CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review of Resident #670's MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was on hospice.
-Section J showed the resident did no...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review of Resident #670's MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident was on hospice.
-Section J showed the resident did not have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than six months.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 1:34 P.M., MDS Coordinator said:
-He/she was the MDS Coordinator for the third floor.
-Section J of the MDS would not be marked if the resident has a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than six months unless a doctor wrote down to do so.
-There were lots of things that would qualify someone for hospice, such as weight loss and end of life care.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 1:51 P.M., MDS Coordinator said he/she did not realize Section J of the MDS needed to be marked for hospice residents.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-He/she would expect MDS's to be accurate.
-He/she did not have anything to do with MDS's.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) assessments were accurate and included hospice services (end of life care) for three sampled residents (Resident #25, #109, and #670) out of 36 sampled residents. The facility census was 171 residents.
Record review of the facility policy titled Minimum Data Set /Quarterly Assessment Form dated November 1, 2016 showed:
-The results of the assessment are used to develop, review and revise the resident's comprehensive plan of care.
-The MDS Coordinator must assure that all sections of the MDS have been completed.
1. Record review of Resident #25's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Record review of the resident's history and physical dated 6/18/21 showed he/she was enrolled with a local hospice company for end of life care at the time of admission to the facility.
Record review of the resident's admission MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-Section J1400. Prognosis. Does the resident have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than 6 months? Was marked No.
-Section O0100. Special Treatments and Programs. Section K. Hospice care. Marked as 1. While NOT a Resident and 2. While a Resident.
Record review of the resident's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-Section J1400. Prognosis. Does the resident have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than 6 months? Was marked No.
-Section O0100. Special Treatments and Programs. Section K. Hospice care. Marked as 2. While a Resident.
Record review of the resident's Physician Orders Sheet dated 3/1/22 to 3/31/22 showed he/she had an order for hospice for end of life care at the time of admission on [DATE].
2. Record review of Resident #109's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted on [DATE].
Record review of the resident's Physician's Orders Sheet dated 3/1/22 to 3/31/22 showed he/she had an order for hospice dated 1/25/22.
Record review of the resident's care plan showed he/she was admitted to hospice for CVA (stroke) late effects on 1/25/22.
Record review of the resident's significant change MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-Section J1400. Prognosis. Does the resident have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than 6 months? Was marked No.
-Section O0100. Special Treatments and Programs. Section K. Hospice care. Was not marked at all to indicate the resident was receiving hospice care.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident and/or his/her family received a copy of the resident's baseline care plan for one sampled resident (Resident #670) out o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident and/or his/her family received a copy of the resident's baseline care plan for one sampled resident (Resident #670) out of 34 sampled residents. The facility census was 171 residents.
1. Record review of the resident's undated baseline care plan showed no documentation of the resident and/or his/her family receiving a copy.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-Baseline care plans could be completed by the admitting nurse.
-He/she did not know if there was any documentation of residents and/or their families receiving copies of the baseline care plans.
-He/she assumed residents and/or their families received copies of the baseline care plans since they had meetings with the residents and their families when the residents were admitted to the facility.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 1:29 P.M. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G said:
-If staff had received all of the necessary information, they would fill out a baseline care plan for a new resident and file it in the chart.
-He/she thought the Minimum Data Set (MDS a federally mandated assessment tool completed by facility staff for care planning) coordinator was responsible for sending copies out to residents and/or families.
-He/she had never sent a copy to a resident and/or his/her family.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 2:42 P.M., Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON)/MDS Coordinator said:
-The charge nurses did the baseline care plans for new residents.
-He/she didn't know if residents or families received copies of baseline care plans since he/she wasn't involved in them.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 3:57 P.M., LPN L said:
-The charge nurses started the baseline care plans and the MDS Coordinator followed up on them.
-Residents and/or their families should have received a copy but he/she didn't know if they did.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 4:01 P.M., LPN H said:
-The charge nurses did baseline care plans upon admission and then they put the baseline care plan in the chart.
-He/she didn't know if residents or families received copies of the baseline care plans.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 4:03 P.M., LPN A said:
-He/she was the first and second floor supervisor.
-They did not give residents or families copies of the baseline care plan.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was completed to incl...
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 a comprehensive care plan was completed to include interventions for behaviors for one sampled resident (Resident #78) who had a diagnosis of depression out of 36 sampled residents. The facility census was 171 residents.
1. Record review of Resident #78's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including high blood pressure, anemia (iron deficiency), shortness of breath, asthma (a respiratory condition where the airway is obstructed), and depression.
Record review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 1/17/22, showed the resident:
-Had significant cognitive impairment.
-Did not have any mood or behavioral symptoms within the lookback period.
-Was independent with ambulation, needed limited assistance with transfers and toileting, and needed extensive assistance with bathing and dressing.
-Had a diagnosis of depression and received an anti-depressant during the lookback period.
Record review of the resident's Social Service Note dated 1/18/22, showed the resident was in stable condition with forgetfulness. He/she liked to sleep in late. No behaviors were noted. The resident said he/she was not depressed.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 1/19/22, showed:
-The resident was at risk for adverse reactions due to taking psychotropic medication for depression. Interventions instructed staff to provide a psychiatric/psychological consult as ordered, consult with the resident's physician and pharmacist to analyze/adjust his/her medication, observe and record his/her behaviors, and administer Citlopram (an anti-depressant) as ordered.
-There was no care plan for depression and the care plan did not show the resident's signs and symptoms of depression or indicated the resident had depressed behaviors, signs or symptoms in the past that warranted interventions, to include medication for behavior maintenance.
-There was no documentation showing any non-pharmacological interventions that were provided when the resident exhibited signs and symptoms of depression.
Record review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 1/2022, showed physician's orders for Citalopram 10 milligrams (mg) daily for depression. The MAR showed the nursing staff administered Citlopram per the physician's orders.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Progress Note dated 2/15/22, showed resident had a diagnosis of persistent depression that was notable through nursing observations of the resident wanting to stay in bed all day and being very quiet. There was a recommendation to consult the psychologist for an evaluation for depression, and to continue Citalopram 10 mg daily for depression.
Record review of the resident's Nursing Notes showed:
-From 12/2021 to 2/20/22 there were no notes that indicated the resident showed any signs or symptoms of depressive behaviors or noted any nursing concerns about the resident's behaviors.
-2/21/22 the resident's daughter was visiting and was concerned about the resident's depression and said the resident has been on antidepressant in the past. The resident's daughter requested an anti-depressant for the resident at this time.
-2/25/22 nursing staff placed a call to the consultant psychiatrist to request a depression evaluation on the resident and to determine if Citalopram should be increased.
Record review of the resident's Psychology Report dated 2/21/22, showed the Psychologist met with the resident for depressed mood and appropriateness of referral after the Social Worker noted the resident had advanced cognitive decline. The Psychologist documented the resident was pleasant and denied any problems with his/her mood. The Psychologist asked the resident if he/she was depressed and the resident said his/her sadness was only because it takes so long to get through problems related to raising his/her daughters. The Psychologist spoke with staff who noted resident's mood had been good though his/her cognition has declined. There were no indications to discontinue, decrease or increase the resident's anti-depressant.
Record review of the resident's MAR date 2/2022 and 3/2022 showed physician's orders for Citlopram 10 mg daily for depression. The MARs showed nursing staff administered the resident's medication per physician's orders.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Order Sheet (POS) dated 3/2022, showed the resident had a physician's order for Citalopram 10 mg daily for depression (ordered on 7/13/21).
Record review of the resident's Care Plan showed there was no addition to the resident's care plan that showed he/she had depression signs and symptoms that were being managed with non-pharmacological interventions in addition to pharmacological interventions.
Observation and interview on 3/21/22 at 10:12 A.M., showed the resident was dressed for the weather, sitting in a chair with a walker in front of him/her. He/she was participating in the morning activity and seemed to be enjoying it. He/she stayed in the activity until it was time for lunch. No behaviors were noted.
Observation and interview on 3/22/22 at 9:41 A.M., showed the resident was laying down in bed, and was awake. He/she said he/she felt good and was happy, but he/she just did not feel like getting out of bed today. His/her walker was next to his/her bed and was within reach, as his/her call light. The resident was smiling during the interaction.
During an interview on 3/25/22, at 9:06 A.M., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) E said:
-The resident likes to sleep late, but he/she was usually a very happy resident and did not experience depressed behaviors like crying or verbalizations of sadness.
-The resident's medication may maintain his/her mood, but the resident was normally in a very good mood.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 9:09 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) J said:
-The resident really did not exhibit depression symptoms like crying or sadness.
-The resident liked to stay in bed, but that could also be due to his/her dementia.
-The resident was on an anti-depressant when he/she was admitted , and had a diagnosis of depression, but they had evaluations completed to re-evaluate his/her need for the anti-depressant.
-He/she said both the consultant psychiatrist and consultant psychologist saw the resident and they maintained him/her on the anti-depressant.
-There should be a depression care plan for the resident, but since the resident did not show signs or symptoms of depression, that may be why there was no depression care plan for him/her.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-He/she would expect signs and symptoms of depression to be on the resident's care plan.
-If the resident was diagnosed with depression, the resident may be on an anti-depressant and not have any behaviors due to the medication managing them.
-The Psychiatrist and the Physician both review the resident's medications for continued use and they would indicate if the resident's medications need to be changed.
-There should be a care plan for depression in the resident's care plan with interventions to manage his/her depression symptoms if/when they occur.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
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 assess and document pressure sores (a localized injury...
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 assess and document pressure sores (a localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence, as a result of pressure, or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction) that re-opened for one sampled resident (Resident #4); to complete weekly skin and/or wound assessments for two sampled residents (Residents #22 and #4); to discontinue applying wound care treatments once the wounds healed for one sampled resident (Resident #4); to provide ongoing wound care assessment and documentation of the resident's pressure ulcers, to update the comprehensive care plan to reflect the current condition and treatment, and to ensure appropriate physician orders for one sampled resident (Resident #52) out of 36 sampled residents. The facility census was 171 residents.
Record review of the facility's Ulcer Prevention, Assessment, Treatment and Documentation in LTC (long term care) policy dated January 1, 2022 showed pressure ulcers will be measured and assessed for healing progress at least weekly.
1. Record review of Resident #22's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis of pressure ulcer of his/her left heel, unspecified stage.
Record review of the resident's undated care plan showed:
-He/she had potential for alteration in skin integrity due to decreased mobility AEB (as evidenced by) current pressure ulcer to left lower extremity (LLE) heel.
-He/she would have a skin assessment by a licensed nurse weekly.
-His/her wound were followed by a specialty wound clinic that completed the treatment and measurements at each visit.
Record review of the resident's wound monitoring for January 2022 showed:
-On 1/3/22, the resident had a treatment to his/her left heel with no measurements or description of the wound.
-On 1/10/22, the resident had a treatment to his/her left heel with no measurements or description of the wound.
-On 1/17/22, the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Shower/Skin Assessment contained no information regarding the resident's wound and was not signed by a nurse.
-On 1/24/22, the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment contained no information regarding the resident's wound and was not signed by a nurse.
-On 1/27/22, the resident had a treatment to his/her left heel with no measurements or description of the wound.
-On 1/31/22, the resident had the treatment to his/her left foot in place with no measurements or description of the wound.
-The box indicating that a skin assessment had been completed was not checked on any of the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment forms.
Record review of the resident's wound monitoring for February 2022 showed:
-On 2/7/22, the resident had no new skin issues with no measurements or description of the wound.
-On 2/10/22, the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment contained no information regarding the resident's wound.
-On 2/14/22, the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment contained no information regarding the resident's wound.
-On 2/17/22, the resident had a lesion on his/her left foot with no measurements.
-On 2/21/22, the resident had no new skin issues with no measurements or description of the wound.
-On 2/24/22, the resident had a treatment to his/her left heel with no measurements or description of the wound.
-The box indicating that a skin assessment had been completed was not checked on the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment forms on 2/10/22 and 2/14/22.
Record review of the resident's wound monitoring for March 2022 showed:
-On 3/3/22, the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment contained no information regarding the resident's wound.
-On 3/7/22, the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment contained no information regarding the resident's wound.
-On 3/14/22, the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment contained no information regarding the resident's wound and was not signed by a nurse.
-On 3/17/22, the resident's heel pad was replaced with no bruising or new abrasions were noted. There were no measurements or description of the wound.
-On 3/21/22, the resident had the treatment to his/her left foot in place with no measurements or description of the wound.
-The box indicating that a skin assessment had been completed was not checked on the CNA Shower/Skin Assessment forms on 3/3/22, 3/7/22 and 3/14/22.
Record review of the resident's undated wound monitoring showed the resident had a soft left heel and the treatment was in place with no other descriptions or measurements.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 11:26 A.M. showed Registered Nurse (RN) D:
-Entered the resident's room.
-Had the supplies already laid out on the bedside table.
-Had the resident's ankle on a pillow so his/her heel was not touching anything.
-Washed his/her hands and put on gloves.
-Applied wound cleanser.
-Removed his/her gloves, washed hands and put on new gloves.
-Placed bordered foam on the resident's wound.
-Put the resident's sock on, removed pillow, lowered the bed and put his/her shoe back on.
-Moved wheelchair over to the side of the bed, guided the resident from behind into his/her chair, shut off the bed alarm and put a blanket over the bed.
-Moved the resident's bed over, moved wheelchair back by bed and fixed resident's mask because he/she hooked it on his/her hearing aid.
-Removed his/her gloves, sanitized and then washed hands, went out to the hall, unlocked and opened the cart and put on new gloves.
-Pulled out a disinfectant wipe, wiped down his/her table, took off gloves and sanitized.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 11:35 A.M., RN D said:
-It had been months since he/she saw the resident's heel.
-He/she didn't work at the facility for six months and just started back PRN (as needed) this week.
-The resident had a nasty sore when he/she arrived but now it looks great.
-The resident was seen by an outside wound company.
-The outside wound company took measurements of the wounds during their visit.
-He/she didn't know if anyone at the facility took measurements of the wounds.
-He/she wouldn't do anything different during wound care if he/she had to do it again.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 10:15 A.M., RN E said:
-He/she was the wound nurse.
-He/she did take measurements on some wounds.
-He/she did not take measurements if the resident was being seen by a third party who was measuring the wound.
-The resident was being seen by an outside wound company who took measurements during each visit.
3. Record review of Resident #52's Face Sheet showed he/She was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Record review of the resident's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] showed the resident:
-Was severely cognitively impaired.
-Was totally dependent on staff for all cares.
-Used a wheelchair propelled by staff for mobility.
-Was totally incontinent of both bowel and bladder function.
-Was at risk for pressure ulcers.
-Had unhealed pressure ulcers.
-Had one stage I pressure ulcer (intact skin may be painful, but it has no breaks or tears. The skin appears reddened and does not blanch (lose color briefly when you press your finger on it and then remove your finger).
-Had two unstageable pressure ulcers (an ulcer that has full thickness tissue loss but is either covered by extensive necrotic tissue or by an eschar) that were present on admission to the facility.
-Had the following interventions in place; pressure relieving cushion in the wheelchair, and bed, turned and repositioned, pressure ulcer care with dressings, ointments and medications to areas other than on feet, and dressings to feet.
Record review of the resident's shower sheets dated 1/1/22 to 3/22/22 showed:
-Four of 20 shower sheets were not signed by a nurse.
-The 1/15/22 shower sheet had documentation of a re-opened area on his/her sacral area and a new skin abrasion.
-There was no shower sheet completed for 3/12/22.
Record review of the resident's Braden Scale dated 1/3/21 showed the resident's score was 14 indicating moderate risk.
Record review of the resident's Wound/Skin Healing Record dated 1/18/22 to 1/25/22 showed:
-His/her right ischium wound measured 1 cm x 1 cm, 1 cm, there was no stage documented.
-His/her right ischium wound was documented as healed on 1/25/22,
-Additional records requested for all other wounds were not produced by the facility.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Orders Medications and Treatments dated 3/1/22 to 3/30/22 showed:
-A diagnosis of pressure ulcer.
-Low air loss mattress (RE: pressure ulcer risk) setting on 6 ordered 10/12/21.
-Skin barrier cream after each incontinent episode and as needed.
-Cleanse his/her left and right hip stage III (Full thickness skin loss subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon or muscle are not exposed. Slough may be present but does not obscure the depth of tissue loss) pressure ulcer with wound cleaner, pat dry, apply Aquacel AG cut to fit, apply A&D ointment to wound, secure with sacral meplex pad, change every shift and as needed dated 10/12/21 and discontinued 2/15/22.
-Cleanse both his/her lower extremity heels with soap and water, rinse with water, pat dry, apply Aquacel AG, cut to fit, secure with meplex heel pad, change two times per week (Tuesday and Saturday) and PRN for soilage.
-Cleanse his/her sacral stage II pressure ulcer with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply vitamin A&D ointment to wound bed, cover with Aquacel AG, cut to fit, secure with sacral meplex pad, change every shift daily and PRN for dated 10/12/21 and DC 2/15/22.
-Charge nurse to monitor the resident's sacral stage 2 pressure ulcer every shift and change as needed for soilage until healed then DC dated 10/12/21.
-Cleanse open area to his/her right ischium (the curved bone forming the base of each half of the pelvis), apply small amount of A&D ointment, then cover with 3x3 with AG, change daily and PRN dated 1/18/22.
-Apply triple antibiotic ointment (a safe and effective topical agent for preventing infections in minor skin trauma. The formulation contains neomycin, polymyxin B and bacitracin in a petrolatum base) to the right lower gluteus (any of three muscles in each of the two round fleshy parts that form the lower rear area of a human trunk which move the thigh), cover with meplex Aquacel AG daily and PRN dated 1/20/22.
Observation on 3/22/22 at 2:06 P.M. showed the resident was resting quietly in bed with eyes closed, with a low air loss mattress in place.
Observation on 3/23/22 at 9:11 A.M. showed the resident was up in his/her broda chair, with booties on his/her feet.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 9:24 A.M. RN E and LPN A said:
-The resident had multiple wounds.
-He/she could not confirm if any of the resident's wounds were open.
-The resident's next dressing changes were due on 3/26/22.
-Most of the residents with skin concerns have PRN orders as well.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 8:45 A.M. showed the resident sitting in his/her broda chair, with booties on his/her feet.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 9:45 A.M. of the resident showed:
-The dressings to his/her left and right hip were dated 3/22/22.
-The dressing to his/her sacral area with nickel size dark drainage was dated 3/22/22.
-The dressings to his/her left and right ischium were dated 3/22/22.
-The dressings to his/her left and right heels were dated 3/22/22.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 2:25 P.M. the DON said:
-Shower sheets should have documentation of the skin assessments,
-The nurse goes to assess the resident and documents on the shower sheets.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 3:09 P.M. showed the resident was in bed with the low air loss mattress set on 8, firm.
Observation on 3/25/22 at 8:14 A.M. showed the resident was up in his/her broda chair with no booties on his/her feet/heels.
Observation on 3/25/22 at 3:42 P.M. with CNA H showed the resident had a dressing to his/her sacral area dated 3/22/22 with drainage on the dressing.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 3:42 P.M. CNA H said the nurse will assess the drainage on the resident's dressing.
Observation on 3/25/22 at 3:48 P.M. with LPN G showed:
-He/she observed and acknowledged drainage to the the resident's sacral dressing,
-He/she removed the dressing revealing a untraceable sacral wound,
-He/she acknowledged an open area to the resident's right ischium believed to be new,
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 3:48 P.M. LPN G said CNA's were to report to the charge nurse any new or different skin issues including drainage on a dressing so a charge nurse could assess the dressing and the wound.
4. During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M. the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-The residents' skin was assessed during showers.
-The nurse completed a full body skin assessment once weekly during the resident bathing.
-The CNA would chart skin issues on the bath sheet when they gave a bath then would give it to the Charge Nurse and the Charge nurse would complete a head to toe skin assessment at least weekly and sign off on the bath/skin sheet (this serves as the weekly nurse skin assessment also). These forms are audited weekly.
-If when they complete a skin assessment a wound is indicated, they would notify the physician and then they would notify the wound nurse so the wound nurse could assess and measure the wound.
-The wound nurse was supposed to round, complete the wound measurements and obtain physician treatment orders.
-The wound nurse was supposed to measure and document the assessment of the wound weekly until it healed.
-The floor nurses did head-to-toe assessments once a week during showers but if the resident was determined to be high risk, it would be more often than once a week.
-The nurse continued to monitor the resident's skin weekly and document any additional skin issues or whether the wound has healed.
-The bath sheets were audited weekly by the floor supervisor.
-He/She didn't think that the facility measured wounds between appointments with a third party who did measure the wounds.
-The weekly assessments should show weekly observations of the wound with details but not necessarily measurements.
-Any new skin issues would be reported and monitored.
-The wound nurse would measure, if necessary, and assess the wound.
-He/She would expect wound assessments to be documented weekly.
-When a wound healed, staff should still monitor it.
-If the resident's wound closed it should be documented on the wound report (assessment) and nursing notes, but if it reopens, the nurse should notify the wound care nurse.
-The wound care nurse was then expected to re-assess the wound, measure it, get treatment orders and start weekly assessments until the wound healed.
-Some of the residents had chronic wounds, so they would continuously monitor and document on those wounds.
2. Record review of Resident #4's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including anemia (iron deficiency), high blood pressure, osteoporosis (a disease that weakens the bones), and pain.
Record review of the resident's Braden Scale (a wound risk assessment) completed on 2/21 showed the resident's risk score was 20 (mild risk is a total score of 15-18).
Record review of the resident's Wound Healing Records regarding the wound to the resident's right lateral ankle showed:
-A body diagram showing the resident had a skin issue on his/her right lower lateral ankle that was originally observed on 10/27/20. The wound was described as a stage II pressure sore (a partial thickness loss of skin with exposed dermis. The wound bed is viable, pink or red, moist and may also present as an intact or ruptured serum filled blister. Granulation tissue, slough and eschar are not present).
-The wound assessment was documented weekly through to 6/1/21 when it showed as healed without any drainage, odor, exudate (drainage), and the wound bed and surrounding skin was normal.
-A note showed on 6/1/21 the physician was notified , the plan of care was updated and a recommendation to see the Physician's Order Sheet (POS) for treatment order changes due to the area being healed and to follow up with radiology regarding the resident's associated pain.
-There were no further wound assessments showing the resident's left lateral ankle wound had re-opened or a new wound had developed.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Telephone Order dated 10/28/20, showed a Stage II to his/her right lateral ankle. Cleanse the lower extremity with wound cleanser, pat dry apply skin prep and cover with meplex dressing (an antimicrobial foam dressing that absorbs drainage and maintains a moist environment for wound healing), apply Aquacel AG 3x3 pad (an antimicrobial dressing that absorbs moisture and contains calcium and silver alginate to prevent infection and promote wound healing) and change Tuesday, Friday and as needed until healed, then discontinue (ordered on 10/28/20).
Record review of the resident's Wound Healing Record regarding the wound to his/her bilateral buttocks showed:
-A body diagram showing the resident had a skin issue on his/her right buttock that was originally observed on 6/1/21. The wound was described as a stage II pressure sore to the resident's right buttock that measured 1.0 centimeters (cm) length by 1.7 cm width by 0.1 cm depth. There was no depth, odor, granulation tissue was observed and the resident's wound bed was pink and the surrounding tissue was normal. Notes showed this wound was recurrent. The family and physician were notified and the resident's plan of care was updated.
-The wound healing record was documented weekly until 6/16/21, when the wound was documented as healed, without drainage, odor and the surrounding skin and wound bed were normal. Notes showed the resident's physician was notified on 6/16/21 and the plan of care was updated. It showed see the POS for treatment changes.
-There were no further wound records that showed this wound re-opened.
Record review of the resident's Wound Healing Record regarding the resident's bilateral buttock wound showed:
-A body diagram showing the resident had a skin issue on his/her left buttock that was originally observed on 6/1/21. The wound was described as a stage II pressure sore to the resident's right buttock that measured 1.0 cm length by 1.4 cm width by 0.1 cm depth. There was no depth, odor, granulation tissue was observed and the resident's wound bed was pink and the surrounding tissue was normal. Notes showed this wound was recurrent. The resident's family and physician were notified and the plan of care was updated.
-The wound healing record was documented weekly until 6/11/21 when the area was documented as healed and had no drainage or odor, the wound bed and surrounding skin was normal. The documentation showed the family and physician was notified and care plan was updated. It showed no changes to the treatment order at this time.
-There were no further wound records showing the wound had re-opened.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Telephone Order dated 6/16/21, showed:
-Stage II to the resident's bilateral buttocks. Cleanse with soap and water, rinse with water, pat dry, apply AD ointment (a skin protectant with Vitamins A and D) to the area, cover with meplex, apply Aquacel AG and a 3x3 foam pad. Change as needed, daily every shift for soilage (originally ordered on 6/16/21).
Record review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 12/6/21, showed the resident:
-Had significant cognitive impairment.
-Was independent with ambulation, transfer, eating and needed limited assistance with toileting bathing and dressing.
-Was at risk for developing pressure sores and had an unhealed pressure sore and moisture associated skin damage.
-Received interventions to include treatments and dressings for his/her pressure sore wounds.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Telephone Orders dated 1/15/22 to 1/31/22 showed there were no physician's orders showing any wound care treatments were discontinued or that the resident's wounds were healed. There were no new physician's orders for wound care treatments.
Record review of the resident's Nursing Notes dated 1/15/22 to 1/31/22 showed there was no documentation showing the resident had any open areas, pressure sores or wounds.
Record Review of the resident's Weekly Shower Sheet/Skin Assessment Sheets showed:
-From 1/1/22 to 1/28/22 showed there were no open areas on the resident's skin.
-The skin assessments showed staff applied lotion to dry skin and ointment was applied on his/her chest.
Record review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 1/22 showed physician's orders to cleanse his/her lower lateral ankle with wound cleanser, pat dry apply skin prep and cover with meplex, apply Aquacel 3x3 pad and change Tuesday, Friday and as needed until healed, then discontinue (ordered on 10/28/20); and a physician's order to cleanse the bilateral buttocks with soap and water, rinse with water, pat dry apply AD ointment to the area, cover with meplex, apply Aquacel AG and a 3x3 foam pad. Change as needed, daily every shift for soilage (ordered on 6/16/21). The MAR showed:
-Treatment orders for the resident's right lateral ankle wound were completed as ordered.
-Treatment orders for the resident's bilateral buttocks were not provided until 1/21/22, 1/25/22 and 1/30/22. There was no documentation showing the resident's wound had closed and re-opened or that the order had been discontinued (due to healing) and re-ordered.
Record review of the resident's Medical Record showed there were no Wound Healing Records or Assessments that showed the resident had any wounds/pressure sores that re-opened and were assessed at the time they re-opened, that the measurements of the wounds were documented or that the physician was notified the wound had re-opened or the resident had a new wound during the months of 1/22 or 2/22.
Record review of the resident's POS dated 2/22, showed the following physician's treatment orders:
-Stage II to his/her right lateral ankle. Cleanse the lower extremity with wound cleanser, pat dry apply skin prep and cover with meplex dressing, apply Aquacel AG 3x3 pad and change Tuesday, Friday and as needed until healed, then discontinue (ordered on 10/28/20).
-Stage II to his/her bilateral buttocks. Cleanse with soap and water, rinse with water, pat dry apply AD ointment to the area, cover with meplex, apply Aquacel AG and a 3x3 foam pad. Change as needed, daily every shift for soilage (ordered on 6/16/21).
-Charge Nurse to monitor for intact dressings every shift for soilage and change as needed (ordered 9/10/20).
Record Review of the resident's Weekly Shower Sheet/Skin Assessment Sheets dated 2/22, showed:
-From 2/1/22 to 2/18/22 showed there were no open areas on the resident's skin.
-There were no bath sheets from 2/18/22 to 2/28/22.
Record review of the resident's Nursing Notes from 2/1/22 to 2/28/22 showed he/she had no open areas, wounds or pressure sores.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 2/22, showed physician's orders to cleanse his/her lower lateral ankle with wound cleanser, pat dry apply skin prep and cover with meplex, apply Aquacel 3x3 pad and change Tuesday, Friday and as needed until healed, then discontinue (ordered on 10/28/20); and a physician's order to cleanse the bilateral buttocks with soap and water, rinse with water, pat dry apply AD ointment to the area, cover with meplex, apply Aquacel AG and a 3x3 foam pad. Change as needed, daily every shift for soilage (ordered on 6/16/21). The MAR showed:
-Treatment orders for the resident's right lateral ankle wound were completed as ordered.
-Treatment orders for the resident's bilateral buttocks were not provided per orders. There was no initials showing treatments were provided and there were no indications the treatment order was discontinued or that the resident's wound had healed.
Record review of the resident's POS dated 3/22, showed the following physician's treatment orders:
-Stage II to his/her right lateral ankle. Cleanse the lower extremity with wound cleanser, pat dry apply skin prep and cover with meplex dressing, apply Aquacel AG 3x3 pad and change Tuesday, Friday and as needed until healed, then discontinue (ordered on 10/28/20).
-Stage II to his/her bilateral buttocks. Cleanse with soap and water, rinse with water, pat dry apply AD ointment to the area, cover with meplex, apply Aquacel AG and a 3x3 foam pad. Change as needed, daily every shift for soilage (ordered on 6/16/21).
-Charge Nurse to monitor for intact dressings every shift for soilage and change as needed (ordered 9/10/20)
Record Review of the resident's Weekly Shower Sheet/Skin Assessment Sheets dated 3/22, showed:
-On 3/8/22 the body diagram showed there was an area on the residents bottom that was documented as a wound and there was an area identified on the resident's left ankle that was documented as a wound and the area was swollen.
-On 3/18/22 the documentation did not show the resident had any wounds or open areas on the resident's skin.
Record review of the resident's MAR dated 3/22, showed physician's orders to cleanse his/her lower lateral ankle with wound cleanser, pat dry apply skin prep and cover with meplex, apply Aquacel 3x3 pad and change Tuesday, Friday and as needed until healed, then discontinue (ordered on 10/28/20); and a physician's order to cleanse the bilateral buttocks with soap and water, rinse with water, pat dry apply AD ointment to the area, cover with meplex, apply Aquacel AG and a 3x3 foam pad. Change as needed, daily every shift for soilage (ordered on 6/16/21). The MAR showed:
-The treatment to the resident's ankle was completed as ordered through 3/22/22.
-The treatment to the resident's buttocks was completed on 3/8/22, 3/15/22, 3/18/22 and 3/21/22.
Record review of the resident's Nursing Notes from 3/1/22 to 3/25/22 showed there were no notes showing the resident had any open areas, pressure sores or wounds that had opened or re-opened. There was no documentation showing the resident's physician was notified or that wound assessments were completed and treatments were ordered.
Record review of the resident's Medical Record showed there were no Wound Healing Records or Assessments that showed the resident had any wounds/pressure sores that re-opened and were assessed at the time they re-opened, that the measurements of the wounds were documented or that the physician was notified the wound had re-opened or the resident had a new wound during the months of 3/22.
During an observation and interview on 3/21/22 at 10:12 A.M., showed the resident was dressed for the weather, groomed with adequate shoes on. He/she was wearing an ankle alarm on his/her right ankle with compression socks on. The resident was participating in an activity and once the activity ended, he/she stood up and ambulated with his/her walker to the dining room. At 10:50 A.M., CNA E said the resident had a pinpoint wound on his/her bottom due to the resident sitting in the same chair most of the day.
During an interview on 3/22/22 at 10:57 A.M., RN E said:
-They keep prophylactic physician wound care orders on the POS for wound care treatments for some residents who have chronic wounds.
-The nurses are expected to document a nursing note when the resident's wound heals and if/when it re-opens.
-The order for the resident's wound care would then change, unless it was for barrier cream or meplex to protect the skin.
-If the resident's wound re-opens, the nurse would notify him/her or the other wound nurse, and they would reassess the resident's wound and document their assessment on the Wound Care Assessment form.
-Once a wound appears, they complete weekly wound assessments on the wound until it healed.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 10:03 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) J said:
-The resident's ankle wound healed a long time ago, but he/she did not remember exactly when.
-They have continued to follow the physician's orders for treating the resident's ankle though there was no longer a wound there as a preventive measure.
-The wound to the resident's buttock was a pinpoint wound that healed a day two ago and he/she had documented that in his/her nursing notes.
-The resident's wounds to his/her ankle and to his/her bottom were chronic and they sometimes will re-open and close, so they still follow the physician's wound care orders as preventive treatment (prophylactics).
-The wound care team comes and monitors the wounds weekly but he/she did not know the specifics of how the documentation was completed, because the wound care team was new to the facility.
-All of the residents have bi-weekly skin monitoring when they receive baths. The initial skin check is done by the nursing aides and then the nurse will complete a head to toe skin check and sign off on the resident's bath/skin sheet.
-If the nursing aide notices a skin issue, they will notify the nurse who will complete an assessment and if there is an open area, they will then notify the wound care team for a follow up wound assessment and the wound care team will notify the physician for treatment orders.
Observation on 3/25/22 at 9:12 A.M., showed the resident's skin assessment with LPN J showed:
-LPN J obtained supplies for the resident's skin assessment and for any treatment as needed. (meplix border and skin prep, A&D ointment, Hydrocortisone ointment- scissors, alcohol wipes, and gloves.)
-Observation of the resident's right ankle showed his/her ankle alarm was in place and there was no open area to the resident's right outer ankle. LPN J said the resident's ankle wound was healed and the physician's order will need to be changed.
-The resident's buttocks had healed areas from moisture. There were no open areas observed and no treatment was needed.
-LPN J said he/she will call to discontinue treatment to the resident's right ankle and plan to move the resident's ankle alarm to prevent rubbing of his/her right ankle.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #25's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Record review of the residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review of Resident #25's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Record review of the resident's history and physical dated 6/18/21 showed the resident had the following diagnosis for indwelling catheter:
-Urinary retention with a history of catheterization.
-Recurrent urinary tract infections.
-Chronic kidney disease.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Orders Sheet dated 3/1/22 to 3/31/22 showed:
-An order for catheter for dependent drainage dated 6/30/21.
-An order for catheter care to include cleansing entry site with soap and water every shift and as needed (PRN).
-An order to change the catheter every 4 weeks on the 25th of month with an 18 Fr with 10 ml balloon.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 3/14/22 showed:
-The resident currently had an indwelling catheter for urinary retention.
-Staff to provide catheter care every shift as ordered by physician.
-Change catheter as ordered by physician.
-Maintain drainage bag below level of bladder.
-Apply statlock (a strap free device which locks the Foley catheter in place, stabilizes the catheter and eliminates any chance of a sudden pull) to secure the catheter as needed, monitor site for development of redness or irritation.
Observation on 3/21/22 at 9:37 A.M. showed the resident had his/her catheter bag hung on the side of his/her broda chair ( a tilt-in-space positioning chairs with the Comfort Tension Seating system which prevents skin breakdown) with no dignity bag and the tubing was on the floor.
Observation on 3/22/22 at 2:01 P.M. showed the resident in bed with catheter bag hanging from the bedside, with no dignity bag and bedspread draped over the top of the drainage bag.
Observation on 3/23/22 at 9:07 A.M. showed the resident had his/her catheter bag hanging off broda chair, with no dignity bag.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 8:46 A.M. showed the resident up in broda chair with his/her catheter tubing on the floor and dangling free.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 10:03 A.M. showed tubing touching the floor.
Observation on 3/24/1:28 P.M. showed:
-CNA G assisted the resident to the bathroom.
-CNA G cleaned rectal area and buttocks after resident had a bowel movement.
-CNA G left the drainage bag attached to the broda chair and the tubing was on the floor throughout toileting.
2. Record review of Resident #109's Face Sheet showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Record review of resident's Care Plan dated 1/31/22 showed:
-The resident was at risk for alteration in elimination patterns related to decreased mobility and urinary retention.
-Resident to be free from bladder distension through next review.
-Staff to provide catheter care every shift.
-Maintain drainage bag below level of bladder.
-Apply statlock to secure catheter as needed, monitor site for development of redness or irritation.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Orders Sheet dated 3/1/22 to 3/31/22 showed:
-Order for catheter to dependent drainage dated 7/29/21.
-Routine daily catheter care to include cleansing entry site with soap and water only daily and as needed for bowel soilage dated 7/29/21.
-May irrigate with 30 ml of sterile saline only as needed for obstruction of drainage, call physician if unable to flush after one attempt dated 7/29/21.
-Change foley catheter every month dated 2/16/22.
Observation on 3/23/22 at 9:18 A.M. showed the drainage bag hanging on the side of the bed with no dignity bag and the tubing was on the floor.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 11:09 A.M. showed:
-CNA H and RN D repositioned the resident in bed.
-Drainage bag hanging from the side of the bed without dignity bag.
-Catheter tubing not attached with statlock.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M. the DON said:
-Catheter drainage bags should be below the waist and in a dignity bag.
-Catheter tubing should be off the floor and secured with a statlock.
-Catheter care should be done every shift, every 12 hours or if visibly soiled.
-When laying the resident down or when providing care is when catheter care should be done, or if the catheter got soiled.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician's order for self care of Foley Catheter (or indwelling catheter, is a tube with retaining balloon passed through the urethra into the bladder to drain urine), was obtained and to have documentation of the education provided and formal evaluation of the resident's ability to provide self-care for one sampled resident (Resident #158) who had a history of bladder infections; to ensure infection control and prevention practices were followed in managing indwelling catheters and the associated drainage system for two sampled residents (Resident #25 and #109) out of 36 sampled residents. The facility census was 171 residents.
Record review of the facility Urinary Catheter care Policy and Procedure dated 12/1/2019 showed:
-Responsible party for the care of the resident Foley catheter was the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) and Registered Nursing (RN) staff.
-Catheters were to be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner.
-Catheters were to be assessed regularly that there were no kinks or pulling of the tubing and the urine was flowing freely.
-Drainage bags were to be maintained below the bladder to prevent back flow of bacteria into to the bladder.
Record review of the facility policy Urinary Catheter Insertion and Care, dated November 1, 2016 showed:
-Urinary catheter will be inserted only when medically necessary (i.e. to relieve urinary tract obstruction, provide urinary drainage in patients with urinary retention, promote wound healing, etc.),
-Urinary catheters will be maintained in a manner that reduces the risk of urinary tract infection,
-Catheters will be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner,
-Catheters are to be assessed regularly to assure there are no kinks or pulling and that urine is flowing freely.
1. Record review of Resident #158's admission Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including but not limited to history of Urinary Tract Infection (UTI - an infection of one or more structures in the urinary system), and Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (BPH-enlargement of the prostate gland blocks the urethra (tube that carries urine from bladder out of body) causing problem urinating).
Record review of the resident's Bowel and Bladder assessment dated [DATE] showed:
-He/she had a Foley catheter with a history of urinary tract infection and BPH.
-The resident was independent with toileting.
Record review of the resident's care plan dated 1/20/22 showed:
-The resident was at risk for alteration in elimination patterns related to decreased mobility and BHP.
-Provide catheter care every shift.
-Monitor urine output every shift
-No intervention related to catheter self-care assessment or obtain and follow physicians orders for resident self care of cleaning site or emptying catheter drainage bag.
-No documentation related to facility nursing completing a resident's skill assessment to assess the resident ability to perform his/her own Foley catheter care.
Record review of resident's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool required to be completed by facility staff for care planning), dated 2/28/22 showed the resident:
-Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 and was cognitively intact.
-Had a Foley catheter.
-Had a diagnosis of neurogenic bladder (a disorder of urinary bladder control due to damage to the spinal cord or to the nerves supplying the bladder).
-Activity of daily living required limited assistance from one staff member with personal care, toileting and bathing.
Record review of the resident's Physician Order Sheet (POS) dated 3/1/22 to 3/31/22 showed:
-Foley catheter size of a 16 French (Fr size of tip of catheter tubing) and attach to dependent drainage bag.
-Foley catheter care including cleansing entry site with soap and water once a day and as needed if soiled.
-Wash hands before and after handling catheter site, may irrigate with 30 milliliter(ml) sterile saline as needed for obstruction of drainage.
-Do not clamp catheter or the drain tube.
-Change Foley catheter every 4 weeks on the 15th on the month and as needed for increase supra pubic (above the pubic bone) pressure, leakage around catheter or increase urinary sediment.
-The resident had no orders transcribed or obtained for the resident to perform self-catheter care or for nursing staff to complete a resident self-care assessment, (to assess the resident ability to provide own Foley catheter care).
Record review of resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) dated 3/1/2022 to 3/23/22 showed documentation by nursing staff of resident catheter care, during each nursing shift.
Record review of the resident's CNA flow sheet charting for catheter urine output from 3/12/22 to 3/23/22 showed:
-On 3/12/22 on the 7:00 A.M.-7:00 P.M. shift, the resident had output of 1000 cubic centimeters (cc) of urine.
-No documentation of the resident's urine output from 3/13/22 to 3/23/22.
Observation on 3/21/22 at 2:57 P.M. of the resident showed his/her Foley catheter drainage bag on side of chair and was not in a privacy bag.
During an interview on 3/21/22 at 2:57 P.M. the resident said:
-He/she had no issues with his/her catheter care provided by facility staff.
-Facility nursing staff had changed his/her catheter system out at least monthly.
-He/she had no recent infections.
Observation on 3/23/22 at 9:01 A.M., of the resident showed:
-He/she was well groomed and no odors were noted.
-His/her catheter bag was hanging below the bladder on his/her walker, while he/she was sitting in his/her wheelchair.
-The urine was clear yellow in the bag and did not have any thick substance in tubing.
-Drainage bag was not placed in privacy bag.
-Could see the drainage bag from the doorway.
-The resident was able to ambulate with walker around his/her room and the hallway.
-The resident had moved his/her catheter drainage bag from wheelchair to walker.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 9:30 A.M. regarding the resident's catheter care, RN B said:
-The resident did his/her own catheter care and nursing staff would monitor the resident's catheter as needed.
-The resident would obtain a green package of wipes from the nursing staff, (Surestep, was a post insertion Foley care wipes includes steps on how to complete catheter care on front of the package).
-The resident had been instructed on how to do self-catheter care, he/she was not sure if the education had been documented.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 10:01 A.M., the resident said:
-He/she had been providing own catheter care including emptying the drainage bag, cleaning the Foley insertion site and tubing.
-In the past nursing staff had taught the resident how to perform self-catheter care.
-If he/she had concerns, he/she would tell the nursing staff.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 10:17 A.M., RN B and LPN F said:
-The resident should have had a physician's order to perform self-catheter care.
-Nursing staff would have been responsible for completing a resident self-care assessment for his/her ability to care for the Foley catheter.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 10:28 A.M. LPN F said he/she had followed up with MDS coordinator and the resident did not have a self-care assessment completed or a physician order for self-care for his/her Foley catheter.
Observation on 3/23/22 at 2:42 P.M., of the resident showed:
-Was propelling his/her wheelchair by the nursing station.
-His/her catheter drainage bag was in a privacy bag, under his/her wheelchair.
Observation on 3/23/22 at 2:50 P.M., of the resident with his/her walker showed:
-He/she had walked up to desk and had the catheter drainage bag hooked on side of walker and catheter drainage bag was not in privacy bag.
-He/she had moved the catheter drainage bag around from chair to walker.
During interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-Foley catheter drainage bag was to be in a dignity bag and tubing and bag keep off the floor.
-Resident catheter care should be completed by facility staff, every shift and/or at least every 12 hours or if soiled.
-The resident's that were their own person, had a right to provide own care.
-He/she would not except the nursing staff to obtain a physician order at this time for the resident provide own self-catheter care.
During interview on 3/25/22 at 1:45 P.M., CNA C said:
-The resident did his/her own catheter care including emptying the drainage bag and cleaning the site at times.
-He/she would follow-up with the resident to ensure care had been completed and if the resident had any issues.
-The residents have care sheets that tell the CNA the type of care and assistance the resident required.
-He/she had training for residents catheter care, and just recently completed skill training.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 1:50 P.M. CNA D said:
-The resident did most of his/her own care including daily catheter care.
-The resident would empty the drainage bag before the CNA's could empty the bag.
-Most of the time the CNA's were not able to document the resident urine output.
-The CNA on the night shift assisted with the resident's shower and did main catheter care for the resident.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 2:05 P.M., LPN F said:
-The facility staff did not complete the resident self-care catheter assessment and did not obtain a physician order for resident to provide his/her own catheter care.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Pharmacist's recommendations were obtained ...
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 the Pharmacist's recommendations were obtained and documented, to ensure the physician responded to the pharmacist's recommendations and responded timely for one sampled resident (Resident #148) out of 36 sampled residents. The facility census was 171 residents.
1. Record review of Resident #148's Face Sheet showed he/she was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including high blood pressure, insomnia (sleep disturbance), anemia (low iron levels), dementia (a chronic or persistent disorder of the mental processes caused by brain disease or injury and marked by memory disorders, personality changes, and impaired reasoning), depression (a common and serious medical illness that negatively affects how you feel, the way you think and how you act), anxiety (a feeling of worry, nervousness, or unease, typically about an imminent event or something with an uncertain outcome), constipation and pain.
Record review of the resident's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated assessment tool to be completed by facility staff for care planning) dated 2/28/22, showed the resident:
-Was cognitively impaired with long and short-term memory loss and behavioral symptoms.
-Had falls since his/her prior assessment.
-Used anti-psychotic and anti-depressant medications.
-Needed supervision to minimal assistance with mobility, eating toileting dressing grooming and bathing.
Record review of the resident's Physician's Order Sheet (POS) dated 3/2022 showed the following physician's orders:
-Prolia 60 milligrams (mg)/milliliters (ml)- inject 1 ml (60 mg) every 6 months for osteoporosis (the bones become brittle and fragile from loss of tissue, typically as a result of hormonal changes, or deficiency of calcium or vitamin D) (ordered 11/23/21).
-Lidocane 4 percent- apply one patch topically once daily for 12 hours-off for 12 hours for pain (ordered 12/2/21).
-Losortan Potassium 50 mg daily for high blood pressure (ordered 11/23/21).
-Melatonin 3 mg -two at bedtime for insomnia (ordered 11/23/21).
-Senexon 8.6 mg twice daily for constipation (ordered 1/20/22).
-Bisacodyl 10 mg suppository- apply rectally as needed daily for constipation (ordered 11/23/21).
-Tylenol 325 mg two tabs every 6 hours as needed for pain (ordered 11/23/21).
-Albuterol 90 microgram (mcg) inhaler- two puffs by mouth every four hours as needed for wheezing (ordered 11/25/21).
-Miralax powder-mix 17 grams in liquid and take once daily as needed for constipation.
-Citalopram 20 mg daily for depression (ordered 2/15/22).
-Risperdone 0.5 mg daily for psychosis (ordered 2/8/22).
-Depakote 375 mg at noon for mood disorder (ordered 3/22/22).
-Renew Ativan 0.5 mg every 24 hours as needed for anxiety (discontinue on 4/1/22) (ordered 3/18/22).
Record review of the resident's monthly Drug Regimen Review showed:
-On 12/22/21, the pharmacist checked see report for any noted irregularities/recommendations.
-On 1/19/22, the pharmacist checked see report for any noted irregularities/recommendations and there was a note showing evaluate Ativan intended duration.
-On 2/10/22, the pharmacist checked, see report for any noted irregularities/recommendations.
-On 3/16/22, the pharmacist checked, see report for any noted irregularities/recommendations.
-There were no physician signatures acknowledging the recommendations or documenting the physician's response to the recommendations.
Record review of the resident's medical record showed no follow up showing what the pharmacist's recommendations were (consultation reports), whether the physician was notified of any of the recommendations and what the physician's response was to those recommendations.
Observation and interview on 3/22/22 at 9:47 A.M., showed the resident was just exiting the bathroom with the nursing staff. He/She was dressed for the weather and was clean. He/She ambulated independently to his/her bed and sat down. He/She said he/she was having a good day today and felt good. He/She said the staff was nice to him/her and he/she liked them. The resident then stood up to go to the morning activity. The resident was alert with confusion but did not seem to be lethargic or behaving in a way that would indicate any medical concerns.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 10:32 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) F said:
-He/she managed the medical records in the facility.
-They keep three months of the resident's most recent records in the resident's medical record and keep three months of medical records in the overflow.
-He/she looked in both areas of the resident's medical records and there was no documentation showing the Drug Regimen Review reports and recommendations or the physician response was in any of the residents records.
-Usually the pharmacist would check that there were recommendations on the monthly Drug Regimen Review form then the recommendations were documented on the pharmacist consultation report. The physician responds on that form.
-The Drug Regimen Review recommendations should be in the medical record or in the overflow. If the recommendation was less than three months ago, it should have been in the resident's medical record.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 10:39 A.M., LPN J said:
-The pharmacist comes in and completes the resident's monthly medication review, then they provide the list of recommendations for each resident to either the physician or LPN F who provided the list to the physician.
-The physician would sign off on the recommendation report and then the Charge nurse was provided with the report to be filed in the resident's medical record.
-The physician would document his/her response on the consultation report then they act upon it and the report is filed in the resident's medical record.
-He/She did not receive the pharmacist's consultation reports (that were to be filed in the resident's medical record) and did not know what the pharmacist's recommendations for the most recent three months were.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-They get pharmacy recommendations from the pharmacist monthly.
-He/She would review the recommendations for each resident and give them to the resident's physician.
-The physician was expected to review the pharmacist's recommendations and they were expected to respond to the recommendations.
-The physician's response was usually documented on the pharmacist's consultation report.
-They would then ensure the report was placed in the resident's medical record.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow facility policies and procedures for checking the nurse aide registry on all newly hired employees in accordance with federal requir...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow facility policies and procedures for checking the nurse aide registry on all newly hired employees in accordance with federal requirements prior to employing four of nine employees sampled for the background screening process. The facility census was 171 residents.
Record review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect policy and procedure dated 8/1/17, showed the purpose was to ensure facility staff was doing all that is within their power to prevent occurrences of abuse, mistreatment, exploitation, involuntary seclusion, injuries of unknown origin and misappropriation of property for all patients. It showed:
-The facility will screen potential employees for a history of abuse, neglect, or mistreating patients, including checking with the appropriate licensing boards and registries.
1. Record review of the following employee records showed:
-Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) F was hired on 7/7/21. There was no evidence to show the Nurse Aide Registry Check was completed.
-Certified Medication Technician (CMT) D was hired on 10/25/21. There was no evidence to show the Nurse Aide Registry Check was completed.
-Rehabilitative Aide A was hired on 10/25/21. There was no evidence to show the Nurse Aide Registry Check was completed.
-Maintenance Worker A was hired on 3/21/22. There was no evidence to show the Nurse Aide Registry Check was completed.
-Maintenance Worker B was hired on 7/12/21. There was no evidence to show the Nurse Aide Registry Check was completed.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 4:45 P.M., the Administrator said the background screening process should include completing the nurse aide registry for all employees to include staff who are not in nursing.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. Record review of Resident #118's face sheet showed he/she was re-admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis (M...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. Record review of Resident #118's face sheet showed he/she was re-admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis (MS - a disease in which the immune system eats away at the protective covering of nerves).
Record review of the resident's Quarterly assessment MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-The resident had MS.
-The resident had a life expectancy of less than six months.
-The resident was receiving hospice care.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 2/11/22 showed:
-The resident was on hospice care for a diagnosis of MS.
-The hospice nurse, Chaplin, social services, and CNA were to visit the resident as needed.
Record review of the Nurse's Notes dated 2/25/22 showed the hospice Nurse came to assess the resident.
Record review of the resident's POS dated March 2022 showed:
-The resident had a code status of DNR dated 4/28/21.
-There was no order for the hospice company to provide services to the resident.
Record review of the Nurse's Progress Notes dated 3/17/22 showed:
-The hospice nurse came into the facility.
-The hospice nurse said the resident was declining.
Record review of the resident's Hospice notebook on 3/21/22 at 2:01 P.M. showed:
-The resident was started on hospice services on 12/15/21 related to M.S.
-The resident was to have one visit by the hospice Nurse weekly and two visits as needed.
-The Chaplain (Clergy) was to visit one time a month and four visits as needed.
-The Social Worker was to visit once a month.
-There was no documentation from the hospice Nurse, Social worker, or Clergy.
During an interview on 3/21/22 at 2:30 P.M. the ADON said:
-The hospice staff was to chart in the Hospice notebook.
-There was no documentation from the Nurse, Clergy, or Social Worker in the notebook.
-Documentation should have been done after each visit.
-There was no Physician's order for the resident to have received Hospice services on the POS.
-There should have been a current order on the POS if the resident was still on hospice services.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 8:37 A.M. Hospice RN B said:
-He/she writes up each visit then turns it into his/her office where it is uploaded in their computer system.
-He/she was to bring the monthly notes to the facility.
-He/she had a big stack of notes but hasn't brought the notes for quiet some time.
-He/she communicated with the nursing staff while he/she was at the facility.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 2:33 P.M. LPN C said:
-He/she thought the hospice Nurse came out to visit the residents weekly.
-He/she did not know how often the Social Worker or Clergy came to visit the hospice residents.
-The hospice staff should have documented in the notebooks what they had done each time they came to visit the residents.
-He/she was told by the hospice Nurses, they were really backed up with work.
-Not all of the hospice staff were documenting in the notebooks.
-He/she had no idea who was responsible to ensure the hospice staff were documenting or leaving a note in the notebook.
5. Record review of Resident #166's face sheet showed he/she had been re-admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Cerebral Vascular Accident (CVA - an interruption of blood flow to the brain cells).
Record review of the resident's care plan dated 2/21/22 showed:
-The resident admitted to hospice with the diagnosis of CVA to monitor monthly vital signs, weekly weights for comfort/quality of life.
-The resident was under hospice care for decline and wight loss.
Record review of the resident's POS dated March 2022 showed:
-The resident was a full code (all life saving measures to be done) dated 1/28/22.
-The resident was admitted to hospice services related to CVA, dated 2/21/22.
Record review of the resident's significant change MDS dated [DATE] showed:
-Primary condition was a stroke.
-Had a condition where life expectancy was less than six months.
Observation on 3/21/22 at 1:28 P.M. showed the hospice Nurse was in the facility to see the resident.
Record review on 03/21/22 2:28 PM of the resident's Hospice notebook showed:
-The resident had been admitted to hospice services on 2/21/22.
-There was no documentation in the hospice notebook by the hospice staff.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 10:42 A.M. the ADON/IP said:
-There should have been documentation by Hospice staff each time they come into see the resident.
-He/she could not find any documentation in the Hospice notebook.
-The facility used to have the charge nurse sign a report paper when the hospice staff had visited the resident.
-That practice was not being followed.
-The charge nurse would have been responsible to ensure hospice had documented their visit.
-He/she had called the hospice company who said they have documentation, but had never sent it over to the facility.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 1:06 P.M. LPN D said:
-It was written on the Nurse's report sheet if a resident was a hospice patient.
-The hospice Nurse would tell them what they were going to do with the resident. when they came into the facility.
-He/she did not know where the hospice staff was to document the cares they had provided.
-He/she did not know if there were Hospice notebooks or where they would have been kept.
-He/she had never seen paper work from hospice staff.
-The hospice staff would give a verbal report to the facility nurse.
-Sometimes the hospice Nurse would write orders in the resident's chart.
-He/she had never seen a Social Worker or Clergy from hospice visit the residents.
6. During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-He/she would expect hospice communication between facility nursing staff and hospice staff.
-He/she would have expected to see notes by facility staff if hospice was at facility to see the resident.
-He/she would expect to have documentation in each resident's hospice binder from the hospice visit.
-The facility administration made a recent change that Hospice would be reviewed during the Quality Assurance (QA) process.
-He/she was not aware of who was responsible of reviewing hospice services prior to survey.
-When a resident admitted to the facility and was already on hospice, he/she would except to have a physician's order be transcribed to the resident's POS for continued hospice services.
-He/she would expect nursing staff to verify physician's orders had been carried over month to month, including hospice status.
3. Record review of Resident #129's Face sheet showed he/she was admitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses:
-Alzheimer's Disease (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions).
-Dementia with behavioral disturbance (a general term for a decline in mental ability resulting in memory loss, and other mental abilities severe enough to interfere with daily functioning) with behavioral disorders (includes agitation, aggression, paranoid delusions, hallucinations, and sleep disorders).
-Atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery (build-up of fats, cholesterol, and other substances in and on the artery walls causing obstruction of blood flow) without angina pectoris (severe pain in the chest spreading out to other areas cause by inadequate blood supply to the heart).
Record review of the resident's POS dated 1/1/22 to 1/31/22 showed to admit to Hospice related to atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris (severe pain in the chest), dated 1/28/22.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 2/2/22 showed he/she was admitted to hospice for atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris.
Record review of the resident's Significant Change MDS dated [DATE] showed he/she entered hospice care.
During an interview on 3/22/22 at 1:15 P.M., LPN D said:
-There were no hospice communication books.
-The hospice staff tell the facility nursing staff what they did with the resident.
-The hospice nurse lets the facility nurse know if there were any order changes and puts them in the facility orders.
During an interview on 3/22/22 at 1:54 P.M., Registered Nurse (RN) C said:
-Communication for hospice is in a hospice communication book in a drawer at the Nurses Station for each hospice resident.
-This resident was on hospice.
Observation on 3/22/22 at 2:00 P.M., RN C was unable to locate the resident's hospice book in the drawer at the Nurses Station.
During an interview on 3/22/22 at 2:05 P.M., RN C said:
-He/she will call hospice to see if they have a book started.
-He/she believed the resident had not been on hospice very long.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 9:00 A.M., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON)/Infection Control Specialist said the resident's hospice book was found and it was in the resident's room.
Record review of the resident's Hospice Communication Book showed:
-The resident was admitted to hospice on 2/1/22.
-Principal diagnosis of Atherosclerotic heart disease.
-The resident's code status was DNR.
-The discipline orders showed:
--Skilled Nursing for symptom management, once a week for 12 weeks, start date 2/1/22 end date 4/23/22.
-Aide, assist with Activities of Daily Living (ADL)'s, elimination cares, hygiene cares, safety, once a week for one week, two times a week for 12 weeks, start date 2/4/22 end date 4/29/22.
-The Hospice Care Plan showed:
--Activity level: transfer bed/chair; wheelchair.
--Functional limitations: bowel/bladder (incontinence); endurance; dyspnea (difficult or labored breathing) with minimal exertion.
--Mental, psychosocial, cognitive status: disoriented.
--Safety measures: fall precautions; standard precautions; transfer precautions.
--Nutrition: diet as tolerated.
Record review of the Hospice Clinical Narrative Visit Note showed:
-No skilled nursing visits for the month of February.
-One RN visit on 3/14/22 at 1:00 P.M., left at 1:30 P.M.
-One LPN visit on 3/7/22 at 9:00 A.M., left at 9:30 A.M.
Record review of the Hospice Aide Visit Note showed:
-No Hospice Aide visits for the month of February.
-Hospice Aide visits were recorded for twice a week from 3/1/22 through 3/17/22.
-The Hospice Aide visits were an hour each.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 2:45 P.M., Hospice RN A said:
-The February hospice notes may be in the medical records at facility.
-The hospice binders get thick and are thinned about every month.
-The hospice Aide puts the old records in the medical records box at Nurses station.
-This gets put into the patient's medical record at facility.
Requested the resident's February hospice records from the facility and they were not provided.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to have coordination of care between hospice (end of life) and the facility and to ensure staff were instructed where and how to retrieve the hospice providers electronic documentation for five sampled residents (Residents #45, #85, #129, #118, and #166); to transcribe ongoing hospice physician orders for two sampled residents (Residents #45 and #85); and to obtain current physician orders for hospice services for one sampled resident (Resident #118) out of 36 sampled residents. The facility census was 171 residents.
Record review of the facility undated policy titled Hospice showed:
-There was no outlined procedure for facility staff and Hospice staff to share communication/documentation.
-There was no mention of the requirement to obtain physician orders for Hospice or palliative care services.
Record review of a hospice contract between the hospice company and the facility dated 11/12/19 showed:
-Both parties would allow each other to have access to all records of Hospice services rendered to hospice patients.
-Collaborating with hospice representatives and coordinating facility staff participation in the care planning process for those hospice patients receiving hospice services.
-This would included establishing the manner of how communication would be documented between hospice and the facility to ensure the needs of the hospice patient were addressed and met 24 hours a day.
-Physician certification of the terminal illness for each hospice patient.
-The facility and hospice would prepare and maintain complete medical records for hospice patients receiving facility services in accordance with this agreement and would include all treatments, progress notes, authorization, physician orders and other pertinent information.
-Documentation of care and services provided by hospice would be filed and maintained in the facility chart.
1. Record review of Resident #45's undated admission Hospice Palliative Care Sheet showed:
-He/she was on palliative care services which began on 11/29/2016 at another care facility.
-Had an admitting palliative care diagnosis of Lung Cancer which had spread to his/her brain.
Record review of the resident's admission Record showed he/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Record review of the resident's admission Order Medication and Treatment dated 9/17/21 showed the resident had the following physician's orders:
-Under his/her Code status had Do Not Resuscitate (DNR - an order from a doctor that
resuscitation should not be attempted if a person suffers cardiac or respiratory arrest) and Hospice.
-Had a diagnosis of Lung Cancer that had spread to the brain.
-No order was transcribed to his/her Physician Order Sheet (POS) of who the resident's hospice provider was and type of hospice care the resident was receiving.
Record review of the resident's Care Plan dated 12/27/21 showed:
-The resident was on hospice services for cancer.
-Provide the resident access to technology to communicate with hospice and families as needed.
-Social services to be available to provide 1:1 visits and encourage verbalization of feelings as needed.
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 12/27/21, showed the resident:
-Was on hospice or palliative care services.
-Was cognitively intact and able to make needs known.
Record review of the resident's social services quarterly assessment dated [DATE] showed the resident continued as a DNR status and remained on hospice services.
Record review of the resident's POS dated 1/1/22 to 3/25/22 showed the resident had the following physician's orders:
-Under his/her CODE status had DNR.
-No order was transcribed to POS related to ongoing hospice or palliative care services.
Record review of the resident Nursing notes from 1/1/22 to 3/25/22 showed:
-There was no facility nursing documentation that showed if the resident had any hospice staff visits scheduled or if the hospice staff had completed visits.
Record review of the resident's Hospice Binder on 3/23/22 showed:
-The resident had an initial telephone hospice physician's orders dated 11/29/16 from another facility.
-There was no current documentation that showed hospice staff visits were scheduled or had been completed.
Observation and interview on 3/23/22 at 9:11 A.M., showed the resident:
-Was sitting in a high back wheelchair and was able to wheel himself/herself around the facility.
-He/she was able to interact with staff and make needs known.
-The resident said:
-Hospice staff had been coming to see him/her at least 2-3 times a week.
-He/she had no concerns with the hospice care he/she was receiving.
-Hospice had provided him/her with personal care items and medication.
-He/she had been getting his/her bath from the facility staff and the hospice staff.
During an interview on 3/23/22 at 10:48 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) E said:
-The facility had received an email on 9/16/21 at 1:22 P.M. showing the resident was to be admitted to the facility on [DATE] from home.
--The hospice company would be delivering a bed and wheelchair.
--The resident had a diagnosis of lung cancer that had spread to the brain, pulmonary embolism (a blockage in one of the arteries in your lungs, usually caused by blood clots), and high blood pressure.
-The initial hospice order was obtained during the resident's admission process on 9/17/21.
-The initial POS dated 9/20/21 had a physician's order that the resident was on hospice services and would not be appropriate for therapy services.
-There was no hospice order transcribed on the resident's current POS.
-The resident's code status of DNR and hospice status was sent to the pharmacy to be placed on his/her POS.
2. Record review of Resident #85's admission Record showed:
-He/she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Dysphagia (difficulty or discomfort in swallowing, as a symptom of disease).
-There was no documentation related to the resident receiving palliative care.
Record review of the resident's Physician History and Physical dated 12/14/21 showed documentation on the resident social history that he/she had been considered a palliative care resident and currently not on hospice services.
Record review of the resident's Annual MDS dated [DATE] showed the resident:
-Was on hospice or palliative care services.
-Was cognitively intact and able to make needs known.
Record review of the resident's social services quarterly assessment dated [DATE] showed the resident continued as a DNR status and remained on palliative care services.
Record review of the resident's POS dated 1/1/22 to 3/25/22 showed the resident had the following physician's orders:
-Under his/her CODE status DNR.
-No physician's order was transcribed to his/her POS related to ongoing palliative care services.
Record review of the resident's Hospice binder on 3/23/22 showed:
-The resident was on palliative care due to cognitive deficit.
-There was no current documentation showing hospice staff visits were scheduled or had been completed.
Record review of the resident's most current palliative care notes showed:
-The facility had to request a copy of the notes as there were none in the facility.
-The facility received a fax on 3/23/22 at 3:49 P.M. indicating the resident's last palliative care visit was on 2/22/22.
Record review of the resident's nursing notes from 1/1/22 to 3/25/22 showed the resident had no facility nursing documentation that showed hospice staff visits were scheduled or had been completed.
During interview on 3/23/22 at 11:05 A.M., LPN F said:
-The resident's hospice orders should have been transcribed to the POS each month.
-When hospice staff arrived to the units, they would let facility nursing know who they were here to see.
-Hospice staff would normally place copy of hospice visit notes into the resident's Hospice binder after completing a visit.
-The resident had been on palliative care for a long time.
-The Palliative care/Hospice staff do not visit as often.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to safely secure the medication storage cart on multiple ...
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 safely secure the medication storage cart on multiple occurrences for one out of eight medication carts; to safely secure facility stock of over the counter medication storage cabinet for one out three storage cabinets; to label and date a multi-use vial of medication when open, and failed to ensure the crash cart was locked for one out of two crash carts. The facility census was 171 residents.
Record review of the facility's Medication Storage in LTC (Long Term Care) Policy, dated 10/12/2012, showed:
-Medications and biologicals were stored safely, securely and properly.
-Medication supply was accessible only by licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications.
-Only licensed nurses and those lawfully authorized to administer medications such as Certified Medication Technicians (CMT) were allowed access to medications.
-Medication rooms, carts and medication supplies were locked or attended by persons with authorized access.
-Medication storage areas are monitored on a monthly basis and corrective action taken if identified any problems.
-Outdated item should be immediately removed from stock and disposed of per facility protocols. The items reordered from the pharmacy.
-Refrigerator medication must be kept in a closed labeled container.
Record review of the Spring Education Days, dated March 2022, showed:
-Registered Nurses (RN's), Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN's) and CMT's were trained on locking medication carts.
-Sixty-three staff signed the sign-in sheet.
1. Observation on 3/22/22 from 8:30 A.M. to 9:20 A.M. showed:
-At 8:34 A.M. CMT A left the medication cart unattended and unlocked.
--One resident was in the hall way, approximately 15 feet away from the cart.
-At 8:37 A.M. CMT A walked away from medication cart, unlocked.
--No resident was in the hall.
-At 8:42 A.M. CMT A left the medication cart to attend to a resident who said he/she dropped a pill.
--The medication cart was unlocked.
-At 8:44 A.M. CMT A walked away from the unlocked medication cart.
--No residents were nearby.
-At 9:11 A.M. CMT A walked away from the medication cart leaving it unlocked and unattended.
-At 9:20 A.M. CMT A left the medication cart unlocked and unattended.
--No residents were in the hall.
Observation on 3/24/22 at 9:12 AM showed:
-Medication cart was unlocked and unattended on 200 hall, South (outside of room [ROOM NUMBER]).
-One resident in a wheelchair was about 10 feet away from the cart.
-No CMT or licensed staff were noted in the area.
-CMT A observed exiting a resident room and returned to the medication cart.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 8:18 A.M., LPN A said:
-Medication carts and room were to be kept locked whenever away from the room or cart.
-He/she received medication storage training in orientation and then yearly after.
-Also received training one on one.
Observation on 3/25/22 from 8:20 A.M. to 8:45 A.M. showed:
-At 8:24 A.M. a medication cart was unlocked and unattended.
-The cart was located near the nurse's station, outside of the dining room on 200 hall, South.
-At 8:38 AM the medication cart was left unlocked and unattended with one resident next to cart.
-At 8:40 A.M. CMT A left the medication cart unlocked and unattended.
--No residents were nearby.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 8:45 A.M., CMT A said:
-It was very important to keep the medication carts and storage rooms locked whenever not attended by staff.
-He/she kept the medication carts and rooms locked and kept everything safe.
-The facility expectation was to keep the medication cart locked when away from it and medication storage room locked at all times.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 9:10 A.M., RN B said:
-Facility protocol was to make sure the medication cart was locked and no medications were left on top.
-Facility protocol was to make sure the medication storage cabinets were locked in the medication room, as well as the door to the medication room.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 9:26 A.M., CMT B said:
-The expectation was that employees must lock the medication cart every time they walked away.
-Medication room was always locked.
-Training was received all the time.
-Administration walked around and made sure staff lock the medication carts.
-He/she received one on one training.
-A skills lab was presented two to three times a year.
-There was a skills lab last week.
-Anyone who attended the skills lab signed the sign in sheet after the training was completed.
-LPN B conducted the education.
During an interview on 3/25/22 10:16 A.M., LPN B said
-Last week the staff started the skills lab.
-Skills lab had a session on medication storage and keeping medication carts locked when not attended.
-It was supposed to be completed this week but survey showed up.
-Not all staff were able to complete the training.
-The training would be continued after the survey week.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-Anytime authorized staff leave the medication cart it must be locked.
-If staff stepped away from cart for any amount of time it needed to be locked.
-Medication storage training was provided twice a year.
-If an issue was found on the floor with staff leaving medication carts unlocked and unattended then one on one training was done on the spot.
-The Infection Control Specialist and LPN B were responsible for documenting in-service training.
-LPN F conducted weekly medication cart audits and reported any chronically unlocked medication carts to the DON.
-CMT's and nurses on the floor and charge nurses helped monitor as well and checked to be sure the medication carts were locked when unattended.
5. Multiple observations between 3/21/22 and 3/25/22 at various times of day showed:
-A crash cart (a set of drawers on wheels used in cart hospitals for dispensing emergency medications) was located behind the 2 South nurses' station.
-The crash cart had a defibrillator (a device used to send an electric shock to the heart to restore a normal heartbeat) sitting on the top of the cart plugged into a wall outlet.
-There was no means of securing the defibrillator or the drawers with medications inside of them such as a lock.
Continuous observation on 3/22/22 from 8:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. showed:
-Two residents were observed sitting behind the nurses station between the nurses' station and the crash cart.
-On three different occurrences there was no staff member at the nurse's station for more than five minutes each time.
Observation on 3/22/22 at 2:57 P.M. of the 2 South crash cart showed:
-There was no break away plastic lock on the crash cart.
-The crash cart had a defibrillator.
-There were medications in the drawers which included Epinephrine (a medication used to treat severe allergic reactions) and Atropine (a medication used to treat heart rhythm problems).
-The drawers containing the medications were not locked.
-Record review on 3/22/22 at 2:57 P.M. of the crash cart check list showed the tear away plastic lock was not checked on 3/20/22 and 3/21/22.
During an interview on 3/22/22 at 3:00 P.M. Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) said:
-The crash cart should have been locked.
-The crash cart should have been checked daily to ensure it was locked.
-There was a plastic tear away lock that signified if the crash cart had been used if it was gone.
-There was no plastic lock on the cart.
-He/she was not aware of any emergencies on that floor where the crash cart would have been used.
-The crash cart check list sheet did not indicate the plastic lock had not been checked on 3/20/22 and 3/21/22.
-The crash cart contained the medications Epinephrine (adrenaline. A substance produced by the medulla inside of the adrenal gland) and Atropine (medicine used to treat the symptoms of low heart rate) which were visible through the clear plastic lid on the top of the cart.
-All nurses were responsible to check the crash cart daily ensuring it was locked.
-He/she would send the crash cart down to the pharmacy to be checked out.
Continuous observation on 3/23/22 from 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 A.M. showed:
-The crash cart had a plastic tear away lock on it.
-One female resident was seated behind the nurses station for more than one hour.
-The resident rolled around the nurses' station in his/her wheel chair.
-The staff would leave the resident alone at the nursing station for five minutes while they left the area.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 1:19 P.M. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D said:
-He/she did not know who was responsible for checking the crash cart.
-He/she did not know if it had to be locked.
-Maybe the code team (a specialty team trained to respond to emergencies) was supposed to check it.
-There were times when residents were sitting behind the desk because they needed closer observation because of their behaviors.
-There were times when no one was at the desk for more than five minutes when it was meal time.
-Someone could come off of the elevator and get into the medication cabinet or into the crash cart and take the medications without being seen by the staff if no one was at the Nurses' station.
During an interview 3/24/22 at 2:01 P.M. LPN D said:
-The charge nurse on day and night shift were to check the crash cart to ensure the lock was on it.
-Someone from Administration turns on the defibrillator to check it.
-One of the female residents has a history of pulling off the lock on the crash cart.
-On 3/20/22 and 3/21/22 the lock on the crash cart was not checked to ensure it was locked.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 2:00 P.M. the Director of Nursing (DON) said:
-The Quality Assurance Nurse was responsible for checking the crash carts.
-He/she was not available this week as he/she was not working.
-The crash cart should have been double locked.
-It should have been stored in a medication room which should have been locked and the cart should also have been locked.
-There was Epinephrine and Atropine in the crash cart.
-There was a resident on 2 South that pulls the plastic lock off of the crash cart.
2. Observation on 3/21/22 of third floor north showed two unknown wheelchair bound residents were sitting behind the nursing desk at different times that day.
Observation on 3/22/22 at 2:07 P.M. of the third floor north nursing station area showed:
-There was an upper cabinet on the back wall of the open area of nurses station that was unlocked.
-This cabinet was easily accessible from the hallway and located close to the entrance of the unit.
-The cabinet was found to be unlocked while looking for the facility Hospice binder and care plan binders.
--Opened the doors to find a large amount (100+) of unopened over the counter medications, including but not limited to Acetaminophen (fever and pain reliever), Aspirin (ASA), Melatonin (sleep aid), Magnesium citrate (is a saline laxative), Milk of Magnesia (used to treat occasional constipation) and cough syrup.
---This was the facility over the counter medication storage cabinet.
---The four door cabinet had no outside labeling of what was inside the cabinet.
---The right side doors were unlocked and the lock was broken.
---The left side of doors of the cabinet were also unlocked.
-Residents were observed to be behind and around the nurses station.
-On the morning of 3/22/22, one resident was observed seated behind the nurses station for more than one hour.
During an interview on 3/22/22 at 2:09 P.M., CMT C said:
-He/she had placed a work order to have the lock fixed on Friday last week (3/18/22).
-The cabinets needed a new key as it should be the same key for both sides of the cabinet.
-He/she had the old key on his/her key ring.
-The over the counter medication storage cabinet doors should be locked at all times.
Observation on 3/22/22 at 2:14 P.M. showed Maintenance team arrived on the unit to fix the locks.
During an interview on 3/22/22 at 2:17 P.M., Maintenance employee C said:
-He/she did not have a work order from Friday 3/18/22 for a broken lock.
-He/she had just received a call from CMT C a little while ago.
-Maintenance was able to replace the locks with other locks he/she had in stock and the same key would work.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 1:19 P.M., LPN D said:
-The medicine cabinet should be locked.
-It had been broken since January 2022.
-There were times when residents were sitting behind the nursing desk.
-There was one resident that would sit behind the desk often because he/she would try to get up out of his/her wheelchair.
-There were times when no staff would be at the desk more than 5 minutes at a time, especially around meal time.
-It would be possible for anyone (visitor, resident or staff) to come off of the elevator and get into the medication cabinet.
3. Observation and interview on 3/24/22 at 11:18 A.M. of the medication refrigerator on First floor South with LPN J showed:
-Refrigerator medication included Tuberculin purified protein derivative (PPD, is used in a skin test to help diagnose tuberculosis (TB) infection), expires on 9/22.
--The PPD box and bottle was open and did not have a date when had been opened.
-LPN J said medication should been dated on the box and the bottle when opened.
-All nurses on the units should be monitoring the medication carts and refrigerator for expired medications and to ensure medications that were open were dated.
-He/she does not remember any recent PPD testing performed on this unit.
-If medication vial was not dated, he/she would expect nursing staff not use the vial and to be destroyed by two nursing staff.
4. Observation on 3/24/22 at 11:43 A.M., Third Floor South with LPN K showed:
-The medication refrigerator was locked.
-Inside the refrigerator was control substance blue drawer that was not locked.
--Inside the unlocked blue drawer were three unopened vials of Ativan (a controlled medication used to treat anxiety).
-LPN K did not have a key that would lock the blue drawer and was not able to locate a key that would lock the blue drawer with the controlled medications in it.
During an interview on 3/24/22 at 2:01 P.M., LPN F said:
-The medication areas were monitored for expiration dates at least weekly, during the day shift.
-Medication should be dated when opened.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 12:00 P.M., the DON said:
-LPN F was responsible for completing medication carts and medication area audits.
-He/she not sure how often monitoring was completed, but at least weekly.
-CMT's would also monitor their medication carts for expired medications.
-He/she would expect medication carts to be locked at all times when not in use or if nursing or CMT had step away.
-He/she would expect nursing staff and CMT's to date medications when they were opened.
-He/she would except staff to report any issues with locked medication items or broken locks to administration immediately.
-He/she would expect the floor nurses to ensure refrigerated controlled medications were doubled locked at all times.
-The facility staffing coordinator provides training at least two time a year related to medication storage.
-The DON was made aware of the third floor south medication drawer and they have removed the medication until the lock can be fixed. The lock was broken and possibly the key was broken off in the lock.
-He/she was not sure if the over the counter storage cabinet had to be locked at all times, he/she would follow-up.
-The refrigerator medication drawer on three south was broken and facility moved the medication out of refrigerator until can fix the lock.
During an interview on 3/25/22 at 2:05 P.M. LPN F said:
-He/she completed audits for stock medication for expiration dates and E-kit audits. every Friday.
-Licensed nurse's and CMT's monitor the carts and refrigerators.