing adverse consequences.
Record review of the resident's Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] showed:
-Current weight was 370 lbs. (a 3.1 lbs., 1% weight gain in one day)
-Weight continues to fluctuate significantly at times, suspect in part due to fluid shift with a history of CHF and edema.
-Order for diuretic medication and weight monitoring.
-Weight increase of 96.4 lbs., 26% in one month.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated 2/10/21 showed:
-Daily weights every day shift, start 2/10/21.
-Daily weights for three days every day shift for three days, start 2/10/21.
-Weekly weight for four weeks every day shift every seven days, start 2/11/21.
Record review of the resident's Daily Weight Monitoring dated February 2021 showed:
-The last time the resident was weighed was on 2/9/21 at 370 lbs.
-The absence of a daily weight being completed on 2/11/21, 2/12/21, and 2/13/21.
Record review of the resident's Nursing Note dated 2/14/21 showed:
-Resident complained of difficulty breathing.
-Repositioned and pulled up in bed to sit up better.
-Resident took a nap for about an hour before calling 911 himself/herself.
-Resident was transferred to the hospital, and did not return to the facility.
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an unwitnessed injury, to the second finger of...
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 an unwitnessed injury, to the second finger of a resident who was severely cognitively impaired was thoroughly investigated and to immediately put interventions in place to prevent further injury. Within less than 30 days the resident sustained a similar injury to his/her third finger. The facility failed to thoroughly investigate the second injury and failed to immediately put interventions in place to prevent further injury. This affected one sampled resident (Resident #97) out of 22 sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
The Administrator was notified on 5/27/21 at 12:56 P.M. of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) which began on 4/5/21. The IJ was removed on 4/14/21 as confirmed by surveyor onsite verification.
Record review of the facility's Care Planning policy, dated 6/2020 showed:
-A comprehensive, person-centered Care Plan will be developed for each resident to meet the resident's needs.
-Changes will be made to the plan on an ongoing basis for the duration of the resident's stay.
Record review of the facility's Incident Investigation policy, dated 8/2020 showed:
-The licensed nurse will fill out the Incident/Accident Report as soon as possible after an injury.
-Interviews with staff members and other witnesses will be documented.
Record review of the facility's Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program, dated 8/2020 showed:
-The facility will promptly and thoroughly investigate injuries of unknown origin.
-The investigation might include some of the following:
--Relevant documentation.
--The resident's medical records.
--Interviews with residents, the physician, facility staff, witnesses, and persons making the allegation.
--Reviews of events leading up to the alleged incident.
-The Administrator will provide written report of the investigation and retain documentation.
-Unexplained injuries are promptly and thoroughly investigated by the Director of Nursing/or designee.
-The charge nurse on duty will complete an Incident and Accident Report and record the information in the resident's medical record, including documentation of relevant risk factors that predisposes the resident to the incident or injury. The nurse will discuss the situation with the physician.
1. Record review of the Resident #97's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool used for care planning), dated 2/4/21, showed the resident:
-Was moderately cognitively impaired.
-Required supervision for locomotion (oversight, encouragement and/or cueing).
-Used a wheelchair (WC) for mobility.
Record review of the resident's 3/8/21 Progress Notes showed:
-A nursing note written at 12:12 A.M., showing at the start of the shift the off-going nurse found the resident had a wound to the index finger of his/her left hand. The wound was covered and a call was placed to the on-call Nurse Practitioner (NP) and the resident's family member. Orders were obtained to send the resident to the ER for evaluation and treatment. The resident returned with a fractured finger and orders for Antibiotic Therapy (ABT) for an open wound.
-A nursing note written at 3:48 A.M., showed the resident was found after the evening meal on 3/7/21 in his/her room. The resident appeared to have gotten his/her finger caught in the wheelchair while propelling to his/her room after supper. The wheelchair was inspected with no findings of anything out of order.
Record review of the resident's medical records for his/her emergency room (ER) visit on 3/7/21 showed:
-The resident's hospital face sheet showed he/she was admitted for evaluation and treatment on 3/7/21.
-The Patient Visit Information, dated 3/7/21 at 9:41 P.M. showed:
--The resident was seen for a closed fracture of the tuft (small fragments chipped off the bone edge) of the distal (situated away from the center of the body) phalanx, avulsion (separation of part or all) of nail plate, and avulsion (wound with pulled off or torn away tissue) of soft tissue.
Record review of the resident's Incident Investigation, dated 3/8/21 showed:
-An injury incident report showing:
--The resident was found on 3/8/21 (the hospital medical report showed the resident went to the ER on [DATE]) after the evening meal in his/her wheelchair in his/her room. The resident's left index finger had a skin tear to the tip and the nail was coming off. Blood was on his/her wheelchair around the wheel. The resident said he/she got caught. The resident appeared to have gotten his/her finger caught in the wheelchair while propelling himself/herself after the dinner meal. The wheelchair was inspected with no findings of anything out of order.
--The resident was oriented to self and had impaired memory. There were no predisposing environmental or situational factors contributing to the incident.
-The resident was described as follows:
--Severely cognitively impaired with restlessness and agitation, cognitive communication deficit, dementia, and anxiety.
--Had behaviors of clenching up and grabbing the wheels of his/her wheelchair tightly.
--The resident was unable to be interviewed due to cognition related to dementia.
-CNA B's interview showed on 3/8/21 after dinner he/she was getting ready to assist the resident into bed when CNA B noticed blood on the resident's bed rail, wheelchair wheel and on the resident's left hand. CNA B reported the resident propelled himself/herself the evening of 3/8/21. The resident had a behavior when other residents walk past the resident of clenching up in reaction and grabbing the wheels of his/her wheelchair tightly while propelling, causing the wheelchair to stop and jerk.
-There were no interventions related to preventing further injury mentioned in the investigation.
-The investigation did not indicate if the resident's environment had been assessed for other possible causes of the injury.
Record review of the resident's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 2/12/21 showed:
-A Skin Integrity Impairment Care Plan, showed an intervention, dated 3/8/21, Maintenance was to inspect the wheelchair to ensure no repairs were needed.
-There were no interventions added to the resident's Physical Therapy and Restorative Aide (Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) with specialized training to help residents maintain physical, mental, and emotional well-being) care plan, dated 3/8/21; his/her Activities of Daily Living (ADL - feeding, grooming, transfers) Care Plan, initiated 5/24/17; or on any of the resident's other care plans related to the resident's supervision needs while sitting in or propelling himself/herself in his/her wheelchair.
Record review of the facility's incident investigation for the resident's second finger injury, undated, showed:
-An incident note showing four points:
--The resident was noted on 3/26/21 to have a laceration to the third digit of the left hand.
--The root cause was the resident was seen by staff chewing on his/her finger.
--There was no documentation on the incident note of who wrote the four points (such as a signature or typed name).
-There was no documentation included in the incident investigation that the resident's environment was investigated for other possible causes of the injury or documentation of who witnessed the resident chewing on his/her finger and there were no witness statements.
-There was no documentation of the situational details related to the injury such as where the resident was when the injury was found, who else was in the environment at the time, whether or not the finger chewing was a new behavior, and whether or not the environment had been checked for other possible causes of the injury.
--The left third digit was initially assessed and described on 4/2/21 as follows: The wound location was the third finger, caused by trauma, and measured 3.2 centimeters (cm) in length by 1.6 cm in width by 0.1 cm in depth.
-None of the resident's existing care plans had interventions for immediate measures to prevent further injury or indicated the resident's level of supervision needs while using his/her wheelchair.
Record review of the resident's nursing notes, dated 3/26/21 through 4/8/21 showed:
-There was no documentation of the third digit injury on 3/26/21.
-A note written on 3/29/21 at 2:36 P.M., showed the resident's third digit looked much like the second prior to the amputation. The note did not indicate the circumstances in which they discovered the injury.
Observation in the dining room on 4/5/21 at 11:03 A.M., showed:
-The resident was sitting at the dining room table with the second and third digits of his/her left hand bandaged. The second digit was short as if amputated. Certified Medication Technician (CMT) A was nearby and said one finger was caught in the resident's wheelchair.
-Observation showed the resident's wheels had many thin metal spokes. The spokes of the resident's WC were not covered.
Record review of the resident's PT treatment encounter notes dated 4/6/21 and 4/8/21 showed:
-The resident was given visual cues for correct hand placement to promote WC mobility with the resident unable to follow, requiring maximum assistance for WC mobility.
Record review of the resident's OT note, dated 4/8/21 showed spoke guards were placed bilaterally (both sides) on the WC wheels due to previous incidents of catching left fingers in the WC spokes.
Observation and interview in the resident's room on 4/8/21 at 9:55 A.M., showed:
-The resident was sitting in his/her room in his/her wheelchair facing away from the bedroom door leaning over the front and right side of the WC with his/her right hand about two or three inches from the WC spokes.
-A few minutes later CMT A pivoted the resident's WC to face the bedroom door while the resident was still leaning over the front and right side of his/her chair with his/her right hand, within two or three inches of the spokes. After pivoting the chair to face the door, CMT A lifted the resident's right arm away from the spokes and placed it to where the WC arm would provide support while rolling the resident out of the room.
-The resident was placed at the dining room table and was observed to repeatedly place his/her right hand on the right side WC spokes and to also touch the right side of the WC with his/her right hand between the front wheel and the right WC brake handle.
Observation on 4/12/21 at 1:19 P.M., showed the resident resting quietly in bed with his/her eyes closed. The wheels were covered with a round piece of clear plastic exposing approximately ½ to 3/4 inch of WC spokes near the wheel rim and approximately 1 ½ inches of the hub of the wheel spokes. The plastic was attached to the WC wheel spokes in three places on each side to the WC.
During a telephone interview on 4/7/21 at 12:01 P.M., the resident's legal representative said:
-He/She was contacted by the facility a month ago and was told the resident had an accident in which the resident's index finger had been torn. The accident also tore up the resident's index finger nail.
-He/She received a second call that there was damage to another finger.
-He/She was told the facility thought the resident got his/her hand stuck in his/her wheelchair both times.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 12:32 P.M., LPN D said:
It was his/her understanding that Maintenance and Occupational Therapy inspected the resident's wheelchair after the injuries and therapy evaluated his/her ability to safely use the wheelchair.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 12:45 P.M., CMT C said the resident tended to put his/her hands into the WC spokes. When being pushed in the wheelchair, the resident would put his/her hands down towards the wheels. From what was reported to him/her, nobody witnessed the injuries.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 2:15 P.M., CNA B said:
-He/She discovered the resident's left index finger the day it was injured.
-He/She had seen other residents push the resident in his/her WC. Staff would tell the resident to stop when they saw a resident push another resident's wheelchair.
-He/She had not noticed anything sharp or hazardous in the resident's room.
-The resident's chair was custom made and had thin metal spokes. Most of the residents' wheelchairs have thicker and fewer plastic spokes.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 2:18 P.M., CMT A said:
-Someone in therapy brought the resident's third finger injury to his/her attention.
-He/She had never noticed anything sharp or hazardous in the resident's room.
-He/She had seen other residents push the resident while he/she was in his/her wheelchair. When that happened, the resident might have had his/her hands down around the spokes or would hold onto the spokes of his/her wheelchair.
-Staff were to redirect the residents if they catch a resident pushing someone.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 10:20 A.M., the Maintenance Assistant said:
-The wheelchair was examined to make sure there were no sharp areas and it functioned properly and safety after the second finger injury.
During a telephone interview on 4/8/21 at 12:11 P.M., the resident's physician said:
-Management should document and investigate the accident leading to the injury of the resident's finger.
-The investigation of injuries of unknown origin should be thorough so that a cause of the accident could be determined and measures could be put in place to prevent further injury.
-Management should follow all Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines for investigating injuries.
During an interview on 4/12/21 at 2:15 P.M., CMT A said:
-The charge nurse asked him/her what happened to the resident's third finger. He/She was not asked to write a statement.
-Staff were not told what they should do to prevent another injury.
-He/She was not aware of any measures immediately put into place to prevent future injuries following either of the two accidents. The facility staff did recently put plastic disks over the resident's WC spokes.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 1:36 P.M., the Therapy Director said:
-Staff talked about the index finger injury in the morning meeting on 3/8/21 and discussed it in the Risk meeting on 3/11/21. The therapy department staff were told by the nursing staff they thought the resident's finger got caught in the WC.
-Therapy communicated with a wheelchair company to get the resident new wheels because staff didn't know if the resident was injured on the spokes of the wheels. The plastic spoke cover was installed on 4/8/21. He/She communicated back and forth with the wheelchair company and ordered the new wheels over the phone.
-He/She learned about the injury to the resident's third finger in the first morning meeting following the accident. Communication with the wheelchair company occurred before the injury to the resident's second finger. Therapy checked out the resident's WC for safety after the injury to the second finger. It was discussed in the morning meetings that Maintenance would also check out the resident's WC after the pointer finger injury.
-There had been no adjustments or additions to the resident's wheelchair prior to the arm rest bolster being added and the wheelchair spoke covers being installed on 4/8/21. The only adaptation to resident's wheelchair had been the bolster and spoke covers.
-On 4/9/21 the resident's status changed to hospice services (care given at the end of life). The resident had been on Skilled services when the WC wheels were ordered. Medicaid would not cover the new wheels because the resident was now receiving hospice services and Medicaid services ended on 4/8/21. He/She needed to talk with hospice to see if they would pay for the new wheels or if they could provide other options.
-The resident had a custom fit chair.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 11:05 A.M., MDS Coordinator B said:
-When there were injuries, the charge nurse was responsible for putting in an immediate intervention.
-The injury would be discussed in clinical Interdisciplinary (IDT) meetings for a more permanent intervention.
-The IDT Meetings included the Administrator, the Director of Nursing (DON), both ADONs, both MDS Coordinators, Social Services, and the Therapy Director or designee.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 12:37 P.M., LPN B said:
-He/She was the resident's nurse both times his/her finger was injured.
-The CNA reported the index finger injury. It appeared the resident could have gotten his/her index finger caught in his/her wheelchair. The resident kept putting his/her hand near the spokes before the accident to the index finger.
-He/She was not aware of any interventions put in place to prevent further injury.
-There were no interventions put in place immediately following the third digit injury to prevent future injury.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:35 P.M., the DON, ADON B, and the Corporate Nurse Consultant were interviewed and said the following:
-If there was a significant injury such as one resulting in a broken bone, the injury should be charted by the charge nurse electronically under Risk Management.
-The charge nurse or ADON should put an intervention in place immediately. The injury should be discussed in the next morning meeting to ensure a more permanent intervention was put in place. Management would review and discuss the injury in their weekly Clients at Risk (CAR) clinical meeting.
-An investigation should be started after an unwitnessed injury and used to develop interventions.
During an interview on 4/29/21 at 7:16 P.M., the Medical Director said:
-He/She would have expected staff to thoroughly investigate any injury, especially one that required a hospital visit.
-He/She would have expected the facility to interview staff and identify any possible witnesses to the injury.
-He/She would have expected the facility staff to develop and put into place appropriate interventions to prevent additional injuries immediately.
NOTE: At the time of the survey, the violation was determined to be at the immediate jeopardy level J. Based on observation, interview and record review completed during the onsite visit, it was determined the facility had implemented corrective action to remove the IJ violation at the time. A final revisit will be conducted to determine if the facility is in substantial compliance with participation requirements.
At the time of exit, the severity of the deficiency was lowered to the D level.
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #502's admission Record dated 4/7/21 showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #502's admission Record dated 4/7/21 showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Atrial Fibrillation (A-fib the upper two chambers of the heart beat quickly and irregularly) and Hypertension (HTN High Blood Pressure).
Record review of the resident's admission MDS, dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was admitted on [DATE].
-Had moderately impaired cognition.
-Had a diagnosis of A-fib and HTN.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated January 2021 showed:
-Losartan Potassium Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet in the morning for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP-measures the pressure in your arteries when the heart beats) less than 110, Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP-measure the pressure in your arteries when your heart rests between beats) less than 60 (normal blood pressure is SBP 120 over DBP 80) or Pulse (heart rate (HR) heart beats per minute normal heart rate at rest is between 60-100) less than 60 start 12/1/20.
-Metoprolol Tartrate Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet two times a day for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated January 2021 showed:
-Losartan Potassium Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet in the morning for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
---The resident's Blood Pressure (BP) and HR were not documented and medication administered 18 out of 31 opportunities.
---The resident received the medication on 1/31/21 when his/her BP of 96/75 was outside of the parameters and the medication was administered one opportunity out of 31 opportunities.
-Metoprolol Tartrate Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet two times a day for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
---The resident's BP and HR were not documented and medication administered 17 out of 62 opportunities.
---The resident received medication when BP was outside of the parameters three out of 62 opportunities.
Record review of the resident's Administration Note dated 1/14/2, showed the resident did not receive his/her 8:00 A.M. Metoprolol Tartrate Tablet 50 mg due to the medication was unavailable and was on order from the pharmacy.
Record review of the resident's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] showed he/she:
-Was admitted on [DATE].
-Had moderately impaired cognition, sometimes understood others and made self-understood.
-Had Debility Cardio-respiratory Conditions (involves multiple systems and disease).
-Had HTN.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated February 2021 showed:
-Losartan Potassium Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet in the morning for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60 start 12/1/20.
-Metoprolol Tartrate Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet two times a day for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated February 2021 showed:
-Losartan Potassium Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet in the morning for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
---The resident's BP and HR were not documented and medication administered 15 out of 28 opportunities.
---The resident received medication on 2/13/21 when BP of 97/58 was outside of the parameters one out of 28 opportunities.
-Metoprolol Tartrate Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet two times a day for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
---The resident's BP and HR were not documented and medication administered 21 out of 56 opportunities.
---The resident received medication when BP was outside of the parameters two out of 56 opportunities.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 2/8/21 showed:
-Avoid taking the blood pressure reading after physical activity or emotional distress.
-Give anti-hypertensive medications as ordered.
-Monitor for side effects such as orthostatic hypotension (a systolic blood pressure decrease of at least 20 millimeters of Mercury (mm Hg) or a diastolic blood pressure decrease of at least 10 mm Hg within three minutes of standing) and increased heart rate and effectiveness.
-Monitor for and document any edema (swelling), notify the physician.
-Monitor/document/report as needed (PRN) any signs/symptoms of malignant hypertension (extremely high blood pressure that develops rapidly and causes some type of organ damage), headache, visual problems, confusion, disorientation, lethargy, nausea and vomiting, irritability, seizure activity, or difficulty breathing.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated March 2021 showed:
-Losartan Potassium Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet in the morning for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60 start 12/1/20.
-Metoprolol Tartrate Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet two times a day for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated March 2021 showed:
-Losartan Potassium Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet in the morning for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
---The resident's BP and HR were not documented and medication administered 1 out of 1 opportunities.
-Metoprolol Tartrate Tablet 50 mg, give one tablet two times a day for HTN, start 12/1/20.
--Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60, start 12/1/20.
---The resident's BP and HR were not documented and medication administered 1 out of 1 opportunities.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 12:13 P.M., the Nurse Practitioner said:
-He/she expected the nurses and CMT to take the resident's blood pressure and pulse before giving the medications.
-The nurse or CMT would not know it was safe to give the medication if he/she didn't take the resident's blood pressure and pulse.
-Medication should be reordered when the resident had 10 pills left.
-No resident should run out of any medication because they were not reordered in time.
-He/she should be notified if a medication was not given/held.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 1:30 P.M., ADON B said:
-The ADON and DON were responsible to audit to ensure medications were administered per physician orders.
-The charge nurse would check the orders for parameters such as blood pressure and pulse, and would contact the physician to verily the parameters.
-The charge nurse was responsible to ensure parameters were followed and the resident's physician was notified of any instance the parameters were outside of range.
-He/she takes the blood pressure and pulse before administering the medication and documents the blood pressure and pulse on the MAR.
-If the blood pressure or pulse was below the parameters, the CMT was to hold the medication and notify the charge nurse.
-He/she would not give blood pressure medication if the blood pressure was out of parameters.
-He/she was not aware of bad Internet connections on the locked unit.
-If the CMT was not entering the blood pressure and pulse into the MAR, the CMT needed training.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 1:45 P.M., CMT A said:
-He/she would check the blood pressure first then administer the medication.
-He/she would check the MAR to see what the blood pressure parameters were.
-He/she would let the nurse know if the blood pressure medication was held due to being out of parameters.
-He/she would write the blood pressure down in a note book because the Internet sometimes did not work on the locked unit.
-He/She would later enter the information into the resident's electronic medical record or have the nurse enter the information into the resident's electronic medical record.
-He/She did not tell anyone of the problem with not being able to document blood pressures in the electronic medical records due to having Internet issues, because he/she thought the DON and administrator already knew about it.
-He/She could not explain how he/she was able to document the resident's medication administration in the resident's electronic medical record, but not be able to document the resident's blood pressure in the resident's electronic medical record.
-If medication was back ordered he/she would call the pharmacy to check and see where the medication was located and then let the charge nurse know.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 2:00 P.M., LPN C said:
-He/she checked the resident's blood pressure and pulse and if out of range he/she would hold the blood pressure medication.
-He/she documented on the MAR if the medication was held.
-If a resident was low or ran out of a medication he/she would call the pharmacy to make sure they have the order to fill.
-He/she would check the E-kit and pull the medication from the E-kit to administer.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 2:50 P.M., CMT B said:
-He/she always took the resident's blood pressure and pulse before he/she administered blood pressure medications.
-He/she would hold the medication if to low and chart why the medication was held in a progress note.
-He/she would notify the charge nurse of the low blood pressure or pulse.
-The blood pressure and pulse were documented on the MAR.
-He/she looked in the medication cart and medication room to see if the resident's medication has been delivered from the pharmacy.
-He/she re-ordered the medications when there was five to seven days left.
3. Record review of Resident #512's admission Record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Parkinson's Disease (is a progressive nervous system disorder that affects movement and causes tremors, stiffness or slowing of movement).
Record review of the resident Order Summary Report dated November 2020 showed:
-Sinement (Carbidopa-Levodopa) (a prescription medicine used to treat the symptoms of Parkinson's Disease ) tablet 25-100 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20.
-Ropinirole HCl (a medication used to treat Parkinson's disease ) tablet 3 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated December 2020 showed:
-Sinement (Carbidopa-Levodopa) tablet 25-100 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20.
-Ropinirole HCl tablet 3 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20.
-No new orders for Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-250 mg four times a day for 30 days per the resident's neurologist on 12/30/20.
-No new order for Ropinirole HCl Tablet 3 mg four times a day per the resident's neurologist on 12/30/20.
Record review of the resident's Neurology visit dated 12/30/20 showed:
-Parkinson's disease still significantly under treated.
-Stop Carbidopa-Levodopa tablet 25-100 mg three times a day (tripled since mid-December).
-Start Carbidopa-Levodopa tablet 25-250 mg four times a day for 30 days.
-A physicians order to increase Ropinirole HCl tablet 3 mg to four times a day.
Record review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated December 2020 showed:
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20, missed five doses out of 90 opportunities.
--NOTE: the resident's neurologist increased the resident's Carbidopa-Levodopa to 25/250 mg four times daily on 12/30/20. No documentation the facility staff transcribed or administered the correct dose on 12/30/20 or 12/31/20. The resident did not get the correct dose eight out of eight opportunities.
-Ropinirole HCl Tablet 3 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20, missed four doses out of 90 opportunities.
--NOTE: The resident's neurologist increased the resident's Ropinirole to 3 mg four times daily on 12/30/20. No documentation the facility staff transcribed or administered the correct dose on 12/30/20 or 12/31/20. The resident did not get the correct dose two out of two opportunities.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan last reviewed 12/15/20 showed:
-Resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE].
-At risk for altered comfort related to Parkinson's Disease.
-Administer medications as ordered.
-Observe and report changes in usual routine, sleep patterns, decrease in functional abilities, decrease in range of motion, withdrawal or resistance to care.
Record review of the resident's Neurology visit dated 1/25/21 showed:
-Current Medications:
--Carbidopa-Levodopa 25/250 mg four times a day.
---Note: Facility MAR reflected he/she was only getting Carbidopa-Levodopa 25-100 mg three times a day.
--Ropinirole HCl Tablet 3 mg four times a day.
---Note: Facility MAR reflected he/she was only getting Ropinirole HCl Tablet 3 mg three times a day.
-Assessment:
--Titer (a way to measure the amount of medication in the bloodstream) for Carbidopa-Levodopa needed to get back to pre-op level before he/she can program Deep Brain Stimulator (a device implanted to stimulate targeted regions of the brain with electrical impulses generated by a neurostimulator) further; frustrating inability for facility to follow his/her orders.
-Treatment:
--A physician's order to increase Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg four times today (1/25/21), then increase to 1.5 pills four times a day starting on 1/28/21, then increase to 2 pills four times a day starting on 1/31/21, then increase to 2.5 pills four times a day starting on 2/4/21.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated January 2021 showed:
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20.
--NOTE: The resident's neurologist increased the resident's Carbidopa-Levodopa to 25/250 mg four times daily on 12/30/20.
-Ropinirole HCl Tablet 3 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20.
--NOTE: The resident's neurologist increased the resident's Ropinirole to 3 mg four times daily on 12/30/20.
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give one tablet four times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 1/25/21 End 1/25/21.
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give 1.5 tablet four times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 1/26/21 End 1/28/21.
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give two tablet four times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 1/29/21 End 1/31/21.
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give 2.5 tablet four times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 2/1/21 End 2/4/21.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated January 2020 showed:
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20 discontinued 1/25/21.
--NOTE: Carbidopa-Levodpa was increased to 25/250 mg four times daily by the resident's neurologist on 12/30/20. No documentation the facility staff transcribed or administered the correct dose 96 out of 96 opportunities.
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give one tablet four times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 1/25/21 End 1/25/21.
-Carbidopa-Levodopa Tablet 25-100 mg, give 1.5 tablet four times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 1/26/21 End 1/28/21, missed four doses out of nine opportunities.
--Note: No progress note to say why the medication was missed. The resident was discharged from the facility on 1/27/21.
-Ropinirole HCI Tablet 3 mg, give one tablet three times a day for Parkinson's Disease, start 11/28/20.
--Note: Ropinirole HCl Tablet 3 mg was not increased to four times a day as ordered by Neurologist on 12/30/20. No documentaion the facility staff transcribed or administered the correct dose 27 out of 27 opportunities.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 1:30 P.M. with the DON and ADON B, ADON B said:
-The ADON and DON were responsible to audit the residents' orders to ensure they were transcribed and administered accurately.
-Whoever went with the resident to the appointment would give the paperwork to the charge nurse.
-The charge nurse would take off the orders and transcribe the orders to the resident's electronic medical record.
-The physician was notified of the orders and should have been documented by staff to the resident's progress notes.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 2:00 P.M., LPN C said:
-If he/she took a resident to an appointment, he/she would give the paperwork to the charge nurse.
-The charge nurse would take off the orders, document the orders in the resident's electronic medical record, then notify the resident's physician of the new orders.
-Staff should document physician notification in the resident's progress notes.
-The ADON and DON were responsible to audit to ensure all orders were transcribed and administered accurately.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 3:10 P.M., LPN A said:
-When a resident returned from an appointment he/she would go through the paperwork.
-He/she would take off any orders and put the order(s) into the computer system.
-He/she would notify the physician to verify the orders.
-The DON and ADON were responsible to audit to ensure all orders were transcribed and administered accurately.
NOTE: At the time of the survey, the violation was determined to be at the immediate jeopardy level J. Based on observation, interview and record review completed during the onsite visit, it was determined the facility had implemented corrective action to remove the IJ violation at the time. A final revisit will be conducted to determine if the facility is in substantial compliance with participation requirements.
At the time of exit, the severity of the deficiency was lowered to the D level.
MO00181055 & MO00182466
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was severely cognitively impaired received Antibiotic Therapy (ABT) as prescribed for an injury to his/her index (second) finger. The resident's index finger became infected with two infections resulting in the need to partially amputate the resident's index finger. Following the amputation, the resident was placed on two antibiotic medications and the facility failed to ensure the resident received the ABT as prescribed or to contact the physician when the resident refused the medication. This affected one resident (Resident #97) out of 22 sampled residents. In addition, the facility failed to ensure two sampled closed record residents (Resident #502 & Resident #512) out of 16 sampled closed record residents, were free from significant medication errors by failing to administer medications as prescribed by the residents' physician. The facility census was 95 residents.
The Administrator was notified on 5/27/21 at 12:57 P.M. of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) which began on 4/5/21. The IJ was removed on 4/14/21 as confirmed by surveyor onsite verification.
Record review of the facility's Administration Procedures for All Medications policy, undated, showed:
-Administer medications in a safe and effective manner.
-Prior to removing the medication package or container from the medication cart, check the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the order.
-Check the label against the order on the MAR.
-If the resident refuses the medication, document the refusal on the MAR and research the reason for the refusal.
-Notify the physician for persistent refusals.
-Check for vital signs, other tests to be done during/prior to medication administration.
-Obtain and record any vital signs or other monitoring parameters orders or deemed necessary prior to medication administration.
-Notify the physician if medication was held for pulse, blood pressure, low or high blood sugar, or other abnormal test results, vital signs, resulting in medication being held.
Record review of the facility Physician Orders Policy revised June 2020 showed:
-This will ensure that all physician orders are complete and accurate.
-The Medical Records Department will verify that physician orders are complete, accurate and clarified as necessary.
-A licensed nurse will transcribe orders with date, time and signature of the person receiving the order.
-Licensed nurse receiving the order will be responsible for documenting and implementing the orders.
-Medication/treatment orders will be transcribed onto the appropriate resident administration record.
-Orders pertaining to other health care disciplines will be transcribed onto the appropriate communication system for that discipline.
-Documentation pertaining to physician orders will be maintained in the residents' medical record.
-Current month's administration records will be maintained in the Medication Administration Record (MAR)/Treatment Administration Record (TAR).
1. Record review of Resident #97's Face Sheet showed the resident was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of:
-Unspecified Dementia (a condition in which a person has an impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that is severe enough to interfere with everyday activities) without Behavioral Disturbance.
-Fracture of Unspecified Phalanx (bone) of Left Index Finger, Subsequent Encounter with Routine Healing.
-Cognitive Communication Deficit (difficulty communicating related to cognitive issues).
-Partial Traumatic Metacarpophalangeal (joint closest to the hand rather than the nail) Amputation of Left Index Finger.
-Cellulitis (a potentially serious bacterial skin infection which can spread rapidly) of Left Finger .
-Unspecified Open Wound of Unspecified Finger with Damage to Nail.
Record review of the resident's 3/8/21 Progress Notes showed at the start of the shift the off-going nurse found the resident had a wound to the index finger of his/her left hand. The wound was covered and a call was placed to the on-call Nurse Practitioner (NP) and the resident's family member. Orders were obtained to send the resident to the emergency room (ER) for evaluation and treatment. The resident returned with a fractured finger and orders for (ABT) for an open wound. The resident was to get Cephalexin (generic for Keflex, an antibiotic) 500 milligrams (mg) twice daily for 14 days.
Record review of the resident's medical records for his/her ER visit on 3/7/21 showed:
-The resident's hospital face sheet showed he/she was admitted for evaluation and treatment on 3/7/21.
-The Patient Visit Information, dated 3/7/21 at 9:41 P.M. showed:
--The resident was seen for a closed fracture of the tuft (small fragments chipped off the bone edge) of the distal (situated away from the center of the body) phalanx, avulsion (separation of part or all) of nail plate, and avulsion (wound with pulled off or torn away tissue) of soft tissue.
--The resident was to take the prescribed antibiotic Cephalexin, 500 mg capsule orally twice daily for 14 days.
Record review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 3/2021 showed the following orders:
-Cephalexin, 500 mg tablet two times daily for broken finger, left index finger starting 3/8/21.
Record review of the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for March, 2021 showed orders for:
-Cephalexin, 500 mg tablet two times daily for broken left index finger starting 3/8/21. Documentation for this medication showed:
--On 3/8/21 for the 8:00 A.M. administration a 7 was indicated on the TAR. The chart key code showed code showed 7 meant the resident was sleeping.
--Spaces for documenting the 3/10/21 morning and afternoon doses of Cephalexin and for documenting the morning dose of Cephalexin on 3/11/21 were left blank.
--Documentation showed the resident received this medication five out of nine opportunities.
--Staff documented they gave the 4:00 P.M. dose of Cephalexin on 3/13/21 even though a 6 was documented the morning of 3/13/21. The key code for 6 indicated the resident was in the hospital.
---NOTE: Further record review showed the resident was hospitalized on [DATE] and returned to the facility on 3/17/21.
Record review of the resident's nursing notes for 3/8/21 through 3/13/21 showed:
-No documentation by the facility staff why the resident's Cephalexin doses on 3/8/21, 3/10/21, and 3/11/21 were left blank or why staff had indicated on the TAR the afternoon of 3/13/21 that the resident was administered Cephalexin when record review showed the resident was in the hospital.
Record review of the resident's hospital records, dated 3/12/21 through 3/17/21 showed:
-The hospital admission History and Physical showed the resident presented to the ER because of a red inflamed left index finger with an avulsion of the left index nail plate and soft tissue avulsion of the pad of the finger. The pad of the finger was blackish brown, concerning of necrosis (dead tissue). The resident was discharged from another hospital on 3/7/21 with orders for Keflex, 500 mg twice daily, but the antibiotic was not given. The left second finger gradually became more erythematous (reddened), painful and swollen. The resident was sent to be seen by the hand surgeon.
-The resident was given a diagnosis of cellulitis of the left second finger and received intravenous (administered through the veins) ABT. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI - device that uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to scan the body or body parts and produce images) was being considered to rule out osteomyelitis (a bacterial or fungal infection that requires antimicrobial (kills micro-organisms) treatment and often surgery).
-The resident, who is severely demented, presented to the ER due to worsening finger infection after fracturing it in his/her wheelchair (WC) a few days ago. After the initial injury he/she presented to another hospital ER where he/she was diagnosed with a fracture and prescribed Keflex. Per report the nursing home did not receive this medication and was not giving the resident his/her antibiotic. A large portion of overlying skin around the nail bed was lifted and dangling. The pulp of the finger was hyper-pigmented and had an open wound surrounding the entire nail bed that had purulent (thick yellow, green or brown colored pus) and sanguineous (thin, pale red or pink) drainage.
-An operative report, dated 3/14/21 showed:
--The resident's injury involved a partial amputation of the tip of the finger. He/She subsequently had increasing redness and drainage from the finger. The patient (resident) presented with a significantly erythematous finger with quite a bit of swelling. He/She seeks revision of the amputation and drainage of any abscess.
--The soft tissue of the second digit was amputated and a significant amount of purulence was noted, including the area of the bone. The tissues and bone were consistent with osteomyelitis. Cultures were obtained. Increasing amounts of purulence from the dorsal aspect (back portion) of the finger was noted. As much purulence (a milky or thick green, brown, yellow or white colored drainage with a distinct odor, indicative of infection) material was expressed as possible which extended to about the Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP - second joint from the nail) joint. The bone was quite nauseous. The wound was debrided (a procedure in which damaged tissue or foreign objects are removed from a wound) back to healthy-looking bone, taking the amputation site into the mid area of the middle phalanx. Then the wound was thoroughly irrigated (a process where a steady flow of solution is used across an open wound surface to hydrate and remove debris). The wound was sutured and dressed.
-A Discharge summary, dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was admitted for inpatient service for management of finger cellulitis and osteomyelitis.
-He/She was treated with intravenous antibiotic therapy and was ordered six more days of oral antibiotics and follow up with the physician in plastic surgery in two weeks.
-Discharge orders included Cephalexin, 250 mg every eight hours for six days and Doxycycline Hyclate (an antibiotic used to treat bacterial infection), 100 mg, twice daily for six days.
Record review of the resident's nurses' notes, dated 3/17/21 through 3/19/21 showed:
-There was no nursing note on 3/17/21 showing the resident had returned to the facility on 3/17/21.
-On 3/19/21 there was a late entry skin wound note showing the nurse had assessed the resident's left index finger and confirmed the resident had a partial amputation to the left index finger. The area had three stitches and had light serosanguineous drainage (clear, pale red or pink colored drainage). The area was closed and intact with no signs of infection such as odorous drainage, redness or swelling.
Record review of the resident's March, 2021 POS showed orders for:
-Cephalexin tablet, 250 mg. Give one tablet by mouth four times a day for infection of left hand for six days starting 3/17/21.
-Doxycycline Hyclate, 100 mg. Give one tablet by mouth two times a day for infection for six days starting 3/17/21.
Record review of the resident's MAR for 3/2021 showed:
-Orders for Cephalexin, 250 mg. Give one tablet by mouth four times a day for infection of left hand for six days starting 3/17/21. Documentation on the MAR showed:
--Blank spaces on 3/17/21 for medication administration times at 4:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M.
--The resident refused the medication on 3/20/21 at 8:00 A.M.
--The spaces to document medication administration were left blank on 3/20/21 at 10:00 P.M. and on 3/21/21 at 4:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M.
--On 3/22/21 MAR documentation showed the resident refused the medication at 4:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M.
--The MAR was left blank for the 3/23/21 12:00 P.M. medication administration.
--The resident did not receive nine out of 24 opportunities for the ABT, Cephalexin 250 mg.
-Orders for Doxycycline Hyclate, 100 mg. Give one tablet by mouth two times a day for infection for six days. Documentation on the MAR showed:
--A blank space on 3/17/21 for the 5:00 P.M. medication administration time.
--The resident refused the medication on 3/20/21 at 8:00 A.M.
--The MAR space was left blank on 3/21/21 for the 5:00 P.M. administration time.
--On 3/22/21 the resident refused the medication at the 5:00 P.M. medication time.
--The resident received eight out of 12 doses of Doxycycline Hyclate 100 mg, and missed four out of 12 opportunities for the ABT.
Record review of the resident's nursing notes for 3/17/21 through 3/23/21 showed there was no documentation explaining the MAR blanks for the two ABT medications or that the physician had been notified when the resident refused the medications.
Observation of wound care in the resident's room on 4/7/21 at 12:32 P.M. showed:
-The resident's bandage was off his/her second finger. The finger appeared to have been amputated between the distal (joint closest the nail) and proximal (joint closets the distal joint) joints of the left index finger.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 12:01 P.M., the resident's legal representative said:
-He/She was contacted by the facility a month ago and was told the resident's had an accident in which the resident's index finger had been torn. The accident also tore up the resident's index finger [NAME][TRUNCATED
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
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 promote dignity when one cognitively impaired sampled...
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 promote dignity when one cognitively impaired sampled resident (Resident #9) was exposed in an incontinence brief and hospital gown visible to the hallway and not dressed daily in appropriate clothing out of 22 sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
Record review of the facility's Privacy and Dignity policy revised 6/2020 showed:
-The facility promoted resident care in a manner and an environment that maintained or enhanced dignity and respect, in full recognition of each residents' individuality.
-The staff were to assist the resident in maintaining self-esteem and self-worth.
-Residents were dressed appropriate to the time of day and season as well as individual preferences.
1. Record review of Resident #9's admission Record showed the resident was admitted on [DATE] and had the following diagnoses:
-Femur fracture (broken thigh bone).
-Need for assistance with personal care.
-Attention and concentration deficits.
-Cognitive communication deficits.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 12/29/20 showed the resident:
-Required extensive assistance of staff for dressing.
-Was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder.
Record review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool required to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 1/4/21 showed the resident:
-Was severely cognitively impaired.
-Required extensive assistance of staff for dressing.
-Thought it was very important to be dressed in clothing (per family member interview).
-Was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder.
Observation on 4/5/21 at 12:15 P.M., showed the resident:
-Was in his/her bed facing the hallway in a blue hospital gown and was not covered with his/her legs exposed.
-The resident was visible from the hallway.
Observation on 4/5/21 at 1:29 P.M., showed the resident:
-Was lying in bed in a blue hospital gown.
-Was not covered and was visible to the hallway.
-Was mumbling sounds with no definitive speech.
During an interview on 4/6/21 at 2:11 P.M., the resident's family member said:
-He/she brought clothes for the resident to wear.
-He/she brought some more clothing today for the resident.
-He/she was independent and lived in an apartment, but unfortunately the apartment had been lost due to the health circumstances of the resident and all belongings were lost.
-Before the resident fell and declined while living in the community, he/she was always dressed and had his/her hair done every week.
-The resident would want to be dressed every day.
-He/she felt this was a dignity issue to be in a hospital gown.
Observation on 4/7/21 at 10:53 A.M., showed:
-The resident was in bed dressed in a white flowered shirt.
-The resident had an incontinence brief on with his/her legs uncovered.
-The privacy curtain was slightly pulled in front of the door.
-The resident was visible from the hallway.
Observation on 4/7/21 at 12:11 P.M., showed:
-The resident was in bed dressed in a white flowered shirt.
-The resident had an incontinence brief on with his/her legs uncovered.
-The privacy curtain was slightly pulled in front of the door.
-The resident was visible from the hallway.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 8:51 A.M., Bath Aide (BA) A said:
-He/she dressed the resident after a shower unless the resident wanted a hospital gown.
-The resident should not be lying in bed with a hospital gown and incontinence brief visible to the hallway.
-This was undignified.
-All residents should be dressed in proper clothing.
-The Certified Nurses Assistants (CNAs) should monitor to make sure residents were dressed properly and the nurse should be following up and monitoring for these dignity issues.
Observation on 4/13/21 at 2:35 P.M., showed the resident:
-Was in his/her bed facing the hallway in a blue hospital gown and was not covered with his/her bare legs exposed.
-The resident was visible from the hallway.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:29 A.M., CNA A said:
-He/she normally would get the resident dressed depending on how the resident was feeling.
-He/she tried to encourage all residents to get up and get dressed.
-Sometimes, the resident did not want to be covered.
-He/she would provide a hospital gown if they did not want clothes on while in bed.
-If exposed and has an incontinence brief on, the CNA's should notice this when going down the hallway.
-This was a dignity issue.
-The resident could uncover himself/herself.
-CNAs were responsible for monitoring for dignity issues.
-The CNAs should close the resident's privacy curtain if the resident was hot and uncovered.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:36 A.M. Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) A (also acting as the charge nurse) said:
-It was a team effort to ensure the resident did not have dignity issues with clothing or incontinence briefs.
-If exposed, the staff should be monitoring to ensure the resident was in proper clothing and was not exposed lying in a brief.
-It was a resident right to choose what to wear.
-Some residents prefer to not put on clothes before getting up.
-If a resident did not have clothing, the facility could provide extra clothing to use.
-If the resident was cognitively impaired the staff should try to get them dressed for day.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:57 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A said:
-The CNAs should provide privacy and nurses should be aware also of dignity issues.
-The resident should not be left in an incontinence brief and hospital gown, exposed to the hallway.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 10:28 A.M., the Social Services Director (SSD) said:
-The residents should be dressed as they choose to be dressed.
-All staff were responsible for ensuring a resident was dressed and was not exposed to the hallway lying in a hospital gown and an incontinence brief.
-This was a dignity issue.
-All staff were responsible for monitoring for dignity.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:34 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON), ADON B, and Corporate Consultant A said:
-The staff should all be monitoring for dignity related to being left in an incontinence brief and a hospital gown.
-If a resident was cognitively impaired, getting dressed would be related to resident preference.
-Cognitively impaired residents can signal to us if they were happy or unhappy at that moment.
-The immediate staff should be checking for dignity related to being left in an incontinence brief and exposed to the hallway.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
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 an individualized plan and provide an activit...
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 an individualized plan and provide an activity program based on the resident's comprehensive assessments and activity preferences to meet the resident's interests and needs for one cognitively impaired sampled resident (Resident #9) and one cognitively intact sampled resident (Resident #72) out 22 sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
Record review of the facility's Activities Program policy revised 6/20/20 showed:
-The purpose was to encourage residents to participate in activities to make life more meaningful, to stimulate and support mental and physical capabilities to the fullest extent and to enable the resident to maintain the highest social, physical and emotional functioning.
-The facility provided an activity program designed to meet the needs, interests, and preferences of the residents.
-A variety of activities should be offered on a daily basis which included weekends and evenings.
-Activities were developed for individual, small group and large group participation.
Record review of the facility's activity calendar dated 1/2021 to 3/2021 showed the following activities: chaplain visits, daily room visits, music appreciation, in room puzzle activities, daily chronical paper (news events), bowling, corn hole, hall or lobby bingo, parties with snacks, games, live music, Friday at the movies, Saturday matinee movies, and holiday celebrations.
1. Record review of Resident #9's admission Record showed the resident was admitted on [DATE] and had the following diagnoses:
-Femur fracture (broken thigh bone).
-Need for assistance with personal care.
-Attention and concentration deficits.
-Cognitive communication deficits.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 12/29/20 showed the resident did not have an activity care plan.
Record review of the resident's Activity Attendance record for 1/2021 showed the resident:
-Was given daily chronicles (daily facts, quotes, famous birthdays downloadable from an activities website) on 1/12/21, 1/14/21 and 1/26/21.
-Did not have any other documented activities for the month.
Record review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool required to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 1/4/21 showed the resident:
-Was severely cognitively impaired.
-Needed the extensive assistance of staff for mobility in a wheelchair.
-Felt it was very important to keep up with the news, religious services, have magazines and books, keeping up with the news, be with groups of people, and to do his/her favorite activities.
-Felt it was somewhat important to be around animals and pets.
Record review of the resident's Activity assessment dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was fairly active in the past.
-The resident enjoyed going to church, exercise classes, television mysteries, cooking, and his/her dog.
-The resident identified himself/herself as one religious denomination.
-The resident wanted to participate in activities at the facility including one on one activities.
-Activities should be modified to accommodate cognitive deficits.
-It was very important for the resident to have books, newspapers, and magazines to read, to be around animals/pets, to keep up with the news, to be around groups of people, to participate in religious services, and to do his/her favorite activities.
-The information related to activities was obtained from his/her family member.
Record review of the resident's Activity Attendance record for 2/2021 showed the resident:
-Had a room visit 2/9/21, 2/10/21, 2/13/21, and 2/16/21 and the resident was only partially involved in the room visit.
-Did not have any other documented activities for the month.
Record review of the resident's Activity Attendance record for 3/2021 showed the resident:
-Had a room visit on 3/6/21 and the resident was only partially involved in the visit.
-Had a family visit on 3/31/21.
-Did not have any other documented activities for the month.
Observation on 4/5/21 at 12:15 P.M., showed:
-The resident was in his/her bed awake, facing the hallway in a dark room.
-There were no pictures or decorations on the wall, no television, and no radio in the room.
Observation on 4/6/21 at 8:25 A.M.,. showed:
-The resident was in his/her bed asleep, facing the hallway in a dark room.
-There were no pictures or decorations on the wall, no television, and no radio in the room.
Observation on 4/6/21 at 10:15 A.M. showed:
-The resident was in his/her bed asleep, facing the hallway in a dark room.
-There were no pictures or decorations on the wall, no television, and no radio in the room.
During an interview on 4/6/21 at 2:11 P.M., the resident's family member said:
-The resident had fallen and lived independently prior to this illness.
-The resident was very social and always liked to talk with others.
-The resident liked crafts, played pool, and was always helpful to others.
Observation on 4/6/21 at 2:45 P.M., showed:
-A bingo activity in the common area with twelve residents socially distanced at tables.
-The resident was in his/her wheelchair being assisted by staff from the therapy room.
-The staff member took the resident to his/her room walking right by the activity.
Observation on 4/7/21 at 10:53 A.M., showed:
-The resident was lying in bed, awake.
-The room was dark.
-There were no pictures or decorations on the wall, no television, and no radio in the room.
Observation on 4/7/21 at 12:11 P.M., showed:
-The resident was lying in bed, awake.
-The room was dark.
-There were no pictures or decorations on the wall, no television, and no radio in the room.
Observation on 4/9/21 at 8:12 A.M., showed:
-The resident was lying in bed, awake, in a dark room.
-A seek and find puzzle was on the resident's bedside table.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:29 A.M., Certified Nurses Assistant (CNA) A said:
-Activities staff would pass out puzzles and papers but the resident cannot cognitively do a puzzle.
-He/she believed there was only one activity person.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:57 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A said:
-The Activity Director (AD) went around daily and passed out word puzzles.
-The staff could sit the resident by the window to see outside.
-All residents should be getting one on one activities if the resident could not go to the activities.
-The AD should contact the family to obtain items like a radio or television for the residents if they did not have these items.
-The AD was responsible for ensuring activities were completed with the residents.
-He/she was unsure who monitored to ensure one on one activities were being completed for the residents.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 10:28 A.M., the Social Services Director (SSD) said:
-The AD was responsible for handling all the activities for the residents.
-He/she was unsure who monitored to ensure residents were participating in activities.
-The staff could give donated items like televisions and radios to residents who do not have these items.
-A cognitively impaired resident could use items like hand clappers to keep a beat (of music) and other items.
-These items could enhance the resident's quality of life.
-Room visits were done, but all staff should recognize the need for activities and identify a resident who had no stimulation in the room.
-Residents should not be left in a dark room all day with no stimulation.
-The resident cannot do word puzzles due to cognitive impairment.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 11:19 A.M., the AD said:
-Residents tend to like seek and finds and daily chronicles which were reading materials.
-Daily chronicles were downloaded from an activity website.
-These items were given to residents daily, seven days a week.
-He/she was a Chaplin also and tried to have a rapport with the residents.
-He/she had been by himself/herself and had no other staff assistance for activities.
-One on one activities were not done because he/she had no other help.
-He/she lost his/her assistant during the pandemic.
-The resident should have one-on-one activities at least two to three times per week.
-The resident wanted the seek and find word puzzle when he/she delivered it to the residents room, but he/she was not sure if the resident could do the seek and find.
-He/she had noticed his/her room was bare and the resident did not have a television, radio, and no items on the walls.
-The resident could use some pictures on the wall.
-He/she had not really thought about it, but should have thought about why the resident's room was bare.
-Maybe the resident needed more family involvement.
-He/she was responsible for auditing activities to ensure they were being completed and was aware the one-on-one activities were not being completed.
-He/she could not do it all alone.
-Other staff should help taking residents to activities when an activity was occurring.
-The resident was cognitively impaired and would benefit from being brought to group activities for the social interaction and stimulation.
Observation on 4/13/21 at 2:33 P.M., showed a bingo activity was being held in the common area.
Observation on 4/13/21 at 2:35 P.M. showed:
-The resident was lying in bed, awake, in a dark room.
-There were no pictures or decorations on the wall, no television, and no radio in the room.
2. Record review of Resident #72's Face Sheet showed he/she:
-Was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE].
-Was readmitted to the facility on [DATE].
-Had the following diagnoses:
--Acute (sudden occurrence) and chronic (ongoing) respiratory failure (a serious condition that develops when the lungs can't get enough oxygen into the blood) with hypoxia (condition in which tissues of the body do not receive sufficient oxygen).
--Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD - a progressive condition that cause airflow blockage and breathing-related problems).
--Schizophrenia (a serious mental disorder in which people interpret reality abnormally).
Record review of the resident's Activity Attendance records for 3/2021 showed:
-He/she was given Morning Chronicles on 3/6/21, 3/9/21, 3/11/21, 3/17/21, 3/18/21, 3/19/21, 3/25/21 and 3/27/21.
-He/she had music/phone activity on 3/11/21, 3/17/21, and 3/25/21.
-He/she had room visits on 3/2/21 and 3/9/21.
-He/she had no other documented activities for 3/2021.
Record review of the resident's admission MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-He/she was cognitively intact.
-It was somewhat important to the resident to do his/her favorite activities.
-He/she was dependent on extensive two person staff assistance for bed mobility, transfer dependent on staff for transfer (movement between surfaces).
-He/she was totally dependent on one staff person for locomotion (moving from one area to another area).
-He/she had no functional limitations in range of motion.
Record review of the resident's Activities Initial Review dated 3/15/21 showed:
-He/she used to do ceramics as a hobby.
-He/she liked cards, games, and conversation.
-He/she wished to have 1:1 visits with staff.
Record review of the resident's care plan dated 3/17/21 showed:
-He/she was at risk for psychosocial well-being and had little or no activity involvement related to his/her immobility and physical limitations.
-Activities staff was to provide in room activities of his/her choice.
Record review of the resident's Activities Attendance records for 4/1/2021 through 4/12/21 showed:
-He/she had Morning Chronicles on 4/5/21, 4/7/21, 4/8/21 4/10/21 and 4/12/21.
-He/she had music/phone activity on 4/7/21.
-He/she had no other documented activities for 4/2021.
Observation of the resident on 4/7/21 at 12:02 P.M., showed:
-The resident was lying in bed.
-He/she was alert and watching TV.
-He/she had no coloring books, colored pencils, or any other activity supplies in his/her room.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 12:42 P.M., Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) B said he/she thought the resident got frustrated and bored in his/her room.
Observation on 4/7/21 at 3:22 P.M., showed:
-The resident was laying in his/her bed asleep.
-He/she had no activity supplies in his/her room.
Observation of the resident on 4/10/21 at 7:03 P.M. and 7:16 P.M., showed:
-He/she was sleeping in his/her bed.
-His/her TV was on.
-There were no activity supplies in his/her room.
Observation of the resident on 4/13/21 at 10:15 A.M., showed:
-He/she was alert, lying in his/her bed with his/her TV on.
-He/she had no coloring books, colored pencils, or any other activity supplies in his/her room.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 10:15 A.M., the resident said:
-He/she liked to color with coloring books and colored pencils.
-He/she liked to do ceramics.
-He/she liked to watch TV.
-No one brought him/her anything to do in his/her room.
-He/she did not like to read.
-He/she would like for someone to visit him/her in his/her room.
-People just come in his/her room for a minute and then leave.
-He/she would like for someone to come in and stay with him/her for a while.
-Activities did not come to his/her room and visit him/her or bring him/her anything to do in his/her room.
-No one brought him/her a coloring book, pencils, or anything else to do with his/her hands.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 11:19 A.M. the AD said:
-He/she went to the resident's room everyday with the Daily Chronicles.
-He/she had asked the resident if he/she wanted art supplies.
-He/she needed to try art supplies with the resident again.
-He/she had not been able to do 1:1 activities with residents because of the pandemic.
-He/she lost his/her help (staff to assist with activities).
-He/she had to be very cautious with social distancing.
-For the past three months it had been worse regarding providing 1:1 activities for residents.
-Two or three staff had been recently hired.
Observation on 4/13/21 at 1:20 P.M., showed:
-The resident was alone and seated partially upright in a chair in his/her room.
-His/her room door was open and he/she was facing the hallway.
-His/her TV was out of his/her view.
-He/she had an anxious facial expression, called out with an anxious voice for help, and reached out to staff who were in the hall.
-ADON A and ADON B entered the resident's room and staff entered his/her room and spoke with the resident in a reassuring manner.
-There were no activity supplies in his/her room.
3. During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:34 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON), ADON B, and Corporate Consultant A said:
-Nursing and activities were all part of interdisciplinary team.
-Staff should assist with getting residents to activities.
-The AD was responsible for providing activities.
-The rest of the staff should be assisting.
-If a resident was cognitively impaired and stayed in his/her room more, activities should be provided based on his/her needs for activities.
-This should also be based off the activity assessment.
-The AD was responsible for completing the activity assessments.
-If the resident was social and religious, the resident should go to those activities if they would like to.
-The family should be contacted by the interdisciplinary team and SSD to identify needs like a radio, television, and/or activities for the resident.
-The amount of activities that were completed with the resident were based on their need for activities.
-Activity monitoring was done by the AD.
-If a resident was cognitively impaired and was given a seek and find word puzzle or something they cognitively could not do, the AD should sit with the resident and do the activity.
-The resident should be given items he/she was capable of doing.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #501's Discharge Order Summary from the sister facility dated 12/24/20 showed:
-BiPAP - with settin...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #501's Discharge Order Summary from the sister facility dated 12/24/20 showed:
-BiPAP - with settings for inspiratory pressure, expiratory pressure, oxygen concentration percentage to keep oxygen saturation equal to or greater than 90%, check as needed (PRN) at bedtime dated 12/18/20.
Record review of the resident's facility admission Record showed:
-The resident was admitted from a sister facility with the following diagnoses on 12/24/20:
--Hypertensive Heart disease with Heart Failure (high blood pressure it refers to a group of disorders that includes Congestive Heart Failure (CHF - the heart does not pump blood as well as it should).
---Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD - a disease process that decreases the ability of the lungs to perform ventilation).
---Chronic Atrial fibrillation (A-fib abnormal heart rhythm).
---Asthma (a respiratory disorder characterized by recurring episodes of shortness of breath, wheezing on expiration and/or inspiration caused by constriction of the bronchi, coughing, and thick secretions).
Record review of the resident's facility admission assessment admission data set dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was cognitively intact.
-Was not marked as the resident using a BiPAP.
Record review of the resident's admission MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was admitted on [DATE].
-Was cognitively intact, able to make his/her needs known and able to understand others.
-Used a BiPAP for respiratory treatment.
-Primary medical condition was debilitating Cardio-respiratory (heart and lungs) conditions.
-Heart/Circulation included A-fib and High Blood Pressure.
-Pulmonary included Asthma and COPD.
--Note: CHF was not marked as a diagnosis.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated December 2020 showed the resident did not have an order to use his/her BiPAP and the resident did not have a physician's order to discontinue the use of the BiPAP upon admission to the facility.
Record review of the resident's Physician and Nursing Progress Notes dated December 2020 showed:
-There was no admission note in the progress notes for the resident.
-No documentation the resident used a BiPAP, the BiPAP settings, or that the resident's BiPAP was discontinued upon admission to the facility.
-No documentation the resident had a BiPAP in his/her personal belongings upon admission to he facility.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated January 2021 showed the resident did not have an order to use his/her BiPAP and no documentation the resident's BiPAP was discontinued upon admission to the facility.
Record review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated January 2021 showed:
-The resident did not wear a BiPAP 31 opportunities out of 31 opportunities.
-No order for the resident to wear a BiPAP at night.
-No documentation the resident's BiPAP was discontinued upon admission to the facility.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan last reviewed on 1/8/21 admission date of 2/8/21 showed:
-Added 2/10/21, resident has altered respiratory status/difficulty breathing related to Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA - intermittent airflow blockage during sleep).
-Administer medication/puffers as ordered.
-Monitor for effectiveness and side effects.
-BiPAP settings titrated (is to adjust the range) pressure as ordered via nose mask.
-Elevate head of the bed to 30 degrees or per resident preference.
-Encourage sustained deep breaths by using demonstration (emphasizing slow inhalation, holding end inspiration for a few seconds, and passive exhalation).
-Using incentive spirometer (an instrument for measuring the air capacity of the lungs), place close for convenient resident use.
-Asking resident to yawn.
-Monitor/document changes in orientation, increased restlessness, anxiety and air hunger.
-Monitor for signs and symptoms of respiratory distress and report to physician as needed (increased respirations, decreased pulse oximetry, increased heart rate, restlessness, headaches, lethargy, confusion, cough accessory muscle usage and skin color changes to blue/grey).
-Oxygen setting via nasal prongs at 2-3 Liters (L) as needed as ordered.
Record review of the resident's Hospital Discharge Notes dated 2/8/21 showed:
-admission Diagnosis:
--Acute on chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia and hypercapnia (acute respiratory failure occurs when fluid builds up in the air sacs in your lungs. Chronic respiratory failure the airways that carry air to your lungs become narrow and damaged. Hypoxia is not enough oxygen in the blood. Hypercapnia is too much carbon dioxide in the blood).
--Acute on chronic CHF.
--Obstructive Sleep Apnea treated with BiPAP.
-Resident to continue use of BiPAP, this will be important for control of his/her CHF.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary dated February 2021 showed:
-New order for BiPAP at bed time, start 2/10/21.
--NOTE: The BiPAP order did not include setting parameters.
-Change tubing weekly on Wednesday every night shift every Wednesday, start 2/10/21.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated February 2021 showed:
-The resident wore the BiPAP three opportunities out of four opportunities.
-Resident discharged from the facility on 2/14/21.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 2:00 P.M. LPN C said:
-The admitting nurse would take off the orders and would set up any appointments.
-The Charge Nurse or ADON was responsible to ensure all orders were transcribed accurately upon admission to the facility.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:40 A.M., ADON B said:
-Nurses were responsible to make sure orders were transcribed and entered into the computer, including treatment orders and orders for respiratory equipment such as a BiPAP.
-The Charge Nurse or the nurse who admitted the resident was responsible to ensure all orders were transcribed accurately upon admission to the facility.
-He/She expected staff to notify the resident's physician if he/she noticed an order, such as the use of a BiPAP was not transcribed accurately to the resident's POS, MAR, and/or TAR.
-ADONs monitored the orders to ensure they were transcribed accurately by comparing the current orders with discharge and/or admission orders.
-He/she and other staff review MARS and TARS in morning meeting.
-He/she would notify the DON, physician and Nurse Practitioner if there was a missing or incorrect order
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:55 A.M., LPN A said:
-The charge nurse transcribed all orders for new admits and re-admits.
-He/she would put the orders into the computer.
-ADON would go in and would do an order audit the next day after he/she put the orders in the computer.
-He/she did not know who audited the MARS and TARS.
MO00183026
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure tracheostomy care was performed in a manner to reduce the potential for complications for one sample resident (Resident #72), when staff failed to ensure appropriate supplies were available for tracheostomy care, and failed to follow physician's orders and administer oxygen via a tracheostomy shield. As a result, the resident was without his/her correct size inner cannula (the inner trach tube that acts as a liner that can be removed and replaced to prevent the build-up of mucus inside the trach tube) for 59 minutes. The facility also failed to transcribe physician's orders for one closed record sampled resident (Resident #501) for the use of a Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP - a non-invasive ventilation with two pressures settings, one for inhalation and one for exhalation, to assist with breathing) out of 22 sampled residents and 16 closed records. The facility census was 95 residents.
Record review of the facility Tracheostomy Care policy, undated, showed:
-The purpose of the policy was to ensure airway patency (condition of being open/unobstructed) by keeping the tube free from mucous build-up and to maintain mucous membrane (tissues that line the respiratory passages) and skin integrity.
-Residents with a tracheostomy tube will have two emergency tracheostomy tubes at the bedside; one tracheostomy tube of the same size and one tracheostomy tube one size smaller than the current tracheostomy size.
-Supplies will be verified at the resident's bedside prior to performing tracheostomy care and will be placed on the Treatment Administration Record (TAR).
-The Director of Nursing (DON)/designee will be notified immediately of supplies needed by the licensed charge nurse.
--The tracheostomy policy did not address having a supply of tracheostomy inner cannula's at the resident's bedside or care instruction in the event of accidental extubation.
A policy for respiratory care and transcription was requested and not received at the time of exit.
1. Record review of Resident #72's Face Sheet showed he/she:
-Was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE].
-Was readmitted to the facility on [DATE].
-Had the following diagnoses:
--Acute and chronic respiratory failure (a serious condition that develops when the lungs can't get enough oxygen into the blood) with hypoxia (condition in which tissues of the body do not receive sufficient oxygen).
--Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD - a progressive condition that causes airflow blockage and breathing-related problems).
--Dependence on supplemental oxygen.
Record review of the residents Physician's Orders Sheet (POS) dated 3/1/21 showed the following orders:
-Suction trach as needed.
-Complete trach care every shift and as needed.
-Trach size #5.0 Shiley (flexible trach tube).
-Oxygen at five liters (L) per minute via trach shield continuously to maintain O2 saturation greater than 90% (the normal O2 saturation should be between 90 - 100%).
-O2 sat/pulse every shift and as needed.
Record review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 3/7/21 showed:
-He/she was cognitively intact.
-He/she received tracheostomy care and oxygen therapy (delivery of supplemental oxygen as a part of managing illness).
Record review of the resident's care plan dated 3/17/21 showed:
-He/she had a tracheostomy.
-He/she should be monitored for restlessness, agitation, confusion, increased heart rate and decreased heart rate.
-Suction as necessary.
-Tube out procedures: Keep extra trach tube and obturator (a device that fits inside and guides the trach tube when it is being inserted) at his/her bedside.
Observation of the resident's trach care and interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C, and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) B on 4/7/21 at 12:02 P.M. showed:
-He/she was laying in his/her bed, was alert and had humidified oxygen via nasal cannula at 5L and humidified air via his/her tracheostomy shield.
-ADON B said the resident's trach care was done each shift; the resident did well in clearing secretions and did not need to be suctioned a lot.
-LPN C joined ADON B for the resident's trach care.
-The resident had moist coughing.
-ADON B suctioned thick secretions from the resident's tracheostomy, and cleansed around the resident's tracheostomy.
-LPN C left the resident's room several times to get additional trach care supplies including additional sterile gloves and additional sterile water.
-ADON B removed the resident's inner cannula, attempted to replace the resident's inner cannula which was too large to fit into the resident's trach tube and said the trach inner cannula was too large for the resident's trach; he/she would need to get the correct size inner cannula.
-ADON B said he/she had not checked the size of the resident's inner cannula at his/her bedside prior to starting the resident's trach care; he/she had done the resident's trach care the previous day and the resident had an extra #5 size trach inner cannula; he/she thought the inner cannula at the resident's bedside was a #5; he/she had not looked at the inner cannula to verify the size was #5; the inner cannula at the resident's bedside that he/she opened was a #6 and was too large for the resident's #5 tracheostomy tube.
-ADON B asked LPN C to get a #5 Shiley inner cannula from the facility central supply.
-ADON B checked all the resident's trach supplies in the resident's room to ensure there was no #5 inner cannula in the resident's room.
-ADON B said there was no other #5 inner trach cannula at the resident's bedside and that there was no extra tracheostomy tube at the resident's bedside.
-ADON B monitored the resident with a pulse oximeter (pulse ox - a small electronic device that is placed on a finger and measures the oxygen saturation, also referred to as O2 sat)
- The resident's oxygen saturation varied from 97% to 100%.
-At 1:11 P.M. as LPN C had not returned to the resident's room, the surveyor went to the Administrator's office and said to the Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) that ADON B was in the resident's room doing trach care, had removed the resident's inner cannula, needed a #5 Shiley which LPN C had gone to look for, but had not returned to the resident's room; the DON then sent a text message to central supply staff regarding the resident needing a #5 Shiley.
-The surveyor returned to the resident's room and ADON B said the resident's O2 sats had been in the 70's; the resident's O2 sat was at 85% at that time and the resident showed no signs of changes in his/her breathing pattern and no changes in his/her color, or alertness.
-ADON B continued to monitor the resident, including continuous monitoring of his/her O2 sat, which varied from low 80's to 100%
-During this time the resident had an anxious and frustrated expression for several brief periods; he/she asked that the air conditioner be turned off, then back on and asked for another blanket - two extra blankets were provided to the resident.
-At 1:51 P.M. LPN C returned to the resident's room and said someone had gone to a sister facility to get a #5 Shiley.
-At 1:52 P.M. ADON A came to the hallway in front of the resident's room and spoke briefly with ADON B and then left the area.
-At 1:53 P.M. ADON B said he/she was going to central supply to see if staff missed something when trying to locate a #5 Shiley in central supply.
-At 1:53 P.M. ADON B returned to the resident's room and said he/she had not found a #5 Shiley in central supply.
-At 1:58 P.M. LPN C returned to the resident's room with a #5 Shiley.
-ADON B then placed the #5 Shiley inner cannula in the resident's trach tube.
-Very shortly after placement of the resident's inner cannula, he/she began having audible (able to be heard without listening with a stethoscope) wheezing (abnormal shrill whistle or coarse rattle that occurs when a person's airways are narrowed).
-The resident was alert and ADON B listened to the resident's lung sounds with a stethoscope; he/she said the wheezing was coming from the resident's lungs and he/she would contact the resident's physician to get a breathing treatment (medication delivered in mist to open airways).
-The resident's O2 sat was 81% and his/her eyes were closed; ADON B rubbed the resident's shoulder, told him/her to wake up; the resident opened his/her eyes and his/her oxygen sat varied from 82% to 87%.
-At 2:18 P.M., ADON A had come to the resident's room; ADON A and ADON B started the resident's breathing treatment.
-ADON A and ADON B said the resident gets 5L of humidified oxygen via nasal cannula and humidified air via trach shield.
-At 2:26 P.M., the resident's breathing treatment was completed; ADON B listened to the resident's lung sounds with his/her stethoscope and said the resident no longer had wheezing.
-The resident's O2 sat was 96% and he/she appeared to be sleeping.
Record review of the resident's Physician Progress Note (noted late entry) dated 4/7/20 at 1: 51 P.M. completed by the Nurse Practitioner showed:
-The resident was reported to have encountered a brief episode of decrease in O2 saturation during trach care, possibly due to sensor error from the pulse oximeter due to the resident's cold extremity.
-The resident's outer cannula was present at that time, hence his/her airway was patent and protected to avoid decompensation.
-The resident was reported to be alert and oriented with no signs or symptoms or loss of consciousness and distress at that time.
-The nursing staff continued to recheck the resident's O2 sat and lung sounds with no evidence of adventitious sounds or decreased O2 saturation.
-The resident has a chronic history of acute/chronic respiratory failure that necessitated tracheotomy.
Record review of the resident's Nursing Progress Note dated 4/7/21 at 2:45 P.M., showed:
-The resident was noted with wheezing in his/her right lung and decreased O2 sat during tracheostomy care.
-His/her tracheostomy care was completed successfully, he/she was repositioned and administered a breathing treatment via his/her tracheostomy.
-Assessment of his/her lungs during his/her breathing treatment showed improvement and following treatment they were noted clear.
-He/she showed no signs of distress following treatment.
-His/her O2 sat was noted at 93%.
-His/her physician was aware and gave no new orders.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 3:32 P.M. with the Administrator and the Central Supply Staff, the Central Supply Staff said:
-The inner cannulas for the resident were at the facility in central supply in boxes, but the boxes had not been opened prior to the resident's trach care on 4/7/21.
-On 4/7/21, central supply staff opened the boxes that the resident's inner cannulas could be in and had not yet found the resident's #5 Shiley inner cannulas.
-He/she would continue to unpack the boxes and find the resident's #5 Shiley inner cannulas.
-He/she would provide the purchase order for the #5 Shiley inner cannulas that were ordered on 3/31/21 and which had been delivered to the facility on 4/1/21.
Observation on 4/7/21 at 3:32 P.M. in central supply showed:
-Open shipping boxes identified by central supply staff as boxes that #5 Shiley's would have been delivered in were opened and some of the supplies in the boxes had an arrangement that gave the appearance the contents of the boxes had been gone through.
-Two unopened boxes of #6 Shiley tracheostomy inner cannulas.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 3:49 P.M., the DON said:
-There had been a trach care training in August 2020. The DON did not work at the facility at this time and did not know exactly what was covered in the training. He/She thought the training was a part of a mock survey conducted at the time.
-Licensed nurses should check supplies at the resident's bedside and ensure there is an inner cannula of the resident's correct size.
-Trach care supplies were kept in central supply.
-For a resident with a trach, there should be an extra trach tube, inner cannulas, and an AMBU bag at the resident's bedside.
-An O2 sat below 90% could cause a resident anxiety.
-For a low O2 sat, a licensed nurse could reposition the resident, have the resident cough and deep breathe, or give a breathing treatment.
During an interview and record review on 4/7/21 at 4:07 P.M., the Administrator said:
-The purchase order was for #5 Shiley inner cannulas.
-The purchase order showed the facility had ordered #5 Shiley trach supplies on 3/31/21.
During an interview on 4/7/21 at 4:21 P.M., MDS Coordinator A said:
-MDS Coordinator B asked him/her to go to a sister facility to get a #5 Shiley inner trach cannula for the resident.
-He/she went to the location of the sister facility and got a #5 Shiley inner trach cannula for the resident.
-Upon his/her return to the main facility entrance he/she saw LPN C; he/she knew LPN C was working with ADON B and gave the #5 Shiley inner cannula to LPN C.
-He/she did not know if there were #5 Shiley inner cannulas in the facility, he/she only knew he/she was asked to go to the sister facility to get the #5 Shiley.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 9:52 A.M., LPN C said:
-He/she was assessing the resident while doing trach care for the resident on 4/7/21.
-He/she wanted the surveyor to understand that he/she had noticed the resident's fingers were cold and the resident was gesturing with his/her hand on which the oximeter was being used.
-Knowing that cold fingers could be from poor circulation and poor positioning of the oximeter on the resident's finger, he/she switched the oximeter to another of the resident's fingers after which the resident's O2 sats were immediately higher.
-He/she did not believe the resident's O2 sat had really been in the in the 70's and as low as the reading of 67% he/she had observed on 4/7/21 during the resident's trach care, because the resident had no distress; his/her breathing pattern and color did not change and he/she stayed alert until later in the resident's care when he/she thought the resident got worn out from the duration of the trach care.
-The resident's O2 sat did continue to vary in the low 80's (82%) to the high 90's% after he/she used another of the resident's fingers for the oximeter. At one point he/she rubbed the resident to wake him/her up.
-The resident did perk up and he/she did think the resident's O2 sat of 88% that he/she then observed was an accurate reading.
-With the resident's comorbidities (simultaneous presence of two or more diseases or medical conditions in a resident), his/her O2 sats could vary and could be lower based on his/her position and when asleep.
-The resident was not in any danger during his/her tracheostomy care on 4/7/21.
-The resident's O2 sats did vary and he/she thought the variance was associated with the position of the oximeter on the resident's finger and the fact that the resident did doze off at times because he/she tires easily.
-He/she considered that an O2 sat of 90% needs to be addressed immediately.
-This had not been a normal circumstance with the resident.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 12:11 P.M. the resident's physician said:
-He/she expected facility licensed nurses to follow physician's orders to care for the resident.
-When he/she prescribes something, he/she expected it to be done.
Observation of the resident on 4/13/21 at 10:12 A.M. showed the resident was laying in his/her bed, was alert and had oxygen by nasal cannula at 5 L per minute.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 10:12 A.M., the resident said:
-He/she did remember having his/her inner cannula out for a while the week prior.
-He/she was not scared and was not frustrated when his/her inner cannula was out for a while and he/she was not cold.
During an interview on 4/29/21 at 7:16 P.M., the Medical Director said:
-He/She would have expected staff to ensure all supplies were at the bedside and available prior to starting trach care.
-It was not appropriate for staff to start trach care, not have all the supplies available, then have to go to another facility to obtain the supplies needed for the trach care.
-It was not appropriate to allow the resident to go for almost an hour between the start of trach care and the point in which staff had the missing supplies to complete the trach care.
-It was not appropriate for staff to allow the resident's oxygen saturation levels to decompensate to the degree in which it was reported the resident's oxygen saturation levels were observed, especially not for almost an hour as it could negatively impact the resident's health.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0712
(Tag F0712)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received required physician's visits with an alter...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received required physician's visits with an alternating personal visit in a rotation of the resident's physician and nurse practitioner for one sampled resident (Resident #61) out of 22 sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
Record review of the facility's Physician Services and Visits policy revised 8/2020 showed:
-The purpose was that the facility would provide residents with care under an attending physician.
-The physician must evaluate the resident at least every 60 days unless there was an alternate schedule or state specific requirement.
1. Record review of Resident #61's admission Record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had the following diagnoses:
-Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA, stroke).
-Hemiplegia/hemiparesis (paralysis/weakness affecting one side of the body)
-Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD-moderate kidney damage).
-Diabetes Mellitus (a complex disorder of carbohydrate, fat, and protein metabolism that is primarily a result of a deficiency or complete lack of insulin secretion in the pancreas or resistance to insulin)
-Muscle wasting.
-Cardiac arrhythmia (a group of conditions that cause the heart to beat irregular, too slowly, or too quickly).
-Congestive Heart Failure (CHF-disorder that impairs the ability of the heart to fill with or pump a sufficient amount of blood throughout the body).
Record review of the resident's Progress Note dated 8/25/20 showed the resident was seen and evaluated by the resident's nurse practitioner.
Record review of the resident's Progress Note dated 10/21/20 showed the resident was seen and evaluated by the resident's nurse practitioner.
Record review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool required to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 12/2/20 showed:
-The resident was cognitively intact.
-Required the extensive assistance of staff for bed mobility and dressing.
-Required the total assistance of staff for transfers.
-Was incontinent of bowel and bladder.
Record review of the resident's Progress Note dated 12/31/20 showed the resident was seen and evaluated by the resident's nurse practitioner.
Record review of the resident's Progress Note dated 2/15/21 showed the resident was seen and evaluated by the resident's nurse practitioner.
Record review of the resident's care plan dated 3/22/21 (re-admission date) showed the resident:
-Was at risk of cardiovascular complications related to a diagnosis of CHF and cardiac arrhythmias.
-Had Hypertension (HTN-high blood pressure) and received medications to treat the HTN.
-Had diabetes and needed staff monitoring for complications.
-Had hemiplegia and was at risk for falls.
During an interview on 4/5/21 at 9:30 A.M., the resident said:
-He/she had only been seen by the nurse practitioner.
-He/she had not been seen by his/her physician in a long time.
-He/she felt the physician should be seeing him/her also.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:36 A.M., Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) A (also acting as the charge nurse) said:
-The resident's physician and nurse practitioner were here often.
-He/she was not sure how often a resident was required to be seen by the physician and nurse practitioner.
-He/she was unsure who monitored to ensure the resident's physician and nurse practitioner were seeing the resident.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:57 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A said:
-The nurse practitioner and physician were here multiple times every week.
-He/she was unsure how often the residents were seen by the physician and/or the nurse practitioner.
-He/she was unsure who monitored to ensure physician visits and nurse practitioner visits were completed.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:34 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON), the ADON and Corporate Consultant A said:
-The residents were seen by the physician at the facility.
-The physician rounded weekly and the nurse practitioner was here at least three days per week.
-The physician completed a monthly progress note on the residents.
-They thought the physician was seeing the residents since he was in the building weekly.
-He/she was unsure of the physician visit regulation/requirements.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #78's Face Sheet showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was diagnosed with:...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #78's Face Sheet showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was diagnosed with:
-Dementia (a group of conditions characterized by impairment of at least two brain functions such as memory loss and judgment).
-Altered mental status (general changes in the brain function such as confusion, memory loss, disorientation, disruption of perception and behavior).
-Anxiety Disorder.
Record review of the resident's POS, dated March 4, 2021 through April 8, 2021, showed:
-Orders for Olanzapine 5 mg, twice daily starting 3/4/21 for mood stabilizer.
-Orders for Olanzapine 2.5 mg, daily in the afternoon starting 3/4/21 for mood stabilizer.
-Orders for Olanzapine 5 mg, two times daily starting 3/25/21 for schizoaffective disorder (a disorder with a combination of symptoms of schizophrenia (a long term disorder leading to faulty perception, false beliefs, and/or mental fragmentation), and mood disorder such as depression or bipolar disorder (a disorder associated with mood swings from depressive lows to manic highs).
-Orders for Olanzapine 2.5 mg, once daily in the afternoon starting 3/25/21 for schizoaffective disorder.
-Xanax 0.5 mg tablet. Give 1 mg every six hours as needed for anxiety starting 3/4/21. The Xanax order was not discontinued after the first 14 days and there was no stop date.
-The POS did not specify behaviors to monitor related to mood or anxiety.
Record review of the resident's March, 2021 MAR showed Xanax 0.5 mg tablet. Give 1 mg every six hours as needed for anxiety, starting 3/21/21.
Documentation showed the resident was given Alprazolam, 1 mg PRN on 3/21/21 at 10:03 P.M.
Record review of the resident's TAR, dated March, 2021 showed:
-For the medication Olanzapine there was no specific behaviors identified related to the resident's mood disorder or schizoaffective disorder for behavioral monitoring purposes.
-For the medication Xanax there were no target behaviors listed on the TAR related to the resident's anxiety in order to justify giving the antianxiety medication on a PRN basis.
-On 3/21/21 there was no documentation of the resident's specific behaviors requiring antianxiety medication.
Record review of the resident's Progress Notes, dated 3/4/21 through 3/31/21 showed:
-On 3/10/21, the resident was found in another resident's room in the other resident's bed with his/her hand suspended in the air. Nursing staff directed the resident to his/her own room. The resident could be easily redirected when offered an open hand and asked to come with the person redirecting him/her.
-On 3/11/21, a Physiatrist (Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation physicians who treat a variety of medical conditions affecting the brain, spinal cord, nerves, bones, muscles, joints, ligaments, and tendons) report showed the resident had progressively worsening agitation due to dementia. His/Her specific behaviors related to agitation were not explained.
-On 3/21/21, the resident was given 1 mg of Xanax at 10:03 P.M. for anxiety. There was no documentation by the nurse showing what specific behaviors the resident was displaying or what non-pharmacological interventions were attempted.
-A Pharmacy Progress Note dated 3/23/21 showed the resident's monthly Medication Record Review (MRR) showed:
--Please ensure daily side effect/target behavior monitoring is in place in order to evaluate continued appropriateness of Olanzapine and Xanax.
--The resident had an active order for PRN Xanax. If appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond 14 days, please ensure proper documentation exists in the resident's record and indicate the duration for the PRN order. Alternately, consider discontinuing the resident's PRN Xanax.
-A Pharmacy Progress Note, dated 3/25/21 showed the Nurse Practitioner (NP) declined to change the Xanax order. There was no explanation given related to why the NP declined the change and no stop date was indicated.
-A Physician Progress Note, dated 3/30/2, showed continue with current Xanax order. The note did not explain a rationale for continuing the medication or indicate a stop date.
Record review of the resident's admission MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was severely cognitively impaired.
-The resident had no behaviors associated with inattention, disorganization (incoherence) or altered level of consciousness (lethargy or vigilance (easily startled).
-The resident had none of the following behaviors:
--Physical (e.g. hitting, pushing, grabbing)
--Verbal (e.g. threatening others, screaming at others, cursing at others).
--Other behaviors (e.g. hitting or scratching self, rummaging, making disruptive sounds).
-The resident was diagnosed with Dementia and Anxiety.
-The resident took an antipsychotic medication six out of seven days on a routine basis and had no antianxiety medications within the past seven days.
Record review of the resident's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 3/18/21 showed:
-The resident's Wandering Care Plan showed the resident wandered into other resident rooms and got into other residents' beds with the intent of getting into his/her own bed related to his/her diagnosis of dementia. There was one intervention to redirect the resident to his/her own room.
-The resident's Increased Agitation Care Plan showed the resident had episodes of outbursts when others speak loudly. Interventions were for staff to provide redirection and to address the resident calmly. The care plan did not indicate if this behavior was related to anxiety or psychosis or had another cause.
-The resident's Antipsychotic Medication Care plan showed the resident should get medications as ordered and staff should monitor for side effects of the medication. The care plan did not show specific behaviors staff should monitor related to schizoaffective disorder.
-The resident's Antianxiety Medication Care Plan showed the resident had an anxiety disorder. Staff were to administer antianxiety medications as ordered and monitor for side effects. There was no documentation in the Antianxiety Care Plan of the specific targe behaviors displayed when the resident was anxious.
Record review of the resident's Behavioral Symptom monitoring check sheet for March, 2021 through 4/13/21 showed on 3/21/21 at 10:59 P.M.,the resident hit and/or kicked, pushed, grabbed, wandered, and used abusive language. Interventions to address behaviors were not identified.
Record review of the resident's Pharmacy Note to the Physician/Prescriber, dated 3/23/21 showed:
-The pharmacist note, dated 3/23/21 that the resident had an active order for Xanax. If appropriate for the order to be extended beyond 14 days, please ensure proper documentation exists in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration for the PRN order. Alternatively, consider discontinuing the resident's Xanax.
-The physician responded by disagreeing, indicating the resident required intermittent anxiolytics (antipsychotic medication) and dated it 3/24/21. The physician did not indicate a stop date for the medication.
Record review of the resident's MAR for 4/1/21 through 4/11/21 showed for the medication Olanzapine 2.5 mg, give one tablet by mouth in the afternoon starting 3/26/21. The space to document medication administration was left blank on 4/10/21. Documentation showed the resident received 10 out of 11 medication administration opportunities.
Record review of the resident's TAR for April, 2021 showed no specific behaviors nurses were to monitor for related to the use of Olanzapine or Xanax.
Record review of the resident's Progress Notes, dated 4/1/21 through 4/8/21 showed
-A Physician Progress Note, dated 4/1/21 showed increased anxiety/anxiety disorder. Continue with the current Xanax order. No stop date was indicated
-A Physician Progress Note, dated 4/8/21 showed staff reported the resident wandered frequently and would become confused, requiring frequent redirection. Continue with redirection as needed by staff. Xanax order at this time.
Observations throughout the survey on 4/5/21 through 4/8/21 and 4/11/21 through 4/13/21 showed the resident wandered through the hallway and in and out of the television room. While in the dining room he/she would often stand over the trash can and touch the trash can. He/She was observed to go into another resident's room on 4/7/21 at 12:30 P.M. Staff asked the resident to exit the room and staff walked with the resident out of the room. The resident remained calm.
During an interview on 4/5/21 at 10:16 A.M., Certified Medication Technician (CMT) A said the resident had behaviors of going into other resident rooms and messing with their trash cans. He/She also messed with the trash cans in the dining room.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 12:41 P.M., CMT A said:
-When the resident first came to the facility, he/she was agitated and wandered in and out of other resident rooms. They recently put signs on the bedroom doors of other residents and put the resident's name and a sign on his/her bedroom door that says go which has helped the resident stay out of other residents' room. He/She had been redirected to his/her room on 4/13/21 and shown his/her name and the word go.
-He/She thought the resident showed anxiety when his/her wandering increased. At those times the resident would pick up other residents' belongings, look in other residents' rooms, and hold onto other residents' belongings. Staff must ease the items away from the resident.
-Staff could redirect the resident by keeping him/her more occupied. Activities the resident would engage in were an activity board, watching television for short periods of time, or engaging in activities the Activity Director would bring.
-The nurse gave the PRN antianxiety medications and documented the resident's exact behaviors at the time he/she was agitated.
-He/She wasn't told if the resident had behaviors related to schizoaffective disorders and hadn't been told how to address any of the resident's specific behaviors.
During an interview on 4/13/21 at 2:31 P.M., ADON B said:
-The resident was severely cognitively impaired and wandered in and out of other residents' rooms. The stop signs have helped the resident significantly if other residents keep their door closed.
-If behaviors were not indicated on the TAR, the charge nurse should document them in the nurses' notes. The nurses did not use behavior monitoring sheets.
-The nurse taking down the initial antianxiety medication order should make sure the order was written initially for 14 days and report to the ADON if the medication goes beyond 14 days. If the medication was continued, the charge nurse needed to ensure there was a stop date.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 12:07 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B said:
-Nurses were not monitoring specific resident behaviors on the TAR. There was no area to document behaviors on the TAR. Charge nurses document behaviors in the resident's nurses' notes. There were no behavior monitoring sheets.
-The resident wandered related to dementia.
-Nurses were not documenting specific behaviors related to the medication Olanzapine.
-He/She was not sure of the resident's target behaviors related to anxiety.
-Antianxiety medications should be initially limited to 14 days. He/She was never educated about that at the facility, but had been educated at another facility that psychotropic medications are initially limited to 14 days. The physician should evaluate the appropriateness of continuing the antianxiety medication beyond the 14 days. If the physician continues the antianxiety medication beyond the 14 days he/she needs to indicate a stop date.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:35 P.M., the ADON, DON, and Corporate Nurse Consultant said:
-The CNAs did the Behavioral Symptoms checklist.
-If the nurses were giving a PRN antianxiety medication they can either document the resident's behaviors in the nurses progress notes or document the behaviors on the TAR.
-Nurses should document the behavior they were observing when giving a PRN antianxiety medication.
-Antipsychotic medication should have target behaviors on the TAR. Licensed staff should document target behaviors on the TAR.
-Specific signs and symptoms of anxiety were listed on the resident's TAR. Residents taking antianxiety medications should have target behaviors. When a nurse gave a PRN antianxiety medication, the non-pharmacological interventions should be documented in the progress notes.
-If a behavior was not quantified, the physician would not know when to reduce a medication. If the resident had any behaviors, they should be documented in the progress notes.
-Initial psychotropic medications should be written for 14 days. The physician should assess the resident's behavioral or psychosocial needs. If a PRN antianxiety medication was continued, the physician should indicate a stop date.
-Charge nurses have been educated on the psychotropic medication policy.
-There was nothing in their current electronic charting system that triggered when the 14 days was up. Nurses should monitor for that. Once the order was updated, the system discontinued the previous order.
-If the pharmacist made recommendations to the physician, the ADON and DON would get copies. The ADON or DON would present the recommendations to the physician and he/she would respond. We (the DON and ADON) would give the signed orders to the charge nurses.
-The Primary Care Physician was usually at the facility two to three times a week and should follow up with pharmacy recommendations within less than a week's time.
-Target behaviors should be on the care plan for any resident taking psychotropic medications, including residents taking psychotropic medications for anxiety, mood disorders, and schizoaffective disorders.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medication regime was free of psychoactive medications without adequate indications, and to ensure behaviors were identified for each psychotropic (a drug that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior) medication used to address the resident's psychosocial needs, for use for one sampled resident (Resident #68), failed to ensure a Pro Re Nata (PRN - as needed) antianxiety (a drug that is used to prevent and treat anxiety (an emotion characterized by feelings of tension and worry) medication was limited to a 14 day duration or to indicate a specific duration if the medication was extended beyond that time period, and to ensure nurses documented specific behaviors and non-pharmacological interventions used prior to using a PRN antianxiety medication for one sampled resident (Resident #78) out of 22 sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
Record review of the facility Psychotherapeutic Drug Management policy, undated showed:
-The purpose of the policy was to:
--Implement the most desirable and effective interventions to change, modify, decrease, or eliminate behaviors that are distressing to the resident, and/or eliminate behaviors that are distressing to the resident, and/or are decreasing or negatively impacting the resident's quality of life.
--To promote or maintain the resident's highest practicable mental, physical, and psychosocial well-being, promote resident safety and security, and to enhance the resident's ability to interact positively with his/her environment.
--To ensure the resident receives only those medications, in doses and for the duration clinically indicated to treat the resident's assessed condition(s).
--To ensure non-pharmacological interventions are considered and used when indicated, instead of, or in addition to, medications.
--To ensure clinically significant adverse-consequences are minimized.
-The facility will make every effort to comply with State and Federal regulations related to the use of psychopharmacological (drugs that affect brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior) medications in the long-term care facility to include regular review for continued need, appropriate dosage, side effects, risks and/or benefits.
-The medication order will include the indications and manifestations of the disorder treated i.e. auditory hallucinations, hitting others, refusing to eat, etc.
-Licensed nurses will:
--Monitor drug use daily for drug effects.
--Monitor the presence of target behaviors on a daily basis charting by exception (i.e., charting only when the behaviors are present).
--Will include in the weekly nursing summary an assessment of the psychotherapeutic drugs administered including: manifestations (symptoms), side effects and an assessment of the resident's progress with behaviors.
-The consulting pharmacist will report any irregularities such as inadequate indications for use to the Facility's Medical Director, Director of Nursing (DON) and the Attending Physician.
Record review of the facility's Psychotherapeutic Drug Management policy, dated 6/2020 showed:
-Psychotropic medications are drugs that affect brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior.
-Behavioral interventions are individualized. Non-pharmacological approaches should be directed toward understanding, preventing, relieving and/or accommodating a resident's distress or loss of abilities as well as maintaining or improving the resident's mental, physical, or psychosocial well-being.
-The attending medical practitioner will write a progress note describing the behaviors and the reason for ordering the psychotherapeutic drug.
-The attending physician will respond to any irregularities reported by the pharmacist by reviewing and documenting in the resident's medical record that the irregularity had been reviewed, and what action had been taken to address it.
-Resident should not receive psychotropic drugs pursuant to a PRN order unless that medication is necessary to treat a diagnosed specific condition that is documented in the clinical record.
-PRN orders for psychotropic drugs are limited to 14 days. If the attending physician or prescribing practitioner believes that it is appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond 14 days, he or she should document their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration of the PRN order.
-Nursing will be responsible for monitoring the presence of target behaviors on a daily basis, charting by exception (charting only when behaviors are present).
-The consulting Pharmacist will report any irregularities such as unnecessary drugs, including but not limited to excessive dosage, excessive duration, inadequate monitoring, inadequate indications for use or adverse consequences of use to the facility's Medical Director, DON, and Attending Physician within three business days of review.
-The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) will be responsible for the care plan, which will emphasize a person-centered approach and have interventions with measurable goals, timetables and specific interventions for the management of behavioral and psychological symptoms.
-The resident's Care Plan will include the reasons for the drug and describe the behaviors the drug was prescribed to treat. The care plan will include the problem/symptoms the resident is experiencing, goals for the resident, a note describing the side effects of the drug, non-pharmacological interventions to help the resident cope with the problem such as a quiet environment, comfort items, and supportive visits by staff.
Record review of the facility's Behavior Management policy, dated 6/2020 showed when a resident displays adverse behavioral problems (such as crying, hitting, yelling, biting), Licensed Nursing Staff will assess the behavioral symptoms to determine possible causal factors, contact the Attending Physician, and implement non-drug interventions to alleviate the behavioral symptoms before initiating any psychotherapeutic agents.
1. Record review of Resident #68's Face Sheet showed:
-He/she was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE].
He/she was readmitted to the facility on [DATE].
-He/she had a diagnosis of schizophrenia (a chronic mental illness that interferes with a person's ability to think clearly, to distinguish reality from fantasy, to manage emotions, make decisions, and relate to others).
Record review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool required to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 3/5/21, showed he/she:
-Was cognitively intact.
-Had no hallucinations (an experience of seeing, hearing or smelling something that does not exist).
-Had no delusions (fixed beliefs that are false).
-Had physical behaviors directed at others.
-Had verbal behaviors directed at others.
-Had other behavioral symptoms directed at others.
Record review of the resident's Pharmacy Progress Note dated 3/23/21 showed to ensure daily side effect/target behavior monitoring is in place in order to evaluate the continued appropriateness of Depakote and Remeron.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Orders Sheet (POS) showed the following medication orders dated 4/9/21:
-Remeron (antidepressant medication) 45 milligrams (mg) at bedtime for depression.
-Zyprexa (Olanzapine- antipsychotic medication) 5 mg twice daily for schizophrenia.
-Alprazolam (Xanax - antianxiety medication) 0.5 mg every six hours daily hold for sedation; the order did not include a diagnosis/indication for use.
-Depakote (anticonvulsant medication that can be given to stabilize mood) 250 mg delayed release, three times daily for mood stabilizer.
Record review of the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR), dated March, 2021 showed:
-No behavior monitoring related to the resident's psychoactive medications of Depakote, Remeron, and Xanax.
-For the medication Olanzapine there was no specific behaviors identified related to the resident's mood disorder or schizoaffective disorder for behavioral monitoring purposes.
Record review of the resident's TAR for April, 2021 showed no behavioral monitoring related to his/her psychoactive medications.
Observation and interview on 4/5/21 at 10:34 A.M., showed the resident:
-Was lying on his/her bed in his/her room.
-He/she was repeatedly calling out with a loud anxious tone for someone to come to his/her room.
-Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) C came from the nurse's station to the resident's room at the far end of the hall and said the resident was very anxious and wanted staff to stay with him/her all the time.
-CNA C entered the resident's room, spoke with him/her briefly and then returned to the nurse's station.
-A short time later the resident again began calling out with a loud anxious tone for someone to come to his/he room.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 12:27 P.M., Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) A said:
-He/She also worked as a charge nurse for the unit.
-The facility did behavior monitoring regarding psychoactive medications.
-He/she looked in the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) and said he/she did not see any behavioral monitoring regarding the resident.
-He/She did not know why staff did not document behaviors for this resident.
-Licensed nurses could have initiated behavior monitoring for the resident.
-The resident had behaviors; he/she used his/her call light a lot and he/she was loud and anxious.
-The CNAs mark boxes in the resident's EMR regarding the resident's behaviors.
-There was nothing on the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) or TAR for licensed nurses to document the resident's behaviors related to his/her antipsychotic medications.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 3:03 P.M. with the DON, ADON B, and the corporate nurse, ADON B said:
-He/she would expect behavior monitoring on resident's TARs for all psychoactive medications (any medication that affects the way a person thinks or feels).
-Licensed nurse monitoring for psychoactive medications is documented on the TAR - all treatments and medications given by licensed nurses are documented on the TAR.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
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 obtain physician's orders for an electronic cardiac de...
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 obtain physician's orders for an electronic cardiac device for two sampled residents (Resident #61 and #69), and failed to accurately and consistently document the resident's vital signs (temperature, pulse rate, respiration rate, and blood pressure), right and left lung sounds, and respiratory status (e.g. shortness of breath or even respirations) for the resident's COVID (a new disease caused by a novel (new) coronavirus) respiratory assessments and to consistently document symptoms of COVID on the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR). The facility also failed to document administration of medications on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for one sampled resident (Resident #77), out of 22 sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
Record review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Interim Infection and Control Recommendations for Healthcare Personnel During the Coronavirus, 2019 Pandemic, dated 2/23/21 showed:
-Re-evaluate admitted patients and residents for signs and symptoms of COVID.
-Screening for fever and symptoms should be incorporated into daily assessments of all admitted patients/residents.
The facility's Respiratory Assessment protocol was requested but was not provided.
1. Record review of Resident #61's admission Record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had the following diagnoses:
-Cardiac arrhythmia (a group of conditions that cause the heart to beat irregular, too slowly, or too quickly).
-Congestive Heart Failure (CHF-disorder that impairs the ability of the heart to fill with or pump a sufficient amount of blood throughout the body).
-Presence of a cardiac pacemaker (an electrical device, often implanted, that maintains a normal heart rhythm by stimulating the heart muscle).
Record review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool required to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 12/2/20 showed:
-The resident was cognitively intact.
-The resident had a diagnosis of CHF.
Record review of the resident's hospital History and Physical dated 3/20/21 showed the resident had a pacemaker.
Record review of the resident's care plan dated 3/22/21 (re-admission date) showed the resident:
-Was at risk of cardiovascular complications related to a diagnosis of CHF and cardiac arrhythmias.
-Had hypertension (HTN-high blood pressure) and received medications to treat the HTN.
-Had a pacemaker.
--The staff were to follow the physician's orders related to the pacemaker.
--The staff were to document the pacemaker checks including heart rate, heart rhythm, and battery check in the resident's medical record.
--The staff were to monitor vital signs as ordered by the physician and report to the physician any significant abnormalities.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report print date 4/7/21 with current physician orders showed:
-There were no physician's orders for a cardiac pacemaker.
-The resident had a diagnosis of presence of cardiac pacemaker.
4. Record review of Resident #77's Face Sheet showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of:
-Cerebellar ataxia (inability to coordinate balance, gait and extremities due to disease or injury of the brain).
-Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type (a disorder characterized by some symptoms of schizophrenia, such as having beliefs or perceptions that do not coincide with reality, and symptoms of bipolar, such as mood swings from manic highs to depressive lows).
-Hypertension.
Record review of the resident's respiratory assessment documentation for the months of December, 2020 through March, 2021 showed:
-The resident had 11 out of 31 respiratory assessments in December 2020.
-The resident had 13 out of 31 respiratory assessments in January, 2021.
-The resident had eight out of 28 respiratory assessments in February, 2021.
-The resident had 14 out of 31 respiratory assessments in March, 2021.
-Respiratory assessments were completed on the evening/night shift between 7:41 P.M. to 5:52 A.M.
-Forty-six out of a possible 121 daily respiratory assessments were completed and showed all 46 were identical. All showed the following:
--Body temperature of 97.9 degrees Fahrenheit (F) (normal body temperature is 98.6 degrees F).
--Pulse at 87 beats per minute (normal pulse is between 60 - 100 beats per minute)
--Respirations at 18 per minute (normal respirations is between 16- 20 breaths per minute).
--Blood pressure at 116/72 (normal blood pressure is between 100 -120/60 - 80).
--Right and left lung sounds were clear.
--The resident's respiratory status was even respirations.
Record review of the resident's Physician order sheet, dated March, 2021 showed the resident was on the following medications:
-Tamsulosin HCI 0.4 milligrams (mg) in the evening for urinary retention starting 9/25/21.
-Divalproex Sodium Delayed Release (DR) 500 mg. Give two tablets two times daily for mood stabilizer starting 9/25/21.
-Risperdal tablet 0.5 mg. Give one tablet two times daily related to Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type starting 10/6/21.
-Metoprolol Succinate Extended Release (ER) 24 hour 50 mg one time daily for Hypertension. Parameters: Hold for systolic blood pressure (SBP - top number) less than 110 and diastolic blood pressure (DPB - bottom number) less than 60 (normal blood pressures are less than 120/80 millimeter of mercury (mm Hg) or the heart rate (HR) is less than 60 (normal heart rate is 60 to 100 beats per minute(BPM) starting 9/26/20.
-Protonix Packet 40 mg. Give 40 mg by mouth one time daily for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) starting 9/25/20.
-Potassium Chloride ER 20 milliequivalent (MEQ). Give one tablet two times daily for supplement starting 9/25/21.
-Sertraline HCI. Give 25 mg one time daily for depression starting 2/23/21.
-Folic Acid 1 milligram (mg) one time daily for supplement staring 9/24/20.
-Thiamine HCI 100 mg one time daily for supplement starting 9/24/20.
-Antidepressants: Monitor for side effects every shift starting 9/25/20.
-Mechanical lift every shift for transfer starting 1/15/21.
-Monitor pain every shift for pain starting 9/24/20.
-Offer hour of sleep (HS) snacks at bedtime. Document A=Accept and R=Refuse starting 9/24/20.
Record review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated March, 2021 showed medication administration documentation spaces were blank for the following medications:
-Tamsulosin HCI 0.4 milligrams (mg) in the evening for urinary retention starting 9/25/21 showed the medication was given at 5:30 P.M. Medication administration documentation spaces were left blank four out of 31 medication administration opportunities.
-Divalproex Sodium Delayed Release (DR) 500 mg. Give two tablets two times daily equal to 1000 mg twice daily for mood stabilizer starting 9/25/21. Medication administration documentation spaces were left blank five out of 62 medication administration opportunities.
-Risperdal tablet 0.5 mg. Give one tablet two times daily related to Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type starting 10/6/21. Documentation showed blank spaces five out of 62 medication administration opportunities.
-Metoprolol Succinate Extended Release (ER) 24 hour 50 mg one time daily for Hypertension. Parameters: Hold for SBP less than 110, DBP less than 60 or HR less than 60. Start date of 9/26/20. The documentation space was left blank for one out of 31 medication administration opportunities on 3/18/21. There was no documentation on 3/18/21 of the resident's blood pressure or heart rate.
-Protonix Packet 40 mg. Give 40 mg by mouth one time daily for GERD starting 9/25/20. A documentation space was left for one out of 31 medication administration opportunities.
-Potassium Chloride ER 20 MEQ. Give one tablet two times daily for supplement starting 9/25/21. Documentation showed blank spaces for five out of 62 medication administration opportunities.
-Sertraline HCI. Give 25 mg one time daily for depression starting 2/24/21. A documentation space was left blank for one out of 31 medication administration opportunities.
-Folic Acid 1 milligram (mg) one time daily for supplement staring 9/25/20. A documentation space was left blank for one out of 31 medication administration opportunities.
-Thiamine HCI 100 mg one time daily for supplement starting 9/25/20. A documentation space was left blank for one out of 31 documentation administration spaces.
-Offer hour of sleep (HS) snacks at bedtime. Document A=Accept and R=Refuse starting 9/25/20. Documentation showed the resident received HS snacks 22 out of 31 opportunities. Documentation was missing for nine out of 31 opportunities for HS snacks. No key codes were used to explain why the resident had not received his/her evening snack.
Record review of the resident's TAR, dated 3/2021 showed:
-Every shift to monitor for symptoms associated with COVID, including cough, fever, headache, congestion, runny nose, muscle or body aches, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing, sore throat, or loss of sense of taste or smell. If symptoms are present follow up in a progress note. If any symptoms are present check yes and document in the nurses' note.
-Symptoms of COVID-19 monitoring was documented on the TAR 56 out of 93 opportunities.
-Monitor pain every shift for pain starting 9/25/20. Documentation showed blank spaces for 36 out of 93 pain monitoring opportunities. Pain was monitored 57 out of 93 opportunity times.
Record review of the resident's nurses' notes for the month of March, 2021 showed no documentation why MARs or TARs were left blank for any of the resident's medications, treatments and HS snack. There was no documentation showing whether or not the resident received his/her medications, treatments and HS snack at medication and treatment administrations times.
During an interview on 4/6/21 at 11:01 A.M., the resident's family contact said:
-The resident requested he/she be given copies of the resident's records. There were blanks on some of the resident's TARs and Medication Administration Records (MAR).
-The resident's respiratory assessments were not consistently being done or done accurately as each one of them was identical. He/She knew someone in the medical field who told him/her they couldn't be right.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 12:07 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B said:
-The nurses were supposed to complete the respiratory assessment documentation for each resident every 12 hours and the COVID screenings were supposed to be done every eight hours on the TAR.
-The respiratory assessments were not getting done.
-Certified Nurse Assistants (CNAs) were supposed to get vital signs. Apparently nobody told the CNAs they were supposed to be doing them. The CNA was supposed to give the nurse the data. The nurse was responsible for ensuring CNAs knew their responsibilities and for putting the information on the respiratory assessment.
-The CNAs were not getting the resident's vital sign information to the nurses for the respiratory assessments. It was the charge nurses responsibility to see that it was done.
-He/She did not believe the resident's respiratory assessments were accurate because nobody's vital signs and blood pressure were exactly the same every day.
-He/She did not know if anyone was auditing the respiratory assessments or COVID symptom documentation.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:35 P.M. the ADON, the DON, and the Corporate Nurse Consultant said:
-Nurses were educated on doing respiratory assessments. The ADON and DON were responsible for making sure they were done. They couldn't say they had ever seen anyone with the exact same temperature or blood pressure throughout the day. If vital signs were the same each time on the respiratory assessment, the ADON should follow up on that.
-When there were holes in the MARs or TARs the electronic charting system would get flagged. The charge nurse, ADON or DON could all see the blanks. If there were blanks, the ADON should follow up with the charge nurse.
MO00181061
2. Record review of Resident #69's Face Sheet showed he/she:
-Was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE].
-Had the following diagnoses:
--Presence of cardiac pacemaker.
--Presence of automatic cardiac defibrillator (small electronic device that is surgically placed into the chest to monitor and correct serious and life-threatening abnormal heart rhythms by sending an electrical shock to the heart).
Record review of the resident's admission MDS dated [DATE] showed he/she was cognitively intact.
Observation of the resident with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) A on 4/14/21 at 11:25 A.M., showed the resident had an electronic cardiac device implanted in his/her upper left chest.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 11:40 A.M., ADON A said:
-The resident said he/she had had a pacemaker check completed recently.
-Pacemaker check orders are put on the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR).
-The resident had no physician's order and no information on his/her POS or TAR regarding his/her pacemaker.
-The resident had seen his/her cardiologist frequently; he/she had pacemaker checks outside the facility.
-He/she should have had physician's orders for his/her pacemaker.
-He/she would ask the resident's physician if he/she was going to give the facility an order for the resident's pacemaker.
Record review of the resident's POS printed on 4/14/21, showed no physician's order for the resident's pacemaker and automatic implantable cardiac defibrillator.
3. During an interview on 4/13/21 at 9:36 A.M., ADON A (also acting as the charge nurse) said:
-Nurses were responsible for ensuring the physician's orders for a residents' pacemaker were obtained upon admission.
-The type of physician's orders depended on the type of pacemaker the resident had.
-The ADONs were responsible for reviewing the physician's orders the next day after the admission.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:34 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON), ADON B, and Corporate Consultant A said:
-The facility did not have a policy on pacemakers.
-The facility followed physician orders or manufacturers guidelines related to pacemakers.
-He/she expected the resident to have a physician's order for the pacemaker.
-He/she expected the physician's order to contain the cardiology group and how often pacemaker checks should be completed.
-The nurses were responsible for obtaining physician's orders for the resident's pacemaker.
-All new admissions were reviewed during stand up meetings by the ADON, DON, and Administrator.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0697
(Tag F0697)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review of Resident #23's admission Record showed he/she admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnose...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review of Resident #23's admission Record showed he/she admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses:
-Personal history of traumatic brain injury (TBI a disruption in the normal function of the brain that can be caused by a bump, blow, or jolt to the head, or penetrating head injury)
-Quadriplegia, unspecified.
-Chronic pain syndrome (long-term pain which can include depression and anxiety which interfere with daily life).
-Pain in unspecified joint.
-Pain in left elbow.
-Pain in right elbow.
-Pain in right hip.
-Pain in left shoulder.
-Pain in unspecified joint.
-Immobility syndrome (the result of lack of movement which can include stiff joints and chronic pain).
-Contracture (tissue tightening or shortening, which can cause pain and loss of movement in a joint), of left elbow.
-Contracture, left wrist.
-Contracture, left hand.
-Contracture of muscle, other site.
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated 4/6/21 showed he/she had the following orders for pain management:
-Morphine Sulfate ER (a narcotic medication used to treat moderate to severe pain) Tablet Extended Release 15 mg, 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for chronic pain.
-Norco Tablet 10-325 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for pain related to chronic pain syndrome.
-Tylenol Tablet (Acetaminophen - an over-the-counter, non-narcotic pain medication used to treat mild to moderate pain) Give 650 mg by mouth every four hours as needed for mild pain/temperature greater than 100.0, not to exceed 3 gram (gm) acetaminophen within all medications/24 hours.
-Gabapentin Capsule (a medication used to treat nerve pain) 300 mg, give 1 capsule by mouth three times a day related to chronic pain syndrome.
-Baclofen Tablet (a medication that relaxes skeletal muscles) 10 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for spasms.
-Monitor pain level every shift, for monitoring level of comfort. If new or change in pain, complete pain evaluation.
-There was no order to hold pain medication if resident is asleep.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan, last reviewed on 1/22/21 showed:
-He/she was at risk for pain related to history of traumatic brain injury, limited mobility, history of stroke, contractures and muscle spasms.
-The goals were for adequate relief of pain or have the ability to cope with incompletely relieved pain.
-Interventions include administering medications as ordered, evaluating the effectiveness of pain interventions, and anticipating the need for pain relief.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 2/1/21 through 2/28/21 showed:
-Norco 10/325 mg was not documented as given two times.
-Morphine Sulfate ER 15 mg was not documented as given one time.
-Gabapentin Capsule 300 mg was not documented as given four times.
-Baclofen Tablet 10 mg was not documented as given three times.
-The pain assessment was not documented five times on the day shift and two times on the night shift.
-No documentation of a reason why the medications were not given as ordered and why pain assessments were not completed.
Record review of resident's MAR dated 3/1/21 through 3/31/21 showed:
-Norco 10-325 mg was not documented as given two times.
-Morphine Sulfate ER 15 mg was not documented as given four times.
-Baclofen 10 mg was not documented as given one time.
-Gabapentin 300 mg was not documented as given one time.
-The pain assessment was not documented as being done two times on the day shift, four times on the evening shift, and four times on the night shift.
-No documentation of a reason why the medications were not given as ordered and why pain assessments were not completed.
Record review of Resident's MAR dated 4/1/21 through 4/11/21 showed:
-Morphine Sulfate ER 15 mg was not documented as given three times.
-Norco 10-325 mg was not documented as given one time.
Baclofen 10 mg was not documented as given one time.
-Gabapentin 300 mg was not documented as given one time.
-The pain assessment was not documented as being done two times on the evening shift, and three times on the night shift.
-No documentation of a reason why the medications were not given as ordered and why pain assessments were not completed.
During an interview on 4/05/21 at 2:53 PM, the resident said the charge nurse told him/her his/her pain medicine had been discontinued. He/she was not able to identify the nurse.
4. During an interview on 4/13/21 at 2:27 P.M. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A said:
-If a resident had scheduled pain medication, the nurse was responsible for documenting the administration of the pain medication on the MAR and signing it off on the narcotic count sheet (Controlled Medication Utilization Record).
-This was the same for any as needed pain medications.
-The nurses were responsible for completing pain assessments on each resident on each shift using a 1-10 pain scale.
-The Controlled Medication Utilization Record should match the residents' MAR.
-If a pain medication was not documented on the residents' MAR as given, an alert would come up on the electronic medical record alerting the nurse.
-The nurse was responsible for ensuring the documentation was completed.
-He/she was unsure if the administration of medication was being monitored and who would be responsible for the monitoring.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 11:13 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) said:
-Gaps on the MAR could mean the resident refused the medication or was asleep.
-There should be documentation on the MAR if a resident refused a medication or was asleep and it was not given.
-The resident had periodically refused the Norco.
-In the past, residents have had an order to hold pain medications if the resident was asleep.
During an interview on 4/14/21 at 1:34 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON), the ADON, and the Corporate Consultant, said:
-Nurses should be documenting on the MAR what medications were given, including pain medications.
-Scheduled medications would turn red on the MAR if they were not given.
-The nurses were responsible for monitoring the electronic medical record dashboard to ensure medications were given to the residents.
-The dashboard would show which scheduled meds were not given. They (the DON and ADONs) would then check with the nurse.
-If pain medicine was ineffective, the charge nurse should notify the resident's physician.
-A physician would agree to holding a pain medication if a resident was asleep.
-There was a box on the MAR to document that a resident refused the medication or was asleep and did not receive it.
-If a physician agreed, each resident should have an order to hold a medication if they were asleep.
-He/she would go over MARs and TARs in clinical meetings.
-The resident's narcotic count sheets were not reviewed.
-The DON, the ADON, and the corporate consultant said this process was started a week ago.
-The DON, the ADON, and the corporate consultant said the nurses and residents had been interviewed to know that the medication made it to the destination.
-The narcotic count sheets should match the residents' MARs.
-The medication would turn red on the residents' electronic medical record if the medication was given out of parameters which alerted the nurse for scheduled medications on the MAR.
-The DON, the ADON, and the corporate consultant said they would check with the nurse on why the medication was not documented as given when it showed up on his/her electronic medical record dashboard.
MO00168012
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately document pain medication administration and reconciliation for controlled substances (drug or other substance that is tightly controlled by the government because it may be abused or cause addiction) for two sampled residents (Resident #27 and #7), and failed to document pain assessments and administer scheduled pain medications to one sample resident (Resident #23) out of 22 sampled residents. The facility census was 95 residents.
Record review of the facility's Pain Management policy revised 6/2020 showed:
-The purpose of the policy was to ensure accurate assessment and management of the resident's pain.
-The licensed nurse would administer pain medication as ordered and document medication administered on the Medication Administration Record (MAR).
-The licensed nurse would assess the resident for pain and document the results on each shift using the MAR using a 1-10 pain scale (1=low pain, 10=extreme pain).
1. Record review of Resident #27's admission Record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had the following diagnoses:
-Multiple Sclerosis (MS, a neurological disease that attacks the protective covering of the nerves, leading to impaired sensory and motor nerve function, and in most cases some degree of disability).
-Muscle wasting.
-Quadriplegia (paralysis caused by illness or injury that results in the partial or total loss of use of all four limbs and torso).
-Chronic pain.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan initiated 1/17/21, and ongoing, showed the resident:
-Was at risk for alterations related to chronic pain.
-Needed pain medications administered (as ordered by the physician).
Record review of the resident's Order Summary Report dated 1/17/2021, showed a physician's order for Tramadol HCI (a controlled substance pain reliever) 50 milligrams (mg): administer one tablet two times per day for pain not to exceed 300 mg per day.
Record review of the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool required to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 1/23/21 showed the resident:
-Was cognitively intact.
-Did not have pain at the time of the assessment.
-Received pain medication seven days per week.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 2/2021 and the Controlled Medication Utilization Record dated 2/2021 showed:
-Tramadol HCI 50 mg: administer one tablet two times per day for pain not to exceed 300 mg per day.
-The staff did not document the resident received the medication on the MAR on 2/12/21, 2/16/21, 2/17/21, and 2/27/21 on the evening shift.
--The staff signed the medication out (as given to the resident) on the Controlled Medication Utilization Record on 2/12/21, 2/16/21, 2/17/21, and 2/27/21.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 3/2021 and the Controlled Medication Utilization Record dated 3/2021 showed:
-Tramadol HCI 50 mg: administer one tablet two times per day for pain not to exceed 300 mg per day.
-The staff did not document the resident received the medication on the MAR on 3/3/21 and 3/23/21 on the day shift.
--The staff signed the medication out (as given to the resident) on the Controlled Medication Utilization Record on 3/3/21.
-The staff did not document the resident received the medication on the MAR on 3/4/21, 3/8/21, 3/9/21, 3/14/21, 3/17/21, and 3/26/21 on the evening shift.
--The staff signed the medication out (as given to the resident) on the Controlled Medication Utilization Record on 3/4/ 21, 3/8/21, 3/9/21, 3/14/21, and 3/17/21.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 4/1/21 to 4/12/21 and the Controlled Medication Utilization Record dated 4/2021 showed:
-Tramadol HCI 50 mg: administer one tablet two times per day for pain not to exceed 300 mg per day.
-The staff did not document the resident received the medication on the MAR on 4/10/21 and 4/12/21 on the day shift.
--The staff signed the medication out (as given to the resident) on the Controlled Medication Utilization Record on 4/10/21.
-The staff did not document the resident received the medication on the MAR on 4/2/21, 4/3/21, 4/4/21, and 4/9/21 on the evening shift.
--The staff signed the medication out (as given to the resident) on the Controlled Medication Utilization Record on 4/2/21, 4/3/21, 4/4/21, and 4/9/21.
During an interview on 4/5/21 at 1:59 P.M., the resident said:
-He/she usually received his/her Tramadol medication, but a few times had not received it due to running out of the medication.
-This would cause him/her pain when the medication was not given.
-At the time of the interview, the resident was not exhibiting signs or symptoms of pain.
2. Record review of Resident #7's Face Sheet showed:
-He/she was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE].
-He/she had the following diagnoses:
--Polyneuropathy (a condition involving damage to multiple nerves throughout the body outside of the brain and spinal cord; symptoms can include temporary or permanent numbness, tingling, pricking or burning sensations, increased sensitivity to touch, and pain).
--Spinal stenosis (narrowing in the spine which puts pressure on the nerves and spinal cord which can cause pain and numbness).
Record review of the resident's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] showed:
-Was cognitively intact.
-Received as needed pain medication.
-Had occasional moderate pain.
Record review of the resident's POS showed an order dated 2/2/21 for Norco tablet 5-325 (a prescription medication that combines hydrocodone 5 mg, an opioid pain reliever, with acetaminophen(Tylenol) 325 mg, which is given to relieve moderate to severe pain), one tablet every six hours as needed for pain.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 3/1/21 through 3/31/21 and the Controlled Medication Utilization Records dated 2/25/21 through 4/11/21 showed:
-Norco Tablet 5-325 one tablet every six hours as needed for pain.
-The Controlled Medication Utilization Record and MAR document were not in agreement as follows:
--Licensed nurses signed the medication out (as given to the resident) the Controlled Medication Utilization Records on 3/1/21, 3/2/21, 3/3/21, 3/4/21, 3/6/21, 3/7/21, 3/9/21, 3/10/21, 3/11/21, 3/12/21, 3/13/21, 3/14/21, 3/16/21, 3/17/21, 3/18/21, 3/20/21, 3/21/21, two doses on 3/23/21, two doses on 3/24/21, 3/26/21, 3/27/21, 3/28/21, 3/29/21, 3/30/21, and 3/31/21.
--Licensed nurses did not document the resident received the medication on the MAR on 3/1/21, 3/2/21, 3/3/21, 3/4/21, 3/6/21, 3/7/21, 3/9/21, 3/10/21, 3/11/21, 3/12/21, 3/13/21, 3/14/21, 3/16/21, 3/17/21, 3/18/21, 3/20/21, 3/21/21, two doses on 3/23/21, two doses on 3/24/21, 3/26/21, 3/27/21, 3/28/21, 3/29/21, 3/30/21, and 3/31/21.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 4/1/21 through 4/14/21 and the Controlled Medication Utilization Record dated 2/25/21 through 4/11/21 showed:
-Norco Tablet 5-325 one tablet every six hours as needed for pain.
-The Controlled Medication Utilization Record and MAR document were not in agreement as follows:
--Licensed nurses signed the medication out (as given to the resident) the Controlled Medication Utilization Records on three doses on 4/2/21, 4/3/21, 4/4/21, two doses on 4/6/21, two doses on 4/8/21, 4/9/21, two doses on 4/10/21, and on 4/11/21.
--Licensed nurses did not document the resident received the medication on the MAR on 4/2/21, 4/3/4/4/21, on 4/6/21, on 4/8/21, 4/9/21, 4/10/21, and on 4/11/21.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly contain waste in a garbage can in the kitchen, and in close-lidded dumpsters, to prevent the harboring and/or feedin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly contain waste in a garbage can in the kitchen, and in close-lidded dumpsters, to prevent the harboring and/or feeding of pests. This deficient practice potentially affected all residents who ate food from the kitchen. The facility census was 95 residents with a licensed capacity for 130 residents.
1. Observations during the kitchen inspection on 4/5/21 at 3:45 P.M. outside the Service Hall showed there were two dumpsters side-by-side, both facing northward, with the left lid of the east dumpster left completely open.
2. Observations during a follow-up kitchen inspection and the facility outer perimeter inspection on 4/6/21, showed the following:
-At 8:18 A.M., both lids of the east dumpster were completely open.
-At 8:40 A.M., a silver trash can with foot pedal next to a sink in the kitchen had its lid propped up approximately 9 inches by the trash piled too high inside.
-At 9:43 A.M., the left lid of the east dumpster was completely open.
-At 2:23 P.M., the left lid of the east dumpster was completely open.
3. Observations during the follow-up kitchen inspection on 4/7/21, showed the following:
-At 12:03 P.M., the right lid of the east dumpster was completely open.
-At 1:27 P.M., both lids of the east dumpster were propped open approximately 1 to 2 feet by the trash bags piled too high inside.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 1:25 P.M., the Dietary Manager said the following:
-The dietary staff are frequently re-educated about keeping the dumpster lids closed.
-The dietary staff do two trips to the dumpsters daily.
-Of all the facility's departments, nursing uses the dumpsters the most.
Record review of the 1999 and 2009 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code and Missouri Food Codes, showed:
In Chapter 5-501.113 Covering Receptacles: Receptacles and waste handling units for refuse, recyclables, and returnables shall be kept covered:
(A) Inside the food establishment if the receptacles and units: (1) Contain food residue and are not in continuous use; or
(2) After they are filled; and
(B) With tight-fitting lids or doors if kept outside the food establishment.
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary food serving utensils and preparation equipment; failed to ensure plastic cutting boards were in good condi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary food serving utensils and preparation equipment; failed to ensure plastic cutting boards were in good condition to avoid food safety hazards; failed to separate damaged food stuffs and keep others free from contamination; failed to refrigerate food stuffs when needed; and failed to keep all kitchen floor areas clean. These deficient practices potentially affected all residents who ate food from the kitchen. The skilled nursing facility census was 95 residents with a licensed capacity for 130 residents.
1. Observations during the kitchen inspection on 4/5/21 between 9:22 A.M. and 12:18 P.M., showed the following:
-In the Dry Storage room the floor felt sticky when walked upon.
-There was a 6 pound (lb.) 12 ounce (oz.) can of cut sweet potatoes heavily dented on one side and a 5 lb. 13 oz. dented can of spinach on a can dispensing rack.
-There was a sign on the dispensing rack that read, Please Bring All Dented Cans to the Manager's Office.
-On a top shelf there was a tub of bran flakes, a tub of frosted flakes, and a tub of crisped rice cereal, all undated.
-On the same top shelf was an undated tub of Fruit Loops with a cracked lid that did not seal tightly.
-On a lower shelf was a 1-gallon jug of soy sauce approximately 4/5 full that read Refrigerate After Opening for Quality on the label.
-The walk-in freezer had three pieces of plastic and an ice cream cup under the racks.
-One red, one blue, and one tan cutting board were all heavily scored to the point of plastic bits coming off.
-The top and bottom drawers of a three-drawer utility cart of serving utensils had numerous crumbs and debris in them.
-The manual can opener had paper debris on the blade.
2. Observations during the follow-up kitchen inspection on 4/6/21 at 8:18 A.M., showed the following:
-In the Dry Storage room the floor felt sticky when walked upon.
-There was a 6 lb. 12 oz. can of cut sweet potatoes heavily dented on one side and a 5 lb. 13 oz. dented can of spinach on a can dispensing rack.
-On a top shelf there was a tub of bran flakes, a tub of frosted flakes, and a tub of crisped rice cereal, all undated.
-On the same top shelf was an undated tub of Fruit Loops with a cracked lid that did not seal tightly.
-On a lower shelf was a 1-gallon jug of soy sauce approximately 4/5 full that read Refrigerate After Opening for Quality on the label.
-One red, one blue, and one tan cutting board were all heavily scored to the point of plastic bits coming off.
-The top and bottom drawers of a three-drawer utility cart of serving utensils had numerous crumbs and debris in them.
-The manual can opener had paper debris on the blade.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 1:25 P.M., the Dietary Manager (DM) said the following:
-The dietary staff were all responsible for cleaning food preparation equipment and utensils on a daily or weekly basis, depending on the item.
-The food preparation utensils should be stored sanitarily.
-The dietary staff were all to identify any damaged delivered food stuffs and put them on a shelf in the Dietary Office for credit.
-The Dietician checked items like cutting boards on their kitchen walk-throughs and decided when they needed replacing.
-Food stuffs stored in containers should be dated by whomever put it in there.
-He/She did daily walk-throughs and would tell the Dietary Aide what they wanted cleaned that day.
Record review of the 1999 and 2009 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code and Missouri Food Codes, showed:
-Chapter 4-101.11: Materials that are used in the construction of utensils and food-contact surfaces of equipment may not allow the migration of deleterious substances or impart colors, odors, or tastes to food and under normal use conditions shall be: (A) Safe; (B) Durable, corrosion-resistant, and nonabsorbent; (C) Sufficient in weight and thickness to withstand repeated wear washing; (D) Finished to have a smooth, easily cleanable surface; and (E) Resistant to pitting, chipping, crazing, scratching, scoring, distortion, and decomposition.
-In Chapter 4-501.12, Surfaces such as cutting blocks and boards that are subject to scratching and scoring shall be resurfaced if they can no longer be effectively cleaned and sanitized, or discarded if they are not capable of being resurfaced. Surfaces such as cutting blocks and boards that are subject to scratching and scoring shall be resurfaced if they can no longer be effectively cleaned and sanitized, or discarded if they are not capable of being resurfaced.
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain a comprehensive, facility-specific infection...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain a comprehensive, facility-specific infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of waterborne pathogens (a bacterium, virus, or other microorganism that can cause disease), and failed to provide documented assessments for such an outbreak, in accordance with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents, visitors, and staff who reside in, visit, use, or work in the facility. The facility census was 95 with a licensed capacity for 130 residents.
1. Record review of the facility's disaster manual entitled Emergency Preparedness Plan, last reviewed and updated on 2/13/19 and obtained from the north nurse station, showed a 13-page document with the heading Legionella Management Policy that did not include the following requirements:
-A facility-specific risk assessment that considers the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) industry standard.
-A completed Centers for Disease Control (CDC) toolkit including control measures such as physical controls, temperature management, disinfectant level control, visual inspections, and environmental testing for pathogens.
-A schematic or diagram of the facility's water system.
-A facility-specific infection prevention program or plan to deal with outbreaks of Legionella (a [NAME] of pathogenic Gram-negative bacteria that includes the species L. pneumophila, causing legionellosis (all illnesses caused by Legionella) including a pneumonia-type illness called Legionnaires' disease and a mild flu-like illness called Pontiac fever.) and/or other waterborne pathogens.
-A program and flowchart that identifies and indicates specific potential risk areas of growth within the building.
-Assessments of each individual potential risk level.
-Testing protocols and acceptable ranges for control measures with a method of monitoring them specifically at this facility.
-Facility-specific interventions or action plans for when control limits are not met.
-Documentation of any site log book being maintained with any cleanings, sanitizings, descalings, and inspections mentioned.
During an interview on 4/8/21 at 2:28 P.M., the Administrator said the following:
-He/She knew that a water-borne pathogen program required completed assessments, diagrams, and a logbook of actions performed.
-They would have to refer to their cheat sheet to see what else may need to be covered.