CRITICAL
(K)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe environment to prevent resident-to-resident abuse for three (Residents #197, #198, and #234) of three residents reviewed for resident-to-resident abuse. All residents on the [NAME] Unit were at risk of abuse from Resident #105.
Resident #105 had diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia, dementia with behavior disturbances, and anxiety and was known to be aggressive. Resident #105 punched Resident #197 on 06/02/2021, resulting in an emergency room visit and stitches to Resident #197's upper lip. Resident #105 had inappropriate sexual contact with Resident #198 on 08/13/2021. Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair on 10/07/2021. Staff reported that Resident #105 got agitated and aggressive unprovoked. The facility staff stated that Resident #105 grabbed residents inappropriately and hit residents and staff. Staff stated that residents and staff were fearful of Resident #105. The Assistant Director of Nursing stated that Resident #105's behaviors created a stressful environment for other residents and staff. Following each of these identified incidences, the facility failed to implement any measures which prevented and ensured there were no repeated situations that put other residents at risk of physical or sexual assault from Resident #105.
It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The immediate jeopardy (IJ) was related to State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, 483.12 (Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation) at a scope and severity of K.
The IJ began on 08/02/2021 when Resident #105 returned to the facility after the resident was sent to a psychiatric long-term care following a physical assault on Resident #197. Although the record indicated Resident #105 continued to exhibit aggressive behaviors which included grabbing, hitting, and using vulgar language on staff and residents upon the resident's return from the psychiatric setting, the facility failed to put measures in place to ensure residents were free from abuse perpetrated by Resident #105. The resident assaulted two additional residents respectively on 08/13/2021 and on 10/07/2021.
On 10/09/2021 at 6:18 PM, an immediate jeopardy (IJ) was identified. At 9:55 PM, the facility administrator was provided with the completed IJ template and notified of the existence of an IJ for abuse. The Administrator signed the template and returned the original to the survey team. A Removal Plan was requested.
On 10/10/2021, the survey team conducted an onsite verification to verify the Removal Plan had been implemented. Resident #105 had been removed from the facility on 10/10/2021. The facility continued to train staff on recognizing and preventing, reporting, and investigating abuse. The IJ continued until 10/10/2021 at 6:17 PM, when the survey team verified the elements of the Removal Plan had been implemented.
The noncompliance remained on 10/10/2021 for no actual harm with the potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy based on the facility continuing in-servicing with facility staff.
Findings included:
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated the facility admitted Resident #105 with diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, wandering, restlessness and agitation, and severe psychotic features. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired with a SAMS (Staff Assessment for Mental Status). The resident required physical assistance of two persons to dressing and toileting. The resident required physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene. The resident required assistance with setup for bed mobility and eating. The resident exhibited behavioral symptoms such as kicking, hitting, pushing, scratching, grabbing and sexual abuse directed towards others. The resident's identified symptoms put others at significant risk for physical injury. The resident significantly intruded on the privacy or activity of others. The resident exhibited the behaviors four to six times daily. The resident currently resided in a locked behavior unit.
A review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a behavior care plan, dated 02/24/2020, indicated under the focus portion of the plan that Resident #105 resisted care and was combative (hitting/punching/slapping) with staff and at times requires additional certified behavioral technician (CBT) for provision of care. The focus portion also indicated Resident #105 wanders and the resident becomes very intrusive with peers, yells, curses, and threatens peers. Resident #105 takes food from peers' trays at times, becomes verbally and physically aggressive. The intervention portion of the care plan, last revised 02/27/2020, included the following: allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm, staff to monitor the effectiveness of techniques and report any changes to nurse, doctor, or interdisciplinary committee (IDC) team, offer appropriate seating areas to reduce agitation and over-stimulation, and offer distraction and remove from area when becoming agitated.
The record revealed the facility did not re-evaluate the effectiveness of the care plan and ensured to integrate measures other than those already in place after Resident #105 physically assaulted Resident #197 on 06/02/2021, after Resident #105 physically assaulted and sexually assaulted Resident #198 on 08/13/2021, and after Resident #105 physically assaulted Resident #234 on 10/07/2021. Resident #105's care plan had not been updated past 02/27/2021.
Observations conducted during the survey from 10/06/2021 through 10/09/2021 revealed Resident #105 was not monitored and was by themself. The resident was always observed in the personal spaces of other residents with closed fist, threatening to punch them. Resident #105 continuously said derogative language, such as using the F-word and B-word towards staff and residents. The resident grabbed staff when they walked by the resident. The observations revealed staff sat at the nurses' station and at the lounges across the unit and were not able to protect other residents should Resident #105 decide to assault a resident.
On 10/06/2021 at 3:29 PM, Resident #105 was heard saying the F word which was directed at staff and residents on the [NAME] Unit. Resident #105 approached the surveyor with a closed fist, threatening to punch the surveyor during this time.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:05 AM, Resident #105 aggressively grabbed the Rehab Assistant (RA) by his left arm when the RA walked by the resident.
The following three resident-to-resident abuse incidents occurred involving Resident #105:
1. Review of a facility incident report, dated on 06/02/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #197 was propelling themself in their wheelchair on the [NAME] Unit hallway trying to get past Resident #105. The incident report indicated Resident #197 told Resident #105 to excuse them, and Resident #105 responded by punching Resident #197 with a closed fist, which caused a laceration to Resident #197's upper lip. The incident report indicated Resident #197 required an emergency room visit to get their upper lip sutured. The incident report indicated that the facility sent Resident #105 to a psychiatric long-term care, where Resident #105 was admitted from 06/02/2021 through 08/02/2021.
Although the 08/02/2021 hospital discharge record indicated that Resident #105 returned to the facility with an order of an antipsychotic (haloperidol 5 milligram [mg] tablet, give one tablet [5mg] by oral route three times per day) added to the resident's medication regimen, the nursing progress notes indicated that Resident #105 continued to exhibit aggressive behaviors. Upon Resident #105's return to the facility and the documented continued aggressive behaviors of the resident, the facility failed to address the unprovoked physical assault Resident #105 directed towards Resident #197 by failing to put a measure in place to prevent future physical assault directed by Resident #105 to other residents at the facility. There was no evidence in the record that the facility followed up with Resident #197 to know how the interaction with Resident #105 made the resident feel. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #197 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15. The resident required extensive assistance of two persons for transfer.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 1:50 PM, Resident #197 stated they frequently had a nightmare about the situation (referring to the assault incident perpetrated by Resident #105 against them). The resident stated they stayed in their room when Resident #105 was in the common area. Resident #197 stated that Resident #105 was a monster who tormented women. The resident stated that facility staff did not interview Resident #197 about the incident after Resident #197 returned from the hospital.
2. Review of a facility incident report, dated 08/13/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #105 was sexually inappropriate with Resident #198. Per the report, Resident #105 was observed to have touched Resident #198 on their buttocks while Resident #198 was walking in an unidentified hallway. It was noted in the report that when Resident #198 questioned why Resident #105 touched them inappropriately, Resident #105 pushed Resident #198 to the floor.
A review of Resident #198's medical record indicated the facility assessed Resident #198 in this case to rule out any injury. There was documentation of a follow-up communication with Resident #198 to know how the resident felt following the interaction with Resident #105.
Review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a monthly psychology follow-up was done on 09/14/2021 at 10:45 AM, after the incident. The medical record did not indicate the facility made the psychiatrist aware of the inappropriate sexual behavior Resident #105 exhibited towards Resident #198. Resident #105 continued to be reported, per nursing progress notes, to exhibit aggressive behaviors. However, the facility did not devise an intervention to ensure other residents at the facility continued to be free of abuse from Resident #105. The record indicated Resident #105 continued to abuse vulnerable residents and staff and posed a safety risk verbally and physically. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #198 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance and anxiety disorder. The resident was independent with activities of daily living.
3. A review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a nursing note written by Registered Nurse (RN) #11 on 10/07/2021 at 1:58 PM. Per the note, Resident #105 was reported to be pacing the unit, charging at staff and residents. The note indicated that Resident #105 pulled on Resident #234's hair while Resident #234 sat at the table in the lounge area of the unit. There was no documentation of a nursing assessment completed with Resident #234 to determine the resident's state of mind or whether the resident was in pain after the encounter. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
On 10/10/2021 at 3:39 PM, the Activity Aide (AA) stated that he witnessed the encounter between Resident #105 and Resident #234 firsthand. Per the AA, he was sitting with a group of residents on A lounge (an enclosed common area on the [NAME] Unit) during a group activity when he saw Resident #105 come into the lounge, made eye contact with Resident #234, and yanked a bulk of Resident #234's hair such that Resident #234's head tilted abruptly towards the side of the pull. The AA stated that Resident #234 yelled out, ''Ouch, Ouch, in a manner that was consistent with discomfort/pain. The AA stated that the incident happened quickly, and he was unable to intervene before Resident #105 laid their hand on Resident #234's hair. Per the AA, Resident #105 punched the AA in the chest and arm a couple of times when the AA stood up to intervene. The AA stated that when he thought he had successfully redirected Resident #105 out of the lounge and was headed to the nurses station to report the situation to the nurse, Resident #105 made their way back into the lounge through another door which accessed the lounge from another side of the unit and physically assaulted Resident #234 again in the same manner as described above. The AA stated that nursing staff came to intervene and successfully removed Resident #105 into the resident's room. The AA stated he reported the incident to RN #11 exactly how it unfolded. He verified that RN #11 did not come into the lounge to assess Resident #234 following the incident.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #234 admitted with diagnoses which included unspecified osteoarthritis, muscle weakness, and dementia with behavioral disturbance.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:39 AM, the RA stated that Resident #105 had been aggressive towards staff and residents since the resident's admission.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:25 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive, combative, and not easily redirectable. LPN #7 stated that Resident #7 liked to say racial slurs and derogatory speech. She stated that Resident #105 got into other residents' personal space. LPN #7 stated that the resident had grabbed, hit, and punched staff and residents. LPN #7 stated, You need to know how to speak, in order to not get the resident agitated. LPN #7 reviewed Resident #105's care plan and acknowledged Resident #105's care plan related to the resident's behavior had not been updated after it was formulated on 02/24/2020 through 02/27/2020. LPN #7 stated that she had no remarks about the intervention portion of Resident #105's care plan which read, Allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm.
On 10/07/2021 at 3:15 PM, Certified Behavioral Therapist (CBT) #1 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive towards residents and staff. He stated that Resident #105 insulted staff and residents with profanity. CBT #1 stated that the resident had hit staff and residents and was a safety concern to self and other residents.
On 10/09/2021 at 9:00 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated that Resident #105 had been very challenging with the resident's care. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105's behaviors created a stressful environment for other residents. ADON #2 stated that the only way the facility had limited the encounters with the resident was their proactiveness. Per ADON #2, Resident #105 had had more than ten incidents with staff and residents during which the resident physically assaulted staff and residents. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105 attacked residents and staff unprovoked. ADON #2 stated the facility had attempted to transfer the resident to another facility deemed more appropriate for the resident's care but were met with resistance. He gave an instance of when the facility sent the resident to [facility name omitted] which operated a psychiatric long-term care program, and Resident #105 was sent back within seven days with four-point restraints. He stated that no facility wanted to take responsibility for Resident #105. Addressing Resident #105's assault on Resident #197, ADON #2 stated that, following the incident on 06/02/2021, Resident #105 was sent to [facility name omitted], psychiatric hospital, where the resident was admitted and managed until the resident returned on 08/02/2021. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105 had their medication regimen adjusted at the psychiatric hospital prior to the resident's return to the facility. ADON #2 acknowledged that per the facility's record on Resident #105, the resident's aggressive behaviors continued upon the resident's return from the hospital. ADON #2 verified there was no adjustments in Resident #105's care plan which reflected the facility intervened in ensuring Resident #105 did not continue to abuse residents at the facility. Addressing the incident when Resident #105 was noted to have inappropriately touched Resident #198 on 08/13/2021, ADON #2 stated that the interaction was considered behavioral. Per the ADON, it was not uncommon for residents on the behavior unit to touch each other inappropriately. ADON #2 added Resident #105 was referred to the psychiatrist following the incident. The ADON, however, recanted his statement after reviewing the pertinent record and acknowledged there was nothing in the record that showed that the psychiatrist was made aware of Resident #105's inappropriate sexual behavior exhibited towards Resident #198. Addressing the incident on 10/07/2021 when Resident #105 was noted to have pulled Resident #234's hair, ADON #2 verified there was no documented assessment of Resident #234 by a nurse. Per the ADON, it was important to evaluate Resident #234 after the resident was physically assaulted, so that the resident was adequately monitored, and necessary treatment was given to address the aftermath of the encounter on the resident. ADON #2 stated that he interviewed the AA (the individual who witnessed the incident firsthand) on 10/08/2021 at approximately 6:30 PM. ADON #2 reiterated the AA's description of the incident as reported above. Per the ADON, when an abuse situation happened, the facility did two incident reports (one for the aggressor and the other for the victim) and two progress notes (assessments), and the family members of the two residents were contacted. The ADON stated that the facility investigated the abuse, did a reportable, and liaised with the medical director and the psychiatrist. He acknowledged the facility did not investigate the abuse instances perpetrated by Resident #105 to Residents #197, #198, and #234. ADON #2 stated that without an investigation, the facility was unable to identify the root cause of the perpetrated abuse instances. Therefore, they were unable to put a plan in place to ensure the residents at the facility were free from abuse. ADON #2 stated that the facility's interdisciplinary committee (IDC) had not met to address the situation with Resident #105.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at approximately 9:15 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 confirmed that no interventions were implemented after Resident #105 returned on 08/02/2021 from the psychiatric stay. ADON #2 verified that the facility failed to implement measures specified by the Abuse, Neglect, or Exploitation Policy after Resident #105's initial occurrence on 06/02/2021, which failed to protect residents from being abused.
On 10/10/2021 at 10:06 AM, the Nursing Home Administrator stated that it was important for the residents at the facility to be free of abuse, as it was their right. The nursing home administrator (NHA) stated that a different set of eyes sees the same situation differently. The NHA stated that he was not on the [NAME] Unit every day. Per the NHA, he had relied on ADON #2 to take care of the situations on the unit. The NHA stated that he had heard of incidents on abuse perpetrated by Resident #105 towards staff and residents. The NHA stated he had not seen Resident #105 being aggressive during his rounds. The NHA stated that he was majorly concerned about residents on the unit not eloping. The NHA stated that when an abuse incident was reported to be repeatedly perpetrated by the same resident, he relied on nursing staff to tell him what they (referring to nursing staff) had done and their input on what they thought the facility should do differently. The NHA stated that he expected an investigation into all abuse allegations. Per the NHA, investigation was key to identifying the trigger for the aggressor and it helped direct the proper intervention, which helped to ensure residents at the facility continued to be free from abuse. The NHA stated that he was not of the impression that the facility did not respond to the situation with Resident #105 accordingly. The surveyor informed the NHA that the contact phone numbers of the two psychiatrists who cared for Resident #105 were not on file. The NHA promised to facilitate an interview with the psychiatrists but failed to do so after repetitive reminders.
The facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect or Exploitation, with an effective date of 10/2020, indicated, The protection of patient rights is a key fundamental patient right. We will monitor and take action to protect and ensure that those rights are maintained. When abuse, neglect or exploitation is suspected or discovered, immediate corrective action will be taken . Physical abuse-actual injury: hitting, slapping, pinching, pushing, kicking . Sexual abuse: sexual coercion, non-consensual sexual contact, or sexual harassment.
Based on the plan that was provided to the surveyors, removal of IJ occurred on 10/09/2021 at 10:39 PM.
Onsite verification was conducted on 10/10/2021 to verify that the facility had implemented the Removal Plan. The onsite verification revealed the facility had transferred Resident #105 to the hospital for psychiatric evaluation. The facility started retraining all staff who worked on the [NAME] Unit on abuse which included identifying, reporting, and role of each employee in investigating abuse.
New Jersey Administrative Code 8:39- 4.1(a)(5)
CRITICAL
(K)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to implemen...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to implement their abuse policy to prohibit and prevent abuse by failing to put interventions in place to prevent further abuse perpetrated by Resident #105 towards three (Residents #197, #198, and #234) of three residents reviewed for resident-to-resident abuse.
Resident #105 had diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia, dementia with behavior disturbances, and anxiety and was known to be aggressive. Resident #105 punched Resident #197 on 06/02/2021, resulting in an emergency room visit and stitches to Resident #197's upper lip. Resident #105 had inappropriate sexual contact with Resident #198 on 08/13/2021. Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair on 10/07/2021. Staff reported that Resident #105 got agitated and aggressive unprovoked. The facility staff stated that Resident #105 grabbed residents inappropriately and hit residents and staff. Staff stated that residents and staff were fearful of Resident #105. The Assistant Director of Nursing stated that Resident #105's behaviors created a stressful environment for other residents and staff. Following each of these identified incidences, the facility failed to implement any measures which prevented and ensured there were no repeated situations that put other residents at risk of physical or sexual assault from Resident #105.
It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The immediate jeopardy (IJ) was related to State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, §483.12(b)(1) (The facility must develop and implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property) at a scope and severity of K.
The IJ began on 08/02/2021 when Resident #105 returned to the facility after the resident was sent to a psychiatric long-term care following a physical assault on Resident #197. Although the record indicated Resident #105 continued to exhibit aggressive behaviors which included grabbing, hitting, and using vulgar languages on staff and residents upon the resident's return from the psychiatric setting, the facility failed to put measures in place to prohibit and prevent abuse perpetrated by Resident #105. The resident assaulted two additional residents respectively on 08/13/2021 and on 10/07/2021.
On 10/09/2021 at 6:18 PM, an immediate jeopardy (IJ) was identified. At 9:55 PM, the facility administrator was provided with the completed IJ template and notified of the existence of an IJ for abuse. The Administrator signed the template and returned the original to the survey team. A Removal Plan was requested.
On 10/10/2021, the survey team conducted an onsite verification to verify the Removal Plan had been implemented. Resident #105 had been removed from the facility on 10/10/2021. The facility continued to train staff on recognizing and preventing, reporting, and investigating abuse. The IJ continued until 10/10/2021 at 6:17 PM, when the survey team verified the elements of the Removal Plan had been implemented.
The noncompliance remained on 10/10/2021 for no actual harm with the potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy based on the facility continuing in-servicing with facility staff.
Findings included:
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated the facility admitted Resident #105 with diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, wandering, restlessness and agitation, and severe psychotic features. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired with a SAMS (Staff Assessment for Mental Status). The resident required physical assistance of two persons to dressing and toileting. The resident required physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene. The resident required assistance with setup for bed mobility and eating. The resident exhibited behavioral symptoms such as kicking, hitting, pushing, scratching, grabbing and sexual abuse directed towards others. The resident's identified symptoms put others at significant risk for physical injury. The resident significantly intruded on the privacy or activity of others. The resident exhibited the behaviors four to six times daily. The resident currently resided in a locked behavior unit.
A review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a behavior care plan, dated 02/24/2020, indicated under the focus portion of the plan that Resident #105 resisted care and was combative (hitting/punching/slapping) with staff and at times requires additional certified behavioral technician (CBT) for provision of care. The focus portion also indicated Resident #105 wanders and the resident becomes very intrusive with peers, yells, curses, and threatens peers. Resident #105 takes food from peers' trays at times, becomes verbally and physically aggressive. The intervention portion of the care plan, last revised 02/27/2020, included the following: allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm, staff to monitor the effectiveness of techniques and report any changes to nurse, doctor, or interdisciplinary committee (IDC) team, offer appropriate seating areas to reduce agitation and over-stimulation, and offer distraction and remove from area when becoming agitated.
The record revealed the facility did not re-evaluate the effectiveness of the care plan and ensured to integrate measures other than those already in place after Resident #105 physically assaulted Resident #197 on 06/02/2021, after Resident #105 physically assaulted and sexually assaulted Resident #198 on 08/13/2021, and after Resident #105 physically assaulted Resident #234 on 10/07/2021. Resident #105's care plan had not been updated past 02/27/2021.
Observations conducted during the survey from 10/06/2021 through 10/09/2021 revealed Resident #105 was not monitored and was by themself. The resident was always observed in the personal spaces of other residents with closed fist, threatening to punch them. Resident #105 continuously said derogative language, such as using the F-word and B-word towards staff and residents. The resident grabbed staff when they walked by the resident. The observations revealed staff sat at the nurses' station and at the lounges across the unit and were not able to protect other residents should Resident #105 decide to assault a resident.
On 10/06/2021 at 3:29 PM, Resident #105 was heard saying the F word which was directed at staff and residents on the [NAME] Unit. Resident #105 approached the surveyor with a closed fist, threatening to punch the surveyor during this time.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:05 AM, Resident #105 aggressively grabbed the Rehab Assistant (RA) by his left arm when the RA walked by the resident.
The following three resident-to-resident abuse incidents occurred involving Resident #105:
1. Review of a facility incident report, dated on 06/02/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #197 was propelling themself in their wheelchair on the [NAME] Unit hallway trying to get past Resident #105. The incident report indicated Resident #197 told Resident #105 to excuse them, and Resident #105 responded by punching Resident #197 with a closed fist, which caused a laceration to Resident #197's upper lip. The incident report indicated Resident #197 required an emergency room visit to get their upper lip sutured. The incident report indicated that the facility sent Resident #105 to a psychiatric long-term care, where Resident #105 was admitted from 06/02/2021 through 08/02/2021.
Although the 08/02/2021 hospital discharge record indicated that Resident #105 returned to the facility with an order of an antipsychotic (haloperidol 5 milligram [mg] tablet, give one tablet [5mg] by oral route three times per day) added to the resident's medication regimen, the nursing progress notes indicated that Resident #105 continued to exhibit aggressive behaviors. Upon Resident #105's return to the facility and the documented continued aggressive behaviors of the resident, the facility failed to address the unprovoked physical assault Resident #105 directed towards Resident #197 by failing to put a measure in place to prevent future physical assault directed by Resident #105 to other residents at the facility. There was no evidence in the record that the facility followed up with Resident #197 to know how the interaction with Resident #105 made the resident feel. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #197 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15. The resident required extensive assistance of two persons for transfer.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 1:50 PM, Resident #197 stated they frequently had a nightmare about the situation (referring to the assault incident perpetrated by Resident #105 against them). The resident stated they stayed in their room when Resident #105 was in the common area. Resident #197 stated that Resident #105 was a monster who tormented women. The resident stated that facility staff did not interview Resident #197 about the incident after Resident #197 returned from the hospital.
2. Review of a facility incident report, dated 08/13/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #105 was sexually inappropriate with Resident #198. Per the report, Resident #105 was observed to have touched Resident #198 on their buttocks while Resident #198 was walking in an unidentified hallway. It was noted in the report that when Resident #198 questioned why Resident #105 touched them inappropriately, Resident #105 pushed Resident #198 to the floor.
A review of Resident #198's medical record indicated the facility assessed Resident #198 in this case to rule out any injury. There was documentation of a follow-up communication with Resident #198 to know how the resident felt following the interaction with Resident #105.
Review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a monthly psychology follow-up was done on 09/14/2021 at 10:45 AM, after the incident. The medical record did not indicate the facility made the psychiatrist aware of the inappropriate sexual behavior Resident #105 exhibited towards Resident #198. Resident #105 continued to be reported, per nursing progress notes, to exhibit aggressive behaviors. However, the facility did not devise an intervention to ensure other residents at the facility continued to be free of abuse from Resident #105. The record indicated Resident #105 continued to abuse vulnerable residents and staff and posed a safety risk verbally and physically. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #198 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance and anxiety disorder. The resident was independent with activities of daily living.
3. A review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a nursing note written by Registered Nurse (RN) #11 on 10/07/2021 at 1:58 PM. Per the note, Resident #105 was reported to be pacing the unit, charging at staff and residents. The note indicated that Resident #105 pulled on Resident #234's hair while Resident #234 sat at the table in the lounge area of the unit. There was no documentation of a nursing assessment completed with Resident #234 to determine the resident's state of mind or whether the resident was in pain after the encounter. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
On 10/10/2021 at 3:39 PM, the Activity Aide (AA) stated that he witnessed the encounter between Resident #105 and Resident #234 firsthand. Per the AA, he was sitting with a group of residents on A lounge (an enclosed common area on the [NAME] Unit) during a group activity when he saw Resident #105 come into the lounge, made eye contact with Resident #234, and yanked a bulk of Resident #234's hair such that Resident #234's head tilted abruptly towards the side of the pull. The AA stated that Resident #234 yelled out, ''Ouch, Ouch, in a manner that was consistent with discomfort/pain. The AA stated that the incident happened quickly, and he was unable to intervene before Resident #105 laid their hand on Resident #234's hair. Per the AA, Resident #105 punched the AA in the chest and arm a couple of times when the AA stood up to intervene. The AA stated that when he thought he had successfully redirected Resident #105 out of the lounge and was headed to the nurses station to report the situation to the nurse, Resident #105 made their way back into the lounge through another door which accessed the lounge from another side of the unit and physically assaulted Resident #234 again in the same manner as described above. The AA stated that nursing staff came to intervene and successfully removed Resident #105 into the resident's room. The AA stated he reported the incident to RN #11 exactly how it unfolded. He verified that RN #11 did not come into the lounge to assess Resident #234 following the incident.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #234 admitted with diagnoses which included unspecified osteoarthritis, muscle weakness, and dementia with behavioral disturbance.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:39 AM, the RA stated that Resident #105 had been aggressive towards staff and residents since the resident's admission.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:25 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive, combative, and not easily redirectable. LPN #7 stated that Resident #7 liked to say racial slurs and derogatory speech. She stated that Resident #105 got into other residents' personal space. LPN #7 stated that the resident had grabbed, hit, and punched staff and residents. LPN #7 stated, You need to know how to speak, in order to not get the resident agitated. LPN #7 reviewed Resident #105's care plan and acknowledged Resident #105's care plan related to the resident's behavior had not been updated after it was formulated on 02/24/2020 through 02/27/2020. LPN #7 stated that she had no remarks about the intervention portion of Resident #105's care plan which read, Allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm.
On 10/07/2021 at 3:15 PM, Certified Behavioral Therapist (CBT) #1 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive towards residents and staff. He stated that Resident #105 insulted staff and residents with profanity. CBT #1 stated that the resident had hit staff and residents and was a safety concern to self and other residents.
On 10/09/2021 at 9:00 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated that Resident #105 had been very challenging with the resident's care. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105's behaviors created a stressful environment for other residents. ADON #2 stated that the only way the facility had limited the encounters with the resident was their proactiveness. Per ADON #2, Resident #105 had had more than ten incidents with staff and residents during which the resident physically assaulted staff and residents. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105 attacked residents and staff unprovoked. ADON #2 stated the facility had attempted to transfer the resident to another facility deemed more appropriate for the resident's care but were met with resistance. He gave an instance of when the facility sent the resident to [facility name omitted] which operated a psychiatric long-term care program, and Resident #105 was sent back within seven days with four-point restraints. He stated that no facility wanted to take responsibility for Resident #105. Addressing Resident #105's assault on Resident #197, ADON #2 stated that, following the incident on 06/02/2021, Resident #105 was sent to [facility name omitted], psychiatric hospital, where the resident was admitted and managed until the resident returned on 08/02/2021. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105 had their medication regimen adjusted at the psychiatric hospital prior to the resident's return to the facility. ADON #2 acknowledged that per the facility's record on Resident #105, the resident's aggressive behaviors continued upon the resident's return from the hospital. ADON #2 verified there was no adjustments in Resident #105's care plan which reflected the facility intervened in ensuring Resident #105 did not continue to abuse residents at the facility. Addressing the incident when Resident #105 was noted to have inappropriately touched Resident #198 on 08/13/2021, ADON #2 stated that the interaction was considered behavioral. Per the ADON, it was not uncommon for residents on the behavior unit to touch each other inappropriately. ADON #2 added Resident #105 was referred to the psychiatrist following the incident. The ADON, however, recanted his statement after reviewing the pertinent record and acknowledged there was nothing in the record that showed that the psychiatrist was made aware of Resident #105's inappropriate sexual behavior exhibited towards Resident #198. Addressing the incident on 10/07/2021 when Resident #105 was noted to have pulled Resident #234's hair, ADON #2 verified there was no documented assessment of Resident #234 by a nurse. Per the ADON, it was important to evaluate Resident #234 after the resident was physically assaulted, so that the resident was adequately monitored, and necessary treatment was given to address the aftermath of the encounter on the resident. ADON #2 stated that he interviewed the AA (the individual who witnessed the incident firsthand) on 10/08/2021 at approximately 6:30 PM. ADON #2 reiterated the AA's description of the incident as reported above. Per the ADON, when an abuse situation happened, the facility did two incident reports (one for the aggressor and the other for the victim) and two progress notes (assessments), and the family members of the two residents were contacted. The ADON stated that the facility investigated the abuse, did a reportable, and liaised with the medical director and the psychiatrist. He acknowledged the facility did not investigate the abuse instances perpetrated by Resident #105 to Residents #197, #198, and #234. ADON #2 stated that without an investigation, the facility was unable to identify the root cause of the perpetrated abuse instances. Therefore, they were unable to put a plan in place to ensure the residents at the facility were free from abuse. ADON #2 stated that the facility's interdisciplinary committee (IDC) had not met to address the situation with Resident #105.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at approximately 9:15 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 confirmed that no interventions were implemented after Resident #105 returned on 08/02/2021 from the psychiatric stay. ADON #2 verified that the facility failed to implement measures specified by the Abuse, Neglect, or Exploitation Policy after Resident #105's initial occurrence on 06/02/2021, which failed to protect residents from being abused.
On 10/10/2021 at 10:06 AM, the Nursing Home Administrator stated that it was important for the residents at the facility to be free of abuse, as it was their right. The nursing home administrator (NHA) stated that a different set of eyes sees the same situation differently. The NHA stated that he was not on the [NAME] Unit every day. Per the NHA, he had relied on ADON #2 to take care of the situations on the unit. The NHA stated that he had heard of incidents on abuse perpetrated by Resident #105 towards staff and residents. The NHA stated he had not seen Resident #105 being aggressive during his rounds. The NHA stated that he was majorly concerned about residents on the unit not eloping. The NHA stated that when an abuse incident was reported to be repeatedly perpetrated by the same resident, he relied on nursing staff to tell him what they (referring to nursing staff) had done and their input on what they thought the facility should do differently. The NHA stated that he expected an investigation into all abuse allegations. Per the NHA, investigation was key to identifying the trigger for the aggressor and it helped direct the proper intervention, which helped to ensure residents at the facility continued to be free from abuse. The NHA stated that he was not of the impression that the facility did not respond to the situation with Resident #105 accordingly. The surveyor informed the NHA that the contact phone numbers of the two psychiatrists who cared for Resident #105 were not on file. The NHA promised to facilitate an interview with the psychiatrists but failed to do so after repetitive reminders.
The facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect or Exploitation, with an effective date of 10/2020, indicated, PROCEDURE: I. IDENTIFICATION AND REPORTING. A. Responsibilities of Employees: 1. Immediately notify your Supervisor or Nurse Manager if you identify an incident of: a. Actual or suspected abuse, neglect, exploitation or misappropriation of property .4. Complete an occurrence report .B. Responsibilities of Supervisory Staff. 1. Review the allegations with your Department Director or Administrator .II. PROTECTION. A. Protection of an abused or neglected resident is a key responsibility of all employees. Action must be taken immediately in the event of any actual or suspected abuse or neglect .III. INVESTIGATION AND FOLLOW-UP. A. Responsibilities of Employees. 1. Provide accurate information .C. Responsibilities of [NAME] President, Administrator, and Risk Management .6. Analyze occurrences to determine whether changes are needed to prevent reoccurrence. 7. Institute corrective measures as needed. 8. Conduct follow up performance improvement activities, if appropriate. TRAINING. A. Responsibilities of the Clinical Education and Organizational Development & Service Excellence Departments: 1. Conduct orientation and annual training on the following topics to all employees and contracted agents. C. Individual responsibility with respect to: i. Protecting the rights of patients .iii. Intervening in situations that could lead to abuse. Iv. Reporting suspected and/or actual incidents of abuse .VI. PREVENTION. A. Responsibilities of All Individuals - (employees and contracted agents). 2. Intervene in situations that could lead to abuse .C. Responsibilities of Supervisors. 1. Monitor: a. Patients with history of aggressive/inappropriate behaviors and participate in care planning through the IDC / Treatment Team
Based on the plan that was provided to the surveyors, removal of IJ occurred on 10/09/2021 at 10:39 PM.
Onsite verification was conducted on 10/10/2021 to verify that the facility had implemented the Removal Plan. The onsite verification revealed the facility had transferred Resident #105 to the hospital for psychiatric evaluation. The facility started retraining all staff who worked on the [NAME] Unit on abuse which included identifying, reporting, and role of each employee in investigating abuse.
New Jersey Administrative Code 8:39-4.1(a)(5)
CRITICAL
(L)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Administration
(Tag F0835)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, it was determined that the administration failed to ensure staff implement...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, it was determined that the administration failed to ensure staff implemented the facility's abuse policy for three instances of abuse that occurred. Resident #105 assaulted Resident #197, Resident #198, and Resident #234. The assault against Resident #197 resulted in a laceration that required sutures. This had the potential to affect all residents.
It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The immediate jeopardy (IJ) was related to State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, §483.70 (Administration) at a scope and severity of L.
The IJ began on 08/02/2021 when Resident #105 returned to the facility after the resident was sent to a psychiatric long-term care following a physical assault on Resident #197. Although the record indicated Resident #105 continued to exhibit aggressive behaviors which included grabbing, hitting, and using vulgar language on staff and residents upon the resident's return from the psychiatric setting, the facility failed to put measures in place to ensure residents were free from abuse perpetrated by Resident #105. The resident assaulted two additional residents respectively on 08/13/2021 and on 10/07/2021.
On 10/09/2021 at 6:18 PM, an immediate jeopardy (IJ) was identified. At 9:55 PM, the facility administrator was provided with the completed IJ template and notified of the existence of an IJ for abuse. The Administrator signed the template and returned the original to the survey team. A Removal Plan was requested.
On 10/10/2021, the survey team conducted an onsite verification to verify the Removal Plan had been implemented. Resident #105 had been removed from the facility on 10/10/2021. The facility continued to train staff on recognizing and preventing, reporting, and investigating abuse. The IJ continued until 10/10/2021 at 6:17 PM, when the survey team verified the elements of the Removal Plan had been implemented.
The noncompliance remained on 10/10/2021 for no actual harm with the potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy based on the facility continuing in-servicing with facility staff.
Findings included:
The October 2021 computerized physician orders (CPO) indicated the facility admitted Resident #105 with diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, wandering, restlessness and agitation, and severe psychotic features. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired with a SAMS (Staff Assessment for Mental Status). The resident required physical assistance of two persons to dressing and toileting. The resident required physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene. The resident required assistance with setup for bed mobility and eating. The resident exhibited behavioral symptoms such as kicking, hitting, pushing, scratching, grabbing and sexual abuse directed towards others. The resident's identified symptoms put others at significant risk for physical injury. The resident significantly intrudes on the privacy or activity of others. The resident exhibited the behaviors four to six times daily. The resident currently resided in a locked behavior unit.
Observations conducted during the survey from 10/06/2021 through 10/09/2021 revealed Resident #105 was not monitored and was by themself. The resident was always observed in the personal spaces of other residents with closed fist, threatening to punch them. Resident #105 continuously said derogative language, such as using the F-word and B-word towards staff and residents. The resident grabbed staff when they walked by the resident. The observations revealed staff sat at the nurses' station and at the lounges across the unit and were not able to protect other residents should Resident #105 decide to assault a resident.
On 10/06/2021 at 3:29 PM, Resident #105 was heard saying the F word which was directed at staff and residents on the [NAME] Unit. Resident #105 approached the surveyor with a closed fist, threatening to punch the surveyor during this time.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:05 AM, Resident #105 aggressively grabbed the Rehab Assistant (RA) by his left arm when the RA walked by the resident.
Resident #105 had multiple incidents of abuse, and the facility failed to implement their abuse policies to prohibit abuse, protect the residents, and prevent further abuse.
1. Review of a facility incident report, dated on 06/02/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #197 was propelling themself in their wheelchair on the [NAME] Unit hallway trying to get past Resident #105. The incident report indicated Resident #197 told Resident #105 to excuse them, and Resident #105 responded by punching Resident #197 with a closed fist, which caused a laceration to Resident #197's upper lip. The incident report indicated Resident #197 required an emergency room visit to get their upper lip sutured. The incident report indicated that the facility sent Resident #105 to a psychiatric long-term care, where Resident #105 was admitted from 06/02/2021 through 08/02/2021.
Although the 08/02/2021 hospital discharge record indicated that Resident #105 returned to the facility with an order of an antipsychotic (haloperidol 5 milligram [mg] tablet, give one tablet [5mg] by oral route three times per day) added to the resident's medication regimen, the nursing progress notes indicated that Resident #105 continued to exhibit aggressive behaviors. Upon Resident #105's return to the facility and the documented continued aggressive behaviors of the resident, the facility failed to address the unprovoked physical assault Resident #105 directed towards Resident #197 by failing to put a measure in place to prevent future physical assault directed by Resident #105 to other residents at the facility. There was no evidence in the record that the facility followed up with Resident #197 to know how the interaction with Resident #105 made the resident feel. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #197 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15. The resident required extensive assistance of two persons for transfer.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 1:50 PM, Resident #197 stated they frequently had a nightmare about the situation (referring to the assault incident perpetrated by Resident #105 against them). The resident stated they stayed in their room when Resident #105 was in the common area. Resident #197 stated that Resident #105 was a monster who tormented women. The resident stated that facility staff did not interview Resident #197 about the incident after Resident #197 returned from the hospital.
2. Review of a facility incident report, dated 08/13/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #105 was sexually inappropriate with Resident #198. Per the report, Resident #105 was observed to have touched Resident #198 on their buttocks while Resident #198 was walking in an unidentified hallway. It was noted in the report that when Resident #198 questioned why Resident #105 touched them inappropriately, Resident #105 pushed Resident #198 to the floor.
A review of Resident #198's medical record indicated the facility assessed Resident #198 in this case to rule out any injury. There was no documentation of a follow-up communication with Resident #198 to know how the resident felt following the interaction with Resident #105.
Review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a monthly psychology follow-up was done on 09/14/2021 at 10:45 AM, after the incident. The medical record did not indicate the facility made the psychiatrist aware of the inappropriate sexual behavior Resident #105 exhibited towards Resident #198. Resident #105 continued to be reported, per nursing progress notes, to exhibit aggressive behaviors. However, the facility did not devise an intervention to ensure other residents at the facility continued to be free of abuse from Resident #105. The record indicated Resident #105 continued to abuse vulnerable residents and staff and posed a safety risk verbally and physically. Resident #105's care plan was not updated to reflect any new intervention.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #198 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance and anxiety disorder. The resident was independent with activities of daily living
3. Review of a progress note, dated 10/07/2021, indicated Resident #105 pulled on Resident #234's hair. Registered Nurse (RN) #11, who documented the information in the medical record that Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair, failed to report the incident to the facility's abuse coordinator. The facility did not report the incident to the state until the survey team brought it to their attention.
During an interview with the Activity Assistant (AA) on 10/10/2021 at 3:39 PM, the AA stated that he witnessed the encounter firsthand. Per the AA, Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair such that it caused Resident #234's head to tilt abruptly towards the side of the pull and the resident yelled out in pain. Per the AA, Resident #105 had a repeat encounter with Resident #234 within a space of few minutes. The AA stated that he reported his observation to the nurse on the shift.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:25 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive, combative, and not easily redirectable. LPN #7 stated that Resident #7 liked to say racial slurs and derogatory speech. She stated that Resident #105 got into other residents' personal space. LPN #7 stated that the resident had grabbed, hit, and punched staff and residents. LPN #7 stated, You need to know how to speak, in order to not get the resident agitated. LPN #7 reviewed Resident #105's care plan and acknowledged Resident #105's care plan related to the resident's behavior had not been updated after it was formulated on 02/24/2020 through 02/27/2020. LPN #7 stated that she had no remarks about the intervention portion of Resident #105's care plan which read, Allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm.
On 10/07/2021 at 3:15 PM, Certified Behavioral Therapist (CBT) #1 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive towards residents and staff. He stated that Resident #105 insulted staff and residents with profanity. CBT #1 stated that the resident had hit staff and residents and was a safety concern to self and other residents.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:39 AM, the RA stated that Resident #105 had been aggressive towards staff and residents since the resident's admission.
On 10/09/2021 at 9:00 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated that Resident #105 had been very challenging with the resident's care. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105's behaviors created a stressful environment for other residents. ADON #2 stated that the only way the facility had limited the encounters with the resident was their proactiveness. Per ADON #2, Resident #105 had had more than ten incidents with staff and residents during which the resident physically assaulted staff and residents. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105 attacked residents and staff unprovoked. ADON #2 stated the facility had attempted to transfer the resident to another facility deemed more appropriate for the resident's care but were met with resistance. He gave an instance of when the facility sent the resident to [facility name omitted] which operated a psychiatric long-term care program, and Resident #105 was sent back within seven days with four-point restraints. He stated that no facility wanted to take responsibility for Resident #105. Addressing Resident #105's assault on Resident #197, ADON #2 stated that, following the incident on 06/02/2021, Resident #105 was sent to [Facility name omitted], psychiatric hospital, where the resident was admitted and managed until the resident returned on 08/02/2021. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105 had their medication regimen adjusted at the psychiatric hospital prior to the resident's return to the facility. ADON #2 acknowledged that per the facility's record on Resident #105, the resident's aggressive behaviors continued upon the resident's return from the hospital. ADON #2 verified there was no adjustments in Resident #105's care plan which reflected the facility intervened in ensuring Resident #105 did not continue to abuse residents at the facility. Addressing the incident when Resident #105 was noted to have inappropriately touched Resident #198 on 08/13/2021, ADON #2 stated that the interaction was considered behavioral. Per the ADON, it was not uncommon for residents on the behavior unit to touch each other inappropriately. ADON #2 added Resident #105 was referred to the psychiatrist following the incident. The ADON, however, recanted his statement after reviewing the pertinent record and acknowledged there was nothing in the record that showed that the psychiatrist was made aware of Resident #105's inappropriate sexual behavior exhibited towards Resident #198.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at approximately 9:15 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 confirmed that no interventions were implemented after Resident #105 returned on 08/02/2021 from the psychiatric stay. ADON #2 verified that the facility failed to implement measures specified by the Abuse, Neglect, or Exploitation Policy after Resident #105's initial occurrence on 06/02/2021, which failed to protect residents from being abused.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 10:06 AM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that it was important for the residents at the facility to be free of abuse, as it was their right. The NHA stated that a different set of eyes see the same situation differently. The NHA stated that he was not on the [NAME] Unit every day. Per the NHA, he had relied on ADON #2 to take care of the situations on the unit. The NHA stated that he had heard of incidences on abuse perpetrated by Resident #105 towards staff and residents. The NHA stated he had not seen Resident #105 being aggressive during his rounds. The NHA stated that he was majorly concerned about residents on the unit not eloping. The NHA stated that when an abuse incident was reported to be repeatedly perpetrated by the same resident, he relied on nursing staff to tell him what they (referring to nursing staff) had done and their input on what they thought the facility should do differently. The NHA stated that he expected an investigation into all abuse allegations. Per the NHA, investigation was key to identifying the trigger for the aggressor, and it helped direct the proper intervention which helped to ensure residents at the facility continued to be free from abuse. The NHA stated that he was not of the impression that the facility did not respond to the situation with Resident #105 accordingly.
The facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect or Exploitation, with effective date of 10/2020, indicated, III. INVESTIGATION AND FOLLOW-UP .C. Responsibilities of [NAME] President, Administrator, and Risk Management .6. Analyze occurrences to determine whether changes are needed to prevent reoccurrence. 7. Institute corrective measures as needed. 8. Conduct follow up performance improvement activities, if appropriate
Based on the plan that was provided to the surveyors, removal of IJ occurred on 10/09/2021 at 10:39 PM.
Onsite Verification:
Onsite verification was conducted on 10/10/2021 to verify that the facility had implemented the Removal Plan. The onsite verification revealed the facility had transferred Resident #105 to the hospital for psychiatric evaluation. The facility started retraining all staff who worked on the [NAME] Unit on abuse which included identifying, reporting, and role of each employee in investigating abuse.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-5.1(a)
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. The facility admitted Resident #152 with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and brain cancer. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS)...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. The facility admitted Resident #152 with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and brain cancer. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was a 5 out of 15, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Since the previous assessment, the resident had one fall with no injury and two falls with injury.
A review of the resident's care plan, last updated on 09/21/2021, indicated Resident #152 was at risk for falls related to poor safety awareness secondary to cognitive loss regarding Alzheimer's disease. The care plan also indicated the following: assistance need with activities of daily living; resident attempts to transfer to toilet; old compression fractures; use of antidepressants, pain, and cardiac medications; a fall on 09/12/2021 resulting in left humerus, left radial, and left femoral neck fractures. Interventions for the falls included the following:
- Physical and occupational therapy referrals for changes in functional mobility, with an effective date of 09/26/2018.
- Reminding Resident #152 to call for assistance with activities of daily living, especially transfers, with an effective date of 09/26/2018.
- Observation for unsafe behavior, with an effective date of 09/26/2018.
- Non-slip footwear, with an effective date of 10/04/2018.
- Encouragement for use of hip guards, with an effective date of 04/25/2019.
- Blood pressure and pulse monitoring weekly, with an effective date of 09/13/2019.
- Pad sensor alarm to bed and chair, with an effective date of 05/12/2020.
- Floor mats at bedside, with an effective date of 07/06/2021.
There were no interventions listed on the resident's care plan regarding any falls that occurred in 2021, except for floor mats at bedside.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 06/09/2021 at 8:00 AM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Resident #152 stated the resident fell in their bedroom. A certified nursing assistant noticed a small abrasion on the back of the resident's head, behind the left ear, while showering the resident the same morning after the fall. The resolution listed on the report was that Resident #152 was educated on calling for help. Resident #152 stated, I just want to use the bathroom. The report indicated staff would continue to monitor and encourage the resident to use the call light.
Following the fall on 06/09/2021, the care plan was not updated to reflect any new interventions.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/09/2021 at 2:45 PM, described the note as the initial fall-focused note and detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. At the end of the note, the writer had the option to list, New safety interventions added after this fall, and this section was left blank.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/09/2021 at 11:10 PM, described the note as the first follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank and did not identify any new interventions.
A review of a progress note, dated 06/15/2021 at 3:36 PM, indicated the interdisciplinary team met regarding the fall on 06/09/2021. The new intervention initiated was alarm to chair.
According to the care plan, the intervention of alarm to chair was already listed on the care plan with an initiated date of 05/12/2020.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 06/29/2021 at 2:00 PM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Resident #152 was found lying on the left side of their body on the floor between the door and the bed. Resident #152 was transferring themselves from the bed to the wheelchair. The wheelchair brakes were not locked. The resolution listed on the report indicated the resident stated, I forgot to lock my brakes. Resident #152 was educated on calling for assistance, and staff would continue to monitor.
Following the fall on 06/29/2021, the care plan was not updated to reflect any new interventions.
A review of a progress note, dated 06/29/2021 at 4:23 PM, detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. No new interventions were added, and additional comments were made stating that safety education was provided to the resident on locking the wheelchair brakes and using the call bell for assistance.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/29/2021 at 10:37 PM, described the note as the first follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank and did not identify any new interventions.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/30/2021 at 11:31 AM, described the note as the second follow-up fall-focused note. New orders were received for an x-ray for cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine, and bilateral hips due to the resident complaining of pain. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank.
A review of a physician's progress note, dated 07/01/2021 at 2:59 PM, indicated the resident had a vertebral compression fracture of the L1/T12 site with an indeterminate age. New orders were given for pain medication and an orthopedic consult.
A review of a progress note, dated 07/06/2021 at 12:13 PM, indicated the interdisciplinary team met regarding the fall on 06/29/2021. The new intervention initiated was floor mats.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 07/15/2021 at 11:50 AM the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Resident #152 spilled milk in their lap, self-ambulated to the bathroom without calling for help, and the resident's tab alarm alerted staff. Resident #152 was found on the floor, sitting with their back against the wall and their legs out in front of them. Resident #152 reported they just went down while trying to get to the toilet. There was no resolution given.
Following the fall on 07/15/2021, the care plan was not updated to reflect any new interventions.
A review of a progress note, dated 07/15/2021 at 2:40 PM, detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. The new interventions added were to educate the resident on the use of the call bell and calling for help.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 07/15/2021 at 11:50 PM, described the note as the first follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank and did not identify any new interventions.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 07/16/2021 at 6:54 AM, described the note as the second follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank.
A review of a progress note, dated 07/20/2021 at 10:01 AM, indicated the interdisciplinary team met regarding the fall on 07/15/2021. The new intervention initiated was to remind the resident to call for assistance.
A review of a social service progress note, dated 08/19/2021 at 4:23 PM, indicated the resident had cognitive impairment shown by memory loss, impaired decision-making skills, and episodes of confusion.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 09/12/2021 at 2:00 PM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Staff heard a loud bang, and Resident #152 screamed out. Staff noted the resident lying on the floor in the doorway of their bedroom, lying on the left side of their body with their left arm behind them. Resident #152 then turned themselves over onto their stomach. Resident #152 was transferred to the emergency room at 2:45 PM the same day. The resolution listed on the report was that the resident was transferred to the emergency room for evaluation of injuries, and the resident's care plan would be updated upon return. A Root Cause Analysis (RCA) would be completed to address the resident's fall, and an action plan would be created.
A review of a progress note, dated 09/12/2021 at 2:00 PM, detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. No new interventions were added.
A review of a Root Cause Analysis document indicated the document was completed on 09/30/2021 related to the fall on 09/12/2021 with major injury. Resident #152 sustained a left hip femoral neck fracture, impacted intra-articular left distal radius fracture, and a comminuted proximal left humeral head fracture. The Problem indicated Resident #152 had a history of gait instability and was found lying in the doorway of their assigned room. Resident #152 was last observed resting in their low bed with a fall mat on the floor and a tab alarm attached to the resident. Resident #152 removed the tab alarm and exited their bed. Resident #152 left their walker at the bedside and ambulated toward the doorway. Resident #152 fell due to ambulating without their walker and known gait instability. Resident #152 was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection during the hospital stay. The first part of the facility's action plan consisted of continuing to use the low bed, fall mat at bedside on the floor, fall socks, to move furniture away from the head of the bed to prevent injury, and to apply hip guards. The second part of the facility's action plan consisted of consideration of using a pad sensor alarm while the resident was in bed and to offer the resident fluid every shift to prevent dehydration. The third part of the facility's action plan consisted of providing frequent reminders for the resident to use their walker when ambulating. Resident #152 would use their wheelchair during recovery, with the goal of ambulating with a walker.
The care plan was not updated to reflect any new interventions, following the root cause analysis.
In an interview on 10/09/2021 at 8:40 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 stated the care plan should be updated and the interdisciplinary team had guidelines for interventions. ADON #1 stated, As long as we have some type of alarm in place and appropriate footwear, we make sure to provide education on call light use. ADON #1 stated that the facility had prevented numerous falls for Resident #152 and .there was really no other intervention we could put into place. We could get a sitter .
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 1:38 PM, the Administrator stated the expectation was that everything should be updated in the residents' care plans.
A review of facility's policy and procedure titled, Interdisciplinary Care Planning and Assessment, revised 01/2021, indicated, care plans are revised as changes in the resident's condition dictates. Reviews are made at least quarterly.
A review of facility's policy and procedure titled, Resident Safety Program - Fall Prevention, revised 07/2021, indicated, Procedure: A. A Morse Scale Falls Risk Assessment is completed upon admission and readmission, significant change assessment, quarterly assessment and after each fall event. B. Interventions are implemented based on risk areas identified by the falls risk assessment. The fall prevention/intervention guide may be utilized to assist in identifying and implementing appropriate interventions. C. Risk for falls and/or injury is identified and addressed in the resident's individualized treatment plan. D. Falls will be reviewed weekly by the interdisciplinary team and interventions adjusted and care plans updated as necessary.
3. The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated the facility admitted Resident #105 with diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, wandering in disease classified elsewhere, restlessness and agitation, and severe psychotic features. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired with a SAMS (Staff Assessment for Mental Status). The resident required physical assistance of two persons for dressing and toileting. The resident required physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene. The resident required assistance with setup for bed mobility and eating. The resident exhibited behavioral symptoms such as kicking, hitting, pushing, scratching, grabbing, and sexual abuse directed towards others. The resident's identified symptoms put others at significant risk for physical injury. The resident significantly intruded on the privacy or activity of others. The resident exhibited these behaviors four to six times daily. The resident currently resided in a locked behavior unit.
A review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a behavior care plan, dated 02/24/2020, indicated under the focus portion of the plan that Resident #105 resisted care and was combative (hitting/punching/slapping) with staff and at times requires additional certified behavioral technician (CBT) for provision of care. The focus portion also indicated Resident #105 wanders and the resident becomes very intrusive with peers, yells, curses, and threatens peers. Resident #105 takes food from peers' trays at times, becomes verbally and physically aggressive. The intervention portion of the care plan, last revised 02/27/2020, included the following: allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm, staff to monitor the effectiveness of techniques and report any changes to nurse, doctor, or interdisciplinary committee (IDC) team, offer appropriate seating areas to reduce agitation and over-stimulation, and offer distraction and remove from area when becoming agitated.
A review of a facility incident report, dated 06/02/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #197 was propelling themself in their wheelchair on the [NAME] Unit hallway trying to get past Resident #105. The incident report indicated Resident #197 told Resident #105 to excuse them, and Resident #105 responded by punching Resident #197 with a closed fist, which caused a laceration to Resident #197's upper lip. The incident report indicated Resident #197 required an emergency room visit to get their upper lip sutured.
A review of a facility incident report, dated 08/13/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #105 was sexually inappropriate with Resident #198. Per the incident report, Resident #105 was observed to have touched Resident #198 on their buttocks while Resident #198 was walking in an unidentified hallway. It was noted in the incident report that when Resident #198 questioned why Resident #105 touched them inappropriately, Resident #105 pushed Resident #198 to the floor.
A review of a progress note, dated 10/07/2021, indicated Resident #105 pulled on Resident #234's hair.
During an interview with the Activity Assistant (AA) on 10/10/2021 at 3:39 PM, the AA stated that he witnessed the encounter firsthand. Per the AA, Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair such that it caused Resident #234's head to tilt abruptly towards the side of the pull and the resident yelled out in a sound that indicated discomfort or pain. Per the AA, Resident #105 had a repeat encounter with Resident #234 within a space of a few minutes. The AA stated that he reported his observations to the nurse on the shift.
A review of Resident #105's medical record indicated that for each of the identified incidents of abuse perpetrated by Resident #105 towards the identified residents, the facility failed to reassess Resident #105 and put new interventions in place to prevent further abuse. Specifically, a review of Resident #105's behavior care plan revealed the care plan was formulated between 02/24/2020 through 02/27/2020. There was no amendment to the resident's care plan to reflect that the facility attempted to address what the trigger was for Resident # 105 and to ensure that the resident did not continue to abuse other residents at the facility.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 2:25 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive, combative, and not easily redirectable. LPN #7 stated that Resident #105 liked to say racial slurs and derogatory speech. She stated that Resident #105 got into other residents' personal space. LPN #7 stated that the resident had grabbed, hit, and punched staff and residents. LPN #7 stated, You need to know how to speak, in order to not get the resident agitated. LPN #7 reviewed Resident #105's care plan and acknowledged Resident #105's care plan related to the resident's behavior had not been updated after it was formulated on 02/24/2020 through 02/27/2020. LPN #7 stated that she had no remarks about the intervention portion of Resident #105's care plan which read, Allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 9:00 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated that Resident #105 had been very challenging with the resident's care. ADON #2 stated that Resident #105's behaviors created a stressful environment for other residents. The ADON verified there was no adjustment in Resident #105's care plan which reflected the facility intervened in ensuring Resident #105 did not continue to abuse residents at the facility. Specifically, ADON #2 verified that following Resident #105's initial encounter with Resident #197 as noted above, the facility had not reviewed or implemented new measures to ensure that Resident #105 did not continue to abuse residents at the facility.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 3:02 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that when an abuse incident was reported to be repeatedly perpetrated by the same resident, he relied on nursing staff to tell him what they had done and their input on what they thought the facility should do differently. The NHA stated that he expected an investigation into all abuse allegations. Per the NHA, investigation was key to identifying the trigger for the aggressor, and it helped direct the proper intervention which helped to ensure residents at the facility continued to be free from abuse.
A review of facility's policy and procedure titled, Interdisciplinary Care Planning and Assessment, revised 01/2021, indicated, care plans are revised as changes in the resident's condition dictates. Reviews are made at least quarterly.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-11.2(e)2
Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to update person-centered care plans to reflect changes in interventions for three (Residents #152, #105, and #213) of 39 residents reviewed for care planning. The facility failed to update the accident/falls care plans with additional interventions after falls occurred for Resident #152 and Resident #213, which could have prevented Resident #152 from falling and sustaining a fracture. The facility also failed to update the behavior care plan for Resident #105. This had the potential to affect all residents.
Findings included:
1. A review of Resident #213's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses including hypertension, obstructive uropathy, diabetes, personal history of traumatic fracture, and muscle weakness. The resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated no cognitive impairment. The resident had one fall with injury.
A review of a fall risk assessment titled, Morse Fall Scale Assessment, dated 08/17/2021, indicated Resident #213 was at moderate risk for falling. There was no other Morse fall scale completed after that date.
A review of Resident #213's care plans, dated 08/31/2021, indicated the resident was at risk for falls, as evidenced by a history of falls, with the last fall on 09/18/2021. Interventions included the following: maintain bed in low position, tab alarm for safety to bed and wheelchair at all times, encourage to use appropriate assistive devices, encourage use of appropriate fitting, non-skid shoes, observe for unsafe behavior, remind to use the call light, and assist with toileting and meeting daily needs. The effective dates for the interventions were 08/31/2021.
The care plan did not indicate any additional interventions to prevent falls after 08/31/2021.
A review of Resident #213's progress notes indicated the resident sustained a fall on 09/10/2021. The notes indicated the fall occurred in the resident's room at 7:45 PM and was unwitnessed. An x-ray was obtained for complaints of back and hip pain, which indicated no injury.
Following the fall on 09/10/2021, the care plan was not updated to reflect any new interventions.
A review of Resident #213's progress notes revealed the resident sustained another fall on 09/18/2021 at 9:00 PM. The notes indicated the fall occurred in the hallway next to the resident's wheelchair and was unwitnessed. There was no injury documented.
Following the fall on 09/18/2021, the care plan was not updated to reflect any new interventions.
An observation of Resident #213 on 10/07/2021 at 7:52 AM revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. The resident was observed to be very hard of hearing. There was no tab alarm (used to indicate if a resident is rising from a seated position), and the bed was not in the low position.
An observation of Resident #213 on 10/08/2021 8:38 AM revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. The resident became frustrated when answering questions. There was no tab alarm, and the bed was not in the low position. There was a fall mat next to the bed.
On 10/08/2021 at 10:24 AM, an interview was conducted with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2. When asked if new interventions were put into place after the resident fell on [DATE], ADON #2 stated no. ADON #2 stated that the facility's interdisciplinary team met and concluded no interventions were needed. When asked if any interventions were put into place after the second fall on 09/18/2021, ADON #2 stated the interdisciplinary team did not feel any additional interventions were warranted. When asked if a new Morse fall scale assessment was completed after either fall, ADON #2 stated, no. When asked if the fall which occurred on 09/18/2021 may have been avoided if interventions were put into place after the fall that occurred on 09/10/2021, the ADON #2 stated, maybe. ADON #2 stated they would update the care plans. When asked why the tab alarm was not in place on 10/07/2021 and 10/08/2021, ADON #2 stated they were not sure but would in-service staff. When asked if ADON #2 was aware that per facility policy a Morse fall risk assessment was to be completed after each fall to identify risk areas, ADON #2 stated, no. ADON #2 confirmed there was only one fall risk assessment completed for Resident #213, which was on admission [DATE]).
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 1:38 PM, the Administrator stated the expectation was that everything should be updated in the residents' care plans.
A review of facility's policy and procedure titled, Interdisciplinary Care Planning and Assessment, revised 01/2021, indicated, care plans are revised as changes in the resident's condition dictates. Reviews are made at least quarterly.
A review of facility's policy and procedure titled, Resident Safety Program - Fall Prevention, revised 07/2021, indicated, Procedure: A. A Morse Scale Falls Risk Assessment is completed upon admission and readmission, significant change assessment, quarterly assessment and after each fall event. B. Interventions are implemented based on risk areas identified by the falls risk assessment. The fall prevention/intervention guide may be utilized to assist in identifying and implementing appropriate interventions. C. Risk for falls and/or injury is identified and addressed in the resident's individualized treatment plan. D. Falls will be reviewed weekly by the interdisciplinary team and interventions adjusted and care plans updated as necessary.
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, facility policy review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ens...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, facility policy review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure fall assessments were completed and interventions were put into place to decrease the likelihood of falls for 3 (Residents #161, #152, and #213) of 7 residents reviewed for falls. This failed practice resulted in Resident #152 falling and sustaining a fracture.
Findings included:
1. The facility admitted Resident #152 with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and brain cancer.
The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was a 5 out of 15, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Since the previous assessment, the resident had one fall with no injury and two falls with injury.
A review of the resident's care plan, which was last updated on 09/21/2021, revealed Resident #152 was at risk for falls. Interventions for the falls included the following:
- Physical and occupational therapy referrals for changes in functional mobility, with an effective date of 09/26/2018.
- Reminding Resident #152 to call for assistance with activities of daily living, especially transfers, with an effective date of 09/26/2018.
- Observation for unsafe behavior, with an effective date of 09/26/2018.
- Non-slip footwear, with an effective date of 10/04/2018.
- Encouragement for use of hip guards, with an effective date of 04/25/2019.
- Blood pressure and pulse monitoring weekly, with an effective date of 09/13/2019.
- Pad sensor alarm to bed and chair, with an effective date of 05/12/2020.
- Floor mats at bedside, with an effective date of 07/06/2021.
There were no interventions listed on the resident's care plan regarding any falls that occurred in 2021, other than the floor mats at bedside.
A record review of the fall assessments indicated that on 06/29/2021 and 08/25/2021, Resident #152 was at a moderate risk for falls, and on 09/20/2021, the resident was at a high risk for falls.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 06/09/2021 at 8:00 AM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Resident #152 stated they fell in their bedroom. A certified nursing assistant noticed a small abrasion on the back of the resident's head, behind the left ear, while showering the resident the same morning after the fall. The resolution listed on the report was that Resident #152 was educated on calling for help. Resident #152 stated, I just want to use the bathroom. The report indicated staff would continue to monitor and encourage the resident to use the call lights.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/09/2021 at 2:45 PM, described the note as the initial fall-focused note and detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. At the end of the note, the writer had the option to list, New safety interventions added after this fall, and this section was left blank.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/09/2021 at 11:10 PM, described the note as the first follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank and did not identify any new interventions.
A review of a progress note, dated 06/15/2021 at 3:36 PM, indicated the interdisciplinary team met regarding the fall on 06/09/2021. The new intervention initiated was alarm to chair.
According to the care plan, the intervention of alarm to chair was already listed on the care plan with an initiated date of 05/12/2020.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 06/29/2021 at 2:00 PM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Resident #152 was found lying on the left side of their body on the floor between the door and the bed. Resident #152 was transferring themselves from the bed to the wheelchair. The wheelchair brakes were not locked. The resolution listed on the report indicated the resident stated, I forgot to lock my brakes. Resident #152 was educated on calling for assistance, and staff would continue to monitor.
A review of a progress note, dated 06/29/2021 at 4:23 PM, detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. No new interventions were added, and additional comments were made stating that safety education was provided to the resident on locking the wheelchair brakes and using the call bell for assistance.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/29/2021 at 10:37 PM, described the note as the first follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank and did not identify any new interventions.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/30/2021 at 11:31 AM, described the note as the second follow-up fall-focused note. New orders were received for an x-ray for cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine, and bilateral hips due to the resident complaining of pain. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank.
A review of a physician's progress note, dated 07/01/2021 at 2:59 PM, indicated the resident had a vertebral compression fracture of the L1/T12 site with an indeterminate age. New orders were given for pain medication and an orthopedic consult.
A review of a progress note, dated 07/06/2021 at 12:13 PM, indicated the interdisciplinary team met regarding the fall on 06/29/2021. The new intervention initiated was floor mats.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 07/15/2021 at 11:50 AM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Resident #152 spilled milk in their lap, self-ambulated to the bathroom without calling for help, and the resident's tab alarm alerted staff. Resident #152 was found on the floor, sitting with their back against the wall and their legs out in front of them. Resident #152 reported they just went down while trying to get to the toilet. There was no resolution given.
A review of a progress note, dated 07/15/2021 at 2:40 PM, detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. The new interventions added were to educate the resident on the use of the call bell and calling for help.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 07/15/2021 at 11:50 PM, described the note as the first follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank and did not identify new interventions.
A review of a nursing progress note, dated 07/16/2021 at 6:54 AM, described the note as the second follow-up fall-focused note. The additional interventions initiated and response to new interventions were left blank.
A review of a progress note, dated 07/20/2021 at 10:01 AM, indicated the interdisciplinary team met regarding the fall on 07/15/2021. The new intervention initiated was to remind the resident to call for assistance.
A review of a social service progress note, dated 08/19/2021 at 4:23 PM, indicated the resident had cognitive impairment shown by memory loss, impaired decision-making skills, and episodes of confusion.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 09/12/2021 at 2:00 PM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. Staff heard a loud bang, and Resident #152 screamed out. Staff noted the resident lying on the floor in the doorway of their bedroom, lying on the left side of their body with their left arm behind them. Resident #152 then turned themselves over onto their stomach. Resident #152 was transferred to the emergency room at 2:45 PM the same day. The resolution listed on the report was that the resident was transferred to the emergency room for evaluation of injuries, and the resident's care plan would be updated upon return. A Root Cause Analysis (RCA) would be completed to address the resident's fall, and an action plan would be created.
A review of a progress note, dated 09/12/2021 at 2:00 PM, detailed the same information provided in the injury and accident report. No new interventions were added.
A review of a progress note, dated 09/20/2021 at 4:01 PM, indicated the resident returned from the hospital with a left humerus fracture.
A review of a Root Cause Analysis document indicated the document was completed on 09/30/2021 related to the fall on 09/12/2021 with major injury. Resident #152 sustained a left hip femoral neck fracture, impacted intra-articular left distal radius fracture, and a comminuted proximal left humeral head fracture. The Problem indicated Resident #152 had a history of gait instability and was found lying in the doorway of their assigned room. Resident #152 was last observed resting in their low bed with a fall mat on the floor and a tab alarm attached to the resident. Resident #152 removed the tab alarm and exited their bed. Resident #152 left their walker at the bedside and ambulated toward the doorway. Resident #152 fell, due to ambulating without their walker and known gait instability. Resident #152 was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection during the hospital stay. The first part of the facility's action plan consisted of continuing to use the low bed, fall mat at bedside on the floor, fall socks, move furniture away from the head of the bed to prevent injury, and apply hip guards. The second part of the facility's action plan consisted of consideration of using a pad sensor alarm while the resident was in bed and to offer the resident fluid every shift to prevent dehydration. The third part of the facility's action plan consisted of providing frequent reminders for the resident to use their walker when ambulating. Resident #152 would use their wheelchair during recovery with the goal of ambulating with a walker.
On 10/08/2021 at 3:15 PM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 provided the injury and accident reports, as well as any fall assessments, for the resident within the last six months. ADON #1 verified there were three fall assessments that had been completed on the resident, which were 06/29/2021, 08/25/2021, and 09/20/2021. There were no fall assessments for 06/09/2021 or 07/15/2021.
In an interview on 10/09/2021 at 8:40 AM, ADON #1 stated it was the facility's policy to complete a fall assessment after each fall, which was completed by the interdisciplinary team (IDT), and there should have been one completed after each fall for Resident #152. ADON #1 stated the care plan should be updated and the IDT team had guidelines for interventions. ADON #1 stated, As long as we have some type of alarm in place and appropriate footwear, we make sure to provide education on call light use. ADON #1 stated that the facility had prevented numerous falls for Resident #152 and .there was really no other intervention we could put into place. We could get a sitter .
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 1:39 PM, the Administrator stated the expectations of the facility was to provide care to prevent falls from occurring and to intervene after a fall to try to prevent further falls. The Administrator stated a fall should be documented in an incident report, and the interdisciplinary team would review the fall and seek to find interventions to prevent further falls. The Administrator also stated the interventions should be updated in the care plans and was disappointed they were not.
Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Resident Safety Program/Fall Prevention, revised on 07/21, revealed, Policy: All residents who are at risk for falls will be identified through a comprehensive assessment process. This risk will be addressed in the resident's individualized treatment plan and evaluated through the IDC process .Procedure: A Morse Scale Falls Risk Assessment is completed upon admission and readmission, significant change assessment, quarterly assessment and after each fall .F. Falls will be reviewed weekly by the IDC team using the IDC team fall event review note, interventions adjusted, and care plans adjusted as necessary.
2. The facility admitted Resident #161 with diagnoses of history of falling, muscle weakness, and age-related osteoporosis. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 14 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Since the previous assessment, the resident had one fall with no injury, two falls with injury, and one fall with major injury.
A review of the resident's care plan, with a revision date of 08/31/2021, indicated the resident was at risk for falls that resulted in right hip surgery on 05/2021 and multiple rib displacements on 08/2021 and pain. Interventions listed included the following:
- Observe Resident #161 for unsafe behavior and redirect accordingly, with an effective date of 5/26/2021.
- Resident #161 to use comfortable, proper fitting non-skid shoes, with an effective date of 5/26/2021.
- Monitor Bowel and Bladder needs, with an effective date of 05/26/2021.
- Provide adequate lighting, with an effective date of 05/26/2021.
- Encourage current activity level, with an effective date of 05/26/2021.
- Tab alarm to bed and chair, with an effective date of 06/03/2021.
- Pad alarm to bed and chair, with an effective date of 07/06/2021.
- Keep bed in low position and call bell within reach, with an effective date of 07/06/2021
- Provide assistance as needed for activities of daily living (ADL), with an effective date of 07/06/2021.
- Observe for signs of discomfort and monitor resident for complaints of pain and follow pain interventions as per doctor's orders, with an effective date of 07/06/2021.
- Hip protectors at all times except for care, with an effective date of 07/07/2021.
- Pressure relieving scoop mattress, with an effective date of 08/20/2021.
- Keep call bell within reach, remind and encourage resident to use it before getting out of bed, with an effective date of 08/31/2021.
A review of all of the resident's assessments indicated the resident had one fall assessment, which was completed on the day the resident was admitted , on 05/18/2021. There were no other fall assessments in the resident's electronic health record.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 06/01/2021 at 12:15 AM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. The resident was found on the floor at bedside and stated they fell on their way back from the bathroom. The resolution listed on the report was that the resident was alert, awake, oriented, and able to make needs known. Resident #161 stated they fell on their way from the bathroom and believed it was their shoe that caused the fall. Staff were re-educated on monitoring the resident's footwear. The facility was to follow up with the resident's family member on providing appropriate footwear for the resident. A tab alarm was to remain in place as an intervention.
A review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 07/06/2021 at 7:15 PM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. The nurse was notified that the resident was lying on the floor on their left side in front of their closet. The resident's right shoe was off as well as the right side of the resident's pants. Resident #161 remained verbal and alert. Resident #161 stated, I was just standing still, and I don't know what happened. I just fell down. The resident was assessed, and there was bruising and a scrape on the resident's left elbow and left knee. Resident #161 complained of moderate pain to their left elbow and knee. There was no swelling or deformities noted. The resident was educated on safety. There was no resolution listed.
A record review of an injury and accident report indicated that on 08/11/2021 at 8:30 PM, the resident had an unwitnessed fall. There was screaming heard coming from Resident #161's room, and the resident was found lying on their back beside their bed. Resident #161 stated they were trying to transfer themselves to the wheelchair, it moved, and they slid to the floor. Resident #161 sustained bruises to their upper back. The resolution listed on the report was to have an x-ray completed, which indicated multiple injuries noted to the rib area. Resident #161 was re-educated on the need to use the call bell for assistance. A tab alarm was to remain in place as an intervention.
In an interview on 10/06/2021 at 3:48 PM, Resident #161 stated that it had been hard adjusting to moving into a nursing home facility. When asked if the resident had had any falls or hospitalizations since being admitted , the resident looked away from the surveyor and denied any falls or hospitalizations since being admitted .
On 10/08/2021 at 3:15 PM, ADON #1 provided the injury and accident reports, as well as any fall assessments, for the resident within the last six months. ADON #1 verified there was only one fall assessment that had been completed on the resident, on 05/18/2021.
In an interview on 10/09/2021 at 8:50 AM, ADON #1 stated Resident #161 should have had a fall assessment completed after each fall.
In an interview on 10/10/2021 at 2:40 PM, the Administrator stated the Resident #161 should have had a fall assessment completed after each fall.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 1:39 PM, the Administrator stated the expectations of the facility was to provide care to prevent falls from occurring and to intervene after a fall to try to prevent further falls. The Administrator stated a fall should be documented in an incident report, and the interdisciplinary team would review the fall and seek to find interventions to prevent further falls. The Administrator also stated the interventions should be updated in the care plans and was disappointed they were not.
3. A review of Resident #213's quarterly MDS Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses including hypertension, obstructive uropathy, diabetes, personal history of traumatic fracture, and muscle weakness. The resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 13, which indicated no cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident had one fall with injury.
A review of a fall risk assessment titled, Morse Fall Scale Assessment, dated 08/17/2021, indicated Resident #213 was at moderate risk for falling. There was no other Morse fall scale assessment completed after that date.
A review of #213's care plans, dated 08/31/2021, indicated the resident was at risk for falls, as evidenced by a history of falls, with the last fall on 09/18/2021. Interventions included the following: maintain bed in low position, tab alarm for safety to bed and wheelchair at all times, encourage to use appropriate assistive devices, encourage use of appropriate fitting, non-skid shoes, observe for unsafe behavior, remind to use the call light, and assist with toileting and meeting daily needs. The effective dates for the interventions were 08/31/2021.
The care plan did not indicate any additional interventions to prevent falls after 08/31/2021.
A review of Resident #213's physician's orders, dated October 2021, indicated an order for a tab alarm to chair and bed at all times. The order date was 08/17/2021. There was no order for a low bed
A review of Resident #213's progress notes indicated the resident sustained a fall on 09/10/2021. The note indicated the fall occurred in the resident's room at 7:45 PM and was unwitnessed. An x-ray was obtained for complaints of back and hip pain, which indicated no injury. There was no documentation to indicate if the tab alarm was in place at the time of the fall.
A review of Resident's #213 IDT (interdisciplinary team) investigation dated 09/13/21 confirmed no interventions were put into place after the fall on 09/10/21.
A review of Resident #213's progress notes indicated the resident sustained another fall on 09/18/2021 at 9:00 PM. The notes indicated the fall occurred in the hallway next to the resident's wheelchair and was unwitnessed. There was no injury documented. There was no documentation to indicate if the tab alarm was in place at the time of the fall.
A review of Resident's #213 IDT investigation dated 09/24/21 confirmed no interventions were put into place after the fall on 09/18/21.
An observation of Resident #213 on 10/07/2021 at 7:52 AM revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. There was no tab alarm (used to indicate if a resident was rising from a seated position), and the bed was not in the low position.
An observation of Resident #213 on 10/08/2021 at 8:38 AM revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. There was no tab alarm, and the bed was not in the low position. There was a fall mat next to the bed.
On 10/08/2021 at 10:24 AM, an interview was conducted with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2. When asked if new interventions were put into place after the resident fell on [DATE], ADON #2 stated, no. ADON #2 stated that the facility's interdisciplinary team met and concluded no interventions were needed. When asked if any interventions were put into place after the second fall on 09/18/2021, ADON #2 stated the interdisciplinary team did not feel any additional interventions were warranted. When asked if a new Morse fall scale assessment was completed after either fall, ADON #2 stated, no. When asked if the fall which occurred on 09/18/2021 may have been avoided if interventions were put into place after the fall that occurred on 09/10/2021, the ADON #2 stated, maybe. ADON #2 stated that the care plan would be updated. When asked why the tab alarm was not in place on 10/07/2021 and 10/08/2021, ADON #2 stated they were not sure but would in-service staff. ADON #2 stated the CNA had all the interventions on the Kiosk, which is where they document. When asked if ADON #2 was aware per facility policy a Morse fall risk assessment was to be completed after each fall to identify risk areas, ADON #2 stated, no. ADON #2 confirmed there was only one fall risk assessment completed for Resident #213, which was on admission [DATE]).
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 7:31 PM, a family member for Resident #213 stated the resident had sustained multiple falls at home. The family member stated that they and other family members were concerned about Resident #213's safety.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 1:39 PM, the Administrator stated the expectations of the facility was to provide care to prevent falls from occurring and to intervene after a fall to try to prevent further falls. The Administrator stated a fall should be documented in an incident report, and the interdisciplinary team would review the fall and seek to find interventions to prevent further falls. The Administrator also stated the interventions should be updated in the care plans and was disappointed they were not.
Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Resident Safety Program/Fall Prevention, revised on 07/2021, revealed, Policy: All residents who are at risk for falls will be identified through a comprehensive assessment process. This risk will be addressed in the resident's individualized treatment plan and evaluated through the IDC process .Procedure: A Morse Scale Falls Risk Assessment is completed upon admission and readmission, significant change assessment, quarterly assessment and after each fall .F. Falls will be reviewed weekly by the IDC team using the IDC team fall event review note, interventions adjusted, and care plans adjusted as necessary.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-27.1(a)
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to report an alleged ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to report an alleged violation of abuse perpetrated by Resident #105 to the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) against two (Residents #198 and #234) of three residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, the facility failed to report an allegation of physical and sexual abuse for Resident #198 and failed to timely report an allegation of physical abuse for Resident #234. The facility's failed practice had the potential to affect all residents at the facility.
Findings included:
The facility admitted Resident #105 with diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, wandering, restlessness and agitation, and severe psychotic features. The admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated the resident was moderately impaired with a SAMS (Staff Assessment for Mental Status). The resident required physical assistance of two persons to dress and for toilet use. The resident required physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene. The resident required assistance with setup for bed mobility and eating. The resident exhibited behavioral symptoms such as kicking, hitting, pushing, scratching, grabbing, and sexual abuse directed towards others. The resident's identified symptoms put others at significant risk for physical injury. The resident intruded on the privacy or activity of other residents. The resident exhibited the behaviors four to six times daily. The resident currently resided in a locked behavior unit.
1. Review of a facility incident report, dated 08/13/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #105 was sexually inappropriate with Resident #198. Per the report, Resident #105 was observed to have touched Resident #198 on their buttocks while Resident #198 was walking in an unidentified hallway. It was noted in the report that when Resident #198 questioned why Resident #105 touched them inappropriately, Resident #105 pushed Resident #198 to the floor.
Review of the medical record revealed Resident #198 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance and anxiety disorder. The resident was independent with activities of daily living.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 9:00 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated that the incident when Resident #105 was noted to have inappropriately touched Resident #198 on 08/13/2021 was considered behavioral. Per ADON #2, it was not uncommon for residents on the behavior unit to touch each other inappropriately. ADON #2 stated the incident was not reported to the NJDOH. There was no facility-reported event (FRE) to the NJDOH for this allegation.
2. Review of a progress note dated 10/07/2021 revealed Resident #105 pulled on Resident #234's hair. Registered Nurse (RN) #11 who recorded in the medical indicated that Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair. RN #1 failed to ensure that she reported the incident to the facility's abuse coordinator. The facility did not report the incident until the survey team brought it to their attention.
During an interview with the Activity Assistant (AA) on 10/10/2021 at 3:39 PM, the AA stated that he witnessed the encounter firsthand. Per the AA, Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair such that it caused Resident #234's head to tilt abruptly towards the side of the pull, and the resident yelled out in pain. Per the AA, Resident #105 had a repeat encounter with Resident #234 within a space of a few minutes. The AA stated that he reported his observation to the nurse on the shift.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 3:02 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that the facility typically reported abuse incidences. Per the NHA, RN #11 probably thought not to disturb the unit supervisor (ADON #2) at the time because the ADON was helping with the survey process. When the surveyor raised the concern about the facility's failure to report the inappropriate sexual behavior exhibited by Resident #105 towards Resident #234, the NHA stated he would have to investigate why the facility did not file a reportable in that case. The NHA acknowledged that the facility did not file the reportable for the alleged abuse perpetrated against Resident #234 until the survey team brought the situation to the facility's attention.
The facility's Policy titled, Abuse, Neglect or Exploitation, with effective date of 10/2020, was provided by the ADON on 10/10/2021 at 11:15 AM. The policy read in part .Contact the NJDOH of abuse and neglect of residents in CHCC's residential LTC programs . as follows: [a] serious bodily injury: immediately or within 2 hours of suspicion; [b] No serious injury: within 24 hours of suspicion .
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-5.1(a)
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to have evidence that ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to have evidence that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated for three (Residents #197, #198, and #234) of three residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, the facility failed to have evidence that it investigated all abuse violations perpetrated by Resident #105 against Residents #197, #198, and #234. The facility's failed practice has the potential to affect all the residents at the facility.
Findings included:
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated the facility admitted Resident #105 with diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, wandering, restlessness and agitation, and severe psychotic features. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS),dated 08/09/2021, indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired with a SAMS (Staff Assessment for Mental Status). The resident required physical assistance of two persons with dressing and toileting. The resident required physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene. The resident required assistance with setup for bed mobility and eating. The resident exhibited behavioral symptoms such as kicking, hitting, pushing, scratching, grabbing, and sexual abuse directed towards others. The resident's identified symptoms put others at significant risk for physical injury. The resident significantly intruded on the privacy or activity of others. The resident exhibited these behaviors four to six times daily. The resident currently resided in a locked behavior unit.
A review of Resident #105's medical record indicated a behavior care plan, dated 02/24/2020, indicated under the focus portion of the plan that Resident #105 resisted care and was combative (hitting/punching/slapping) with staff and at times requires additional certified behavioral technician (CBT) for provision of care. The focus portion also indicated Resident #105 wanders and the resident becomes very intrusive with peers, yells, curses, and threatens peers. Resident #105 takes food from peers' trays at times, becomes verbally and physically aggressive. The intervention portion of the care plan, last revised 02/27/2020, included the following: allow behaviors to continue in a safe manner if it assists with keeping Resident #105 calm, staff to monitor the effectiveness of techniques and report any changes to nurse, doctor, or interdisciplinary committee (IDC) team, offer appropriate seating areas to reduce agitation and over-stimulation, and offer distraction and remove from area when becoming agitated.
1. A review of a facility incident report, dated on 06/02/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #197 was propelling themself in their wheelchair on the [NAME] Unit hallway trying to get past Resident #105. The incident report indicated Resident #197 told Resident #105 to excuse them, and Resident #105 responded by punching Resident #197 with a closed fist, which caused a laceration to Resident #197's upper lip. The incident report indicated Resident #197 required an emergency room visit to get their upper lip sutured.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #197 had diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15. The resident required extensive assistance of two persons for transfer.
2. A review of a facility incident report, dated 08/13/2021, indicated it was reported by an unidentified eyewitness that Resident #105 was sexually inappropriate with Resident #198. Per the incident report, Resident #105 was observed to have touched Resident #198 on their buttocks while Resident #198 was walking in an unidentified hallway. It was noted in the incident report that when Resident #198 questioned why Resident #105 touched them inappropriately, Resident #105 pushed Resident #198 to the floor.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #198 had diagnoses which included dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere with behavioral disturbance and anxiety disorder. The resident was independent with activities of daily living.
3. A review of a progress note, dated 10/07/2021, revealed Resident #105 pulled on Resident #234's hair.
During an interview with the Activity Assistant (AA) on 10/10/2021 at 3:39 PM, the AA stated that he witnessed the encounter firsthand. Per the AA, Resident #105 pulled Resident #234's hair such that it caused Resident #234's head to tilt abruptly towards the side of the pull, and the resident yelled out in a sound that indicated discomfort or pain. Per the AA, Resident #105 had a repeat encounter with Resident #234 within a space of a few minutes. The AA stated that he reported his observations to the nurse on the shift.
The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated Resident #234 had diagnoses which included unspecified osteoarthritis, muscle weakness, and dementia with behavioral disturbance.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 3:02 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that when an abuse incident was reported to be repeatedly perpetrated by the same resident, he relied on nursing staff to tell him what they had done and their input on what they thought the facility should do differently. The NHA stated that he expected an investigation into all abuse allegations. Per the NHA, investigation was key to identifying the trigger for the aggressor, and it helped direct the proper intervention which helped to ensure residents at the facility continued to be free from abuse. When the abuse investigation for this incident was requested, the NHA stated that the facility did not have evidence that the facility investigated the abuse incidents identified above.
The facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect or Exploitation, with effective date of 10/2020, indicated, .Investigation and follow-up . Responsibilities of Supervisors/Nurse Managers and /or Director of Nursing/Nurse Executive or Designee (1). Review the investigations policy and complete the investigator's checklist .
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-5.1(a)
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to prov...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a meaningful program of activities for two (Residents #105 and #236) of three residents reviewed for activities. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the activity program was designed to meet the individual activity needs, interests, and abilities for Residents #105 and #236, who were demented. The facility also failed to invite and encourage group and individual activities of stated interest promoting socialization and decreasing boredom.
The failed practice had the potential to affect all 38 residents who resided on the [NAME] Unit (locked unit).
Finding included:
1. The October 2021 computerized physician orders (CPO) indicated the facility admitted Resident #105 with diagnoses which included paranoid schizophrenia, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, wandering, restlessness and agitation, and severe psychotic features. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired with a SAMS (Staff Assessment for Mental Status). The resident required physical assistance of two persons to dressing and toileting. The resident required physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene.
The undated participation and activity interest assessment completed with Resident #105 indicated the resident was not able to respond to the question related to the resident's preferred activities. The report indicated the facility attempted to reach out to the resident's family but was unsuccessful. However, the assessment indicated that staff reported Resident #105 loved music. It was noted that Resident #105 sat and rocked to music whenever music was being played.
The facility posted an activity calendar which listed different activities for each day of the month. The calendar indicated the following activities were to be carried out with residents on the [NAME] Unit from 10/06/2021 through 10/10/2021, which were the survey dates.
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/06/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Sit and be fit)
- At 11:00 AM (Person, place, or thing game)
- At 11:30 AM (Canadian Rocky Mountains Park: Landscape documentary)
- At 2:15 PM-3:45 PM (Bingo)
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/07/2021 included:
- At 10:15 AM (Stretch and flex)
- From 10:45 AM through 11:20 AM (Chaplain time)
- At 11:30 AM (25 most beautiful destinations in America)
- At 2:15 PM (Where do these foods come from)
- At 3:00 PM (The life of [NAME])
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/08/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Morning stretch)
- At 11:00 AM (Disc drop game)
- At 11:30 AM (The [NAME] program)
- At 2:15 PM (Trivia: Just for fun)
- From 3:00 through 3:45 PM ([NAME] classics)
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/09/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Noodle fitness)
- From 11:00 AM through 11:45 AM (Food jingo)
- At 2:15 PM (Word association game)
- From 3:00 PM through 3:45 PM (Il [NAME] Italian songs)
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/10/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Contemporary Christian music)
- At 11:00 AM (Fill in the blank)
- At 11:30 AM (Flashback to 1956: A timeline of life in America)
- From 2:15 PM through 3:45 PM (Bingo)
Observations conducted from 10/06/2021 through 10/09/2021 revealed Resident #105 was unmonitored and was by themself. The resident was always observed in the personal spaces of other residents with closed fist, threatening to punch them. Resident #105 continuously said derogative language, such as using the F-word and B-word towards staff and residents. The resident grabbed staff when they walked by the resident. The observations revealed the resident was never encouraged or invited to participate in any activity. There were no observations of music being played for the resident to rock to as identified in the participation and activity interest assessment. The resident wandered on the unit most of the time and was aggressive towards residents and staff.
On 10/06/2021 at 3:29 PM, Resident #105 was heard saying the F word which was directed at staff and residents on the [NAME] Unit. Resident #105 approached the surveyor with a closed fist, threatening to punch the surveyor during this time.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:05 AM, Resident #105 aggressively grabbed the rehab assistant (RA) by his left arm when the RA walked by the resident.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:39 AM, the RA stated that Resident #105 had been aggressive towards staff and residents since the resident's admission. He said he hardly saw the resident participate in any activity program.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:25 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive, combative, and not easily redirectable. LPN #7 stated that Resident #105 liked to say racial slurs and used derogatory speech. LPN #7 stated that Resident #105 got into other residents' personal space. LPN #7 stated that the resident had dragged, hit, and punched staff and residents. LPN #7 stated, You need to know how to speak, in order to not get the resident agitated. LPN #7 verified that Resident #105 liked music. She acknowledged that there was no music activity which encouraged the resident's engagement.
On 10/07/2021 at 3:15 PM, Certified Behavior Technician (CBT) #1 stated that Resident #105 was aggressive towards residents and staff. He stated that Resident #105 insulted staff and residents with profanity. CBT #1 stated that the resident had hit staff and residents and was a safety concern to self and other residents. Per CBT #1, he did not know why the activity department ceased playing music for the resident. CBT #1 stated that Resident #105 was known to be calm when music was played.
On 10/08/2021 at 2:54 PM, the Activities Director (AD) stated that the [NAME] Unit had two types of activity programs. Per the AD, there were structured group programs and individual room activities where staff provided one-on-one. The AD stated that the one-on-one approaches took place on and off throughout the day. One-on-one activities were not on the activity calendar. The AD stated that one-on-one activities were carried out when residents were more cooperative. The AD stated the different types of one-on-one activities included a rolling sensory cart, hand massage, shoulder massage, and pet therapy. Per the AD, the facility just started up again with indoor pet visitation. The AD added that the facility did one-to-one conversation and facilitated FaceTime calls and virtual visits as activity programs. The AD stated that she knew Resident #105 enjoyed snacking. Prior to COVID-19, Resident #105 enjoyed music and stayed around longer. Per the AD, Resident #105 was calm and relaxed when music was played. She stated that the ongoing renovation at the facility hindered the engagement as they had issues with space. The AD stated that outdoor patio visits, which helped the resident socialize, were also hindered by the renovation. The AD acknowledged that Resident #105 wandered aimlessly across the unit. Per the AD, it was fine for Resident #105 to wander as it was therapeutic. Per the AD, walking was part of activity. The AD stated that the resident's behavior hindered activity staff from inviting the resident to activities.
During the interview, the AD provided the activity participation log for Resident #105 from 10/06/2021 through 10/10/2021 (survey dates). The log revealed the acronym MDX on the participation record dated 10/06/2021; the acronym W was reported on the participation log on 10/07/2021; and the acronym WI was recorded on 10/08/2021. The bottom portion of the participation log listed an alphabetical representation of each letter in the acronyms identified above. Specifically, the record identified that M represented music, D represented discussion group, X represented sensory stimulation, W represented outdoor/patio visit and I represented room visit. The AD acknowledged that the reported activities on Resident #105's log contradicted her assertions as reported in the interview above. The AD acknowledged the log did not identify the time and duration of participation. The AD stated that she would look into the contradictory information in the log from activity staff.
On 10/09/2021 at 9:00 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated that Resident #105 had been very challenging with the resident's care. Resident #105's behaviors created a stressful environment for other residents. ADON #2 stated that he felt the activity department did not engage the resident in activity programs as identified in the resident's activity participation assessment because of the resident's behavior.
On 10/10/2021 at 3:02 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that he believed activity staff on the behavior ([NAME]) unit were doing their best to engage the residents on the unit. Per the NHA, if activity staff deemed walking/wandering an activity, then it was an activity.
The facility's policy titled, Activity Programming and Protocols, effective 01/2021, indicated, All residents (both alert/oriented and regressed/ low functioning, confused, and behavior populations) are provided with a choice for participation in a variety of daily programs. Activity programs promote and enhance resident's socialization, physical, creative, educational/intellectual, cultural, spiritual, awareness stimulation and community integration needs; focus is on maintaining resident's dignity and personal identity, increased feeling of well-being and success. Programs are adapted to resident's level of functioning and are offered in an individual manner, small or large group format. All residents have the right to refuse to participate in programs. Residents are provided with the opportunity to enjoy various recreational/social activities without compromising the participating residents' safety. All programs have therapeutic value and incorporate family-centered activities, which provide a supportive and therapeutic environment to give the families and residents and opportunity to work towards achieving common goals.
2. The October 2021 computerized physician order (CPO) indicated the facility admitted Resident #236 with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired with a Staff Assessment for Mental Status (SAMS). The resident currently resided in a locked behavior unit. The resident required one-person physical assistance with dressing and personal hygiene.
The activity care plan, initiated on 09/23/2021, indicated under the focus portion of the plan that Resident #236 needed support and encouragement to remain within program settings. The care plan indicated that Resident #236 wandered in and out of groups. The goal portion of the care plan indicated the following: that Resident #236's socialization would be increased by friendly visits/one-on-one chat; Resident #236's current amount of activity time per week would not decline; Resident #236 would attend at least one to two activities of choice per day with a duration of five to 10 minutes; and Resident #236 will continue to walk within the unit and will appear to enjoy socialization with staff and certain peers. The intervention portion of Resident #236's care plan indicated the following: gently redirect the resident's attention as necessary within the resident's tolerance to remain in the program or remain on task; compliment Resident #236's participation efforts; schedule activities for the resident on a regular basis and monitor the resident attendance; and provide one-on-one programming [sensory and cognitive stimulation, social engagement, aromatherapy/ therapeutic music, and pet therapy/likes dog].
A review of Resident #236's, undated, activity assessment indicated the resident liked to read magazines and picture books. The activity assessment indicated the resident liked to listen to [NAME], Spanish music, rock and roll, 50's, 60's, and 70's music. The activity assessment indicated the resident liked to do arts and crafts. The resident liked card games and bingo and liked to watch music performances on television. Resident #236 liked playing with a dog. The resident was indicated to have no preference for group activities. The assessment indicated that activity staff would encourage participation in activities of choice.
The facility posted an activity calendar which listed different activities for each day of the month. The calendar indicated the following activities were to be carried out with residents on the [NAME] Unit from 10/06/2021 through 10/10/2021, which were the survey dates.
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/06/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Sit and be fit)
- At 11:00 AM (Person, place, or thing game)
- At 11:30 AM (Canadian Rocky Mountains Park: Landscape documentary)
- At 2:15 PM-3:45 PM (Bingo)
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/07/2021 included:
- At 10:15 AM (Stretch and flex)
- From 10:45 AM through 11:20 AM (Chaplain time)
- At 11:30 AM (25 most beautiful destinations in America)
- At 2:15 PM (Where do these foods come from)
- At 3:00 PM (The life of [NAME])
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/08/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Morning stretch)
- At 11:00 AM (Disc drop game)
- At 11:30 AM (The [NAME] program)
- At 2:15 PM (Trivia: Just for fun)
- From 3:00 through 3:45 PM ([NAME] classics)
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/09/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Noodle fitness)
- From 11:00 AM through 11:45 AM (Food jingo)
- At 2:15 PM (Word association game)
- From 3:00 PM through 3:45 PM (Il [NAME] Italian songs)
The activity schedule for [NAME] Main Lounge on 10/10/2021 included:
- At 10:30 AM (Contemporary Christian music)
- At 11:00 AM (Fill in the blank)
- At 11:30 AM (Flashback to 1956: A timeline of life in America)
- From 2:15 PM through 3:45 PM (Bingo)
Observations conducted on the [NAME] Unit from 10/06/2021 through 10/10/2021 revealed Resident #236 was never in any activity. The resident did not receive encouragement to participate in any of the identified preferred activities assessed for the resident. Except at mealtimes, Resident #236 was left to wander throughout the unit without any meaningful engagement. The resident wandered into other residents' rooms for most of the observations and exited the rooms with belongings of other residents.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:28 AM, Resident #236 exited room [ROOM NUMBER] with a red bag. In the bag was a radio, a pair of shoes, nail polish, and apple juice.
On 10/07/2021 at 11:32 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #10 identified the items in the red bag as belonging to a resident who occupied the room. CNA #10 identified the beads on Resident #236 did not belong to the resident. Per CNA #10, she did not know why Resident #236 was not invited to activities. CNA #10 stated that Resident #236 wandered into other residents' rooms every day, and nursing staff had to keep redirecting Resident #236 so the resident was not in any safety related concern.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:02 PM, Resident #236 was observed in room [ROOM NUMBER] rummaging through the wardrobes of the residents who occupied the room. The surveyor called the attention of the nursing staff who responded and escorted Resident #236 out of the room.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:04 PM, an unidentified resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] was yelling out loud that they were sick and tired because Resident #236 kept coming in their room and displacing their personal items.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:13 PM, Certified Behavioral Technician (CBT) #2 stated that Resident #236 always snuck in other residents' rooms and displaced other residents' personal belongings. CBT #2 stated that Resident #236 sometimes snuck out with other residents' personal belongings, and staff did their best to retrieve those items and return them to the identified owners. CBT #2 stated that she had not seen the resident participate in any activity program. Per CBT #2, Resident #236 wandered through the lounge when activities were going on. CBT #2 stated that the resident did not receive encouragement to participate in activities.
On 10/07/2021 at 2:09 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7 stated that Resident #236 had obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The resident compulsively took things that did not belong to the resident. LPN #7 stated the facility had spoken to the psychiatrist about the resident. Staff tried to be vigilant with the resident. She stated that nursing staff retrieved the items the resident took from their peers' multiple times a day and returned them back to the residents. LPN #7 stated that staff tried to keep the resident in clear view to advert the resident from sneaking into other resident's rooms. LPN #7 stated that lack of engagement with the resident posed a safety risk. Per LPN #7, to hide the items Resident #236 took from other residents' rooms, Resident #236 had been found by staff several times when the resident tried to use the drawers from their bedside table as a ladder to hide items the resident took from other residents on their wardrobe. LPN #7 stated that Resident #236 was not on any activity program.
On 10/08/2021 at 2:54 PM, the Activities Director (AD) stated that the [NAME] Unit had two types of activity programs. Per the AD, there were structured group programs and individual room activities where staff provided one-on-one. One-on-one approaches took place on and off throughout the day. The one-on-one activities were not on the activity calendar. The AD stated that one-on-one activities were carried out when residents were more cooperative. The AD stated that the different types of one-on-one activities included a rolling sensory cart, hand massage, shoulder massage, and pet therapy. Per the AD, the facility just started up again with indoor pet visitation. The AD added that the facility did one-to-one conversation and facilitated FaceTime calls and virtual visits as activity programs. The AD stated that she knew Resident #236 enjoyed music, picture books, magazines, and pets. She stated that prior to COVID-19, Resident #236 enjoyed music and stayed around longer. Per the AD, Resident #236 was calm and relaxed when music was played. The AD stated that the ongoing renovation at the facility hindered the engagement, as they had issues with space. She stated that outdoor patio visits which helped the resident socialize were also hindered by the renovation. The AD stated that she was aware that Resident #236 wandered into other residents' rooms and took their personal items. Per the AD, it was fine for Resident #236 to wander as it was therapeutic, and walking was an activity.
The AD provided the activity participation log for Resident #236 from 10/06/2021 through 10/10/2021 (survey dates). The log revealed the acronym NXDXE on the participation record dated 10/06/2021; the acronym IZ was reported on the participation log on 10/07/2021; and the acronym ID was recorded on 10/08/2021. The bottom portion of the participation log listed an alphabetical representation of each letter in the acronyms identified above. Specifically, the record identified that N represented physical exercise, D represented discussion group, X represented sensory stimulation, I represented room visit, and Z represented other. The log did not identify the time and duration of Resident #236's participation in any of the reported activities. Resident #236 was not observed to have participated in any activity.
On 10/08/2021 at 3:15 PM, the Assistant Activities Director (AAD) stated that she documented moments when Resident #236 walked through the lounge during activities to reflect that the resident participated because the resident had a glance of the television screen when the resident walked through. The AAD stated that when she held the resident's hands to redirect the resident from wandering into spaces on the unit, she reported the interaction as sensory session. The AAD stated that Resident #236's attention span was very short; therefore, activity staff could not do so much with the resident.
On 10/10/2021 at 3:02 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that he was not made aware of Resident #236 wandering into other residents' rooms or taking other residents' personal belongings. The NHA stated that he believed activity staff on the behavior ([NAME]) unit were doing their best to engage the residents on the unit. Per the NHA, if activity staff deemed walking or hand holding an activity, then it was an activity.
The facility's policy titled, Activity Programming and Protocols, effective 01/2021, indicated, All residents (both alert/oriented and regressed/ low functioning, confused, and behavior populations) are provided with a choice for participation in a variety of daily programs. Activity programs promote and enhance resident's socialization, physical, creative, educational/intellectual, cultural, spiritual, awareness stimulation and community integration needs; focus is on maintaining resident's dignity and personal identity, increased feeling of well-being and success. Programs are adapted to resident's level of functioning and are offered in an individual manner, small or large group format. All residents have the right to refuse to participate in programs. Residents are provided with the opportunity to enjoy various recreational/social activities without compromising the participating residents' safety. All programs have therapeutic value and incorporate family-centered activities, which provide a supportive and therapeutic environment to give the families and residents and opportunity to work towards achieving common goals.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-7.3(a)6
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 observations, interviews, record review, and review of facility policies, it was determined the facility failed to ensu...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review, and review of facility policies, it was determined the facility failed to ensure interventions were implemented to prevent wounds from developing or worsening for 1 (Residents #156) of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Findings included:
1. A review of Resident #156's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses of age-related osteoarthritis, spinal stenosis, pain in left hip, muscle weakness, age-related osteoporosis, and herpes zoster. Resident #156's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 3, which indicated severely impaired cognition. The resident required extensive assistance of two staff with mobility. The resident was always incontinent, and was at risk for developing pressure ulcers. The MDS indicated Resident #156 had four unstageable pressure ulcers.
A review of Resident #156's care plan, dated 02/18/2021, had a focus of skin integrity. Interventions included pillows between knees when in bed, assist with repositioning when in bed and chair, pressure relieving air mattress and pressure relieving chair cushion. The interventions were dated 02/19/2021.
A review of a progress note for Resident #156, dated 06/18/2021, indicated a new concern of skin breakdown on the right and left foot over bony prominence. The note did not indicate the physician was notified and no new orders were documented.
A review of a progress note for Resident #156, dated 07/20/2021, indicated a new concern for open area on the right hip measuring 3 centimeters (cm) x 2 cm and the left hip was noted to have an area of non-blanchable redness measuring 1 cm x 2 cm. Orders were obtained for the wound clinic to evaluate and treat.
A record review indicated that Resident #156 was assessed by a wound care clinic for treatment and follow-up. A note dated 07/22/2021 indicated the resident had a full thickness ulceration of the right trochanter/hip. This measured 2.5 cm x 2.5 cm. The wound base was 100% necrotic tissue (dead, nonviable). The resident also had a full thickness ulceration of the left trochanter/hip. This measured 0.4 cm x 1.2 cm. The wound base had stable eschar (dark scab tissue). The resident also had an area of deep purplish discoloration of the left lateral foot surface. This measured 4.0 cm x 1.2 cm. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the first metatarsal on the left foot. This measured 1.2 cm x 1.2 cm. The suggested interventions from the wound care clinic included the following: offload pressure to affected area with soft pillow, continue repositioning in accordance with assessed needs, alternating pressure relief mattress, and wheelchair cushion.
A record review indicated that Resident #156 was assessed by a wound care clinic for treatment and follow-up. A note dated 07/29/2021 indicated the resident had a full thickness ulceration of the right trochanter/hip. This wound was stable. The resident also had a full thickness ulceration of the left trochanter/hip. This measured 2.0 cm x 2.0 cm. The wound base has stable. The resident also had an area of deep purplish discoloration of the left lateral foot surface. This measured 4.0 cm x 3.0 cm. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the first metatarsal on the left foot. This measured 1.5 cm x 1.0 cm and was stable. The resident acquired a new wound to the right lateral foot surface, and was assessed as a Stage 1 pressure injury that was non-blanchable. The suggested interventions from the wound care clinic included the following: offload pressure to affected area with soft pillow, continue repositioning in accordance with assessed needs, alternating pressure relief mattress, and wheelchair cushion.
A record review indicated that Resident #156 was assessed by a wound care clinic for treatment and follow-up. A note dated 08/05/2021 indicated the resident had a full thickness ulceration of the right trochanter/hip. This measured 2.7 cm x 3.0 cm x 1.0 cm. The resident also had a full thickness ulceration of the left trochanter/hip. This wound was stable. The resident also had an area of deep purplish discoloration of the left lateral foot surface. This wound was stable. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the first metatarsal on the left foot. This wound was stable. The resident acquired a new wound to the left lateral foot surface, and was assessed as an unstageable pressure injury. The resident also had a Stage one pressure injury to the right lateral foot surface. This wound was stable. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the left bunion. This measured 2.0 cm x 2.3 cm. Wound base was 60% yellow slough tissue. The suggested interventions from the wound care clinic included the following: offload pressure to affected area with soft pillow, continue repositioning in accordance with assessed needs, alternating pressure relief mattress, and wheelchair cushion.
A review of the Braden Score (measures risk of skin breakdown), dated 08/20/2021, was assessed as 13 which indicated Resident #156 was at moderate risk for skin breakdown.
A record review indicated that Resident #156 was assessed by a wound care clinic for treatment and follow-up. A note dated 08/26/2021 indicated the resident had a full thickness ulceration of the right trochanter/hip. This measured 2.0 cm x 3.0 cm x 1.2 cm. The resident also had a full thickness ulceration of the left trochanter/hip. This measured 3.5 cm x 3.5 cm. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the left lateral foot surface. This measured 2.0 cm x 3.0 cm. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the first metatarsal/bunion on the left foot. This measured 1.0 cm x 2.0 cm. The wound bed was 60% slough and 40% granular tissue. The suggested interventions from the wound care clinic included the following: offload pressure to affected area with soft pillow, continue repositioning in accordance with assessed needs, alternating pressure relief mattress, and wheelchair cushion.
A record review indicated that Resident #156 was assessed by a wound care clinic for treatment and follow-up. A note dated 09/02/2021 indicated the resident had a full thickness ulceration of the right trochanter/hip. This measured 1.8 cm x 2.5 cm x 1.2 cm. The resident also had a full thickness ulceration of the left trochanter/hip. This measured 6.0 cm x 5.0 cm. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the left lateral foot surface. This measured 1.0 cm x 2.0 cm. The resident also had a full thickness wound of the first metatarsal/bunion on the left foot. This measured 1.5 cm x 1.5cm. x 0.1 cm. The wound bed was 60% slough and 40% granular tissue. The suggested interventions from the wound care clinic included the following: offload pressure to affected area with soft pillow, continue repositioning in accordance with assessed needs, alternating pressure relief mattress, and wheelchair cushion.
According to the wound clinic notes from 07/20/2021 through 09/02/2021, Resident #156 wounds to the right trochanter, left trochanter, and the first metatarsal/bunion to the left foot worsened based on the measurements recorded. The resident also developed a new wound to the right ankle.
On 09/06/2021, a new care plan with a focus of wound was added to the care plan. There were no new interventions added.
A review of a report of certified nurse assistant (CNA) daily documentation of skin condition for September 2021 provided by Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2, revealed there were 83 documented observations of skin for Resident #156. Of those documentations, 59 observations were documented as intact skin. The remaining 24 observations were documented as open area to skin.
A review of Resident #156's physician's orders, dated October 2021, indicated the resident had an order for a pressure relieving air mattress/alternating setting #1. The order date was 08/25/2021. The wound clinic had made the recommendation for an air mattress on 07/22/2021. There was also an order for pillows between knees while in bed. The order date was 06/11/2021.
A review of Resident #156's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) and Medication Administration Record (MAR) for September 2021 and October 2021 indicated no documentation regarding pressure relieving interventions.
An observation on 10/06/2021 at 9:11 AM revealed Resident #156 was in bed, lying on their left side. There was an air mattress in place. There were no pillows for off-loading or other pressure-relieving devices noted.
An observation on 10/07/2021 at 7:43 AM revealed Resident #156 lying in bed on their left side. An air mattress was in place. There were no pillows for off-loading or other pressure-relieving devices noted.
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 9:27 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated skin observations were completed daily by the CNAs. The CNAs report to the nurses any concerns or changes in the residents' skin. When asked if the nurses did any assessments, ADON #2 stated only if a CNA brought a concern to them. When asked about the accuracy of the monthly CNA documentation of skin integrity for Resident #156, ADON #2 stated they were not sure why CNAs were documenting intact skin when the resident had wounds. The ADON stated they would re-educate staff. ADON #2 stated the facility staff performed wound care on most residents. ADON #2 stated that residents who are under hospice care received wound care by the hospice nurse or their staff. Some residents were seen by a wound care clinic that came to the facility to perform wound care, measurements, and assessments. ADON #2 stated that Resident #156 received wound care from the wound care clinic staff, as well as the facility nurses. When asked what interventions were in place to prevent wounds from developing or worsening on Resident #156, ADON #2 stated the resident had an air mattress, pillows for support, and heel protectors. ADON #2 stated they were unaware that the resident did not have heel protectors on or pillows for offloading of feet when informed of observations on 10/06/2021 and 10/07/2021. ADON #2 stated they would in-service staff immediately on the need to use heel protectors or use of pillows for offloading. When asked why an air mattress was not ordered until 08/25/2021 and heel protectors were not ordered, ADON #2 stated they were not sure but would look into it.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 1:38 PM, the Administrator stated that skin issues for any residents would be handled immediately. The Administrator stated that their expectation was for nurses to assess the residents' wounds and skin daily, as a CNA could not assess. The Administrator stated that the CNA could report alteration in skin to the nurse, but the facility should take all steps to prevent skin breakdown from happening or getting worse. The Administrator stated an incident report should be completed as soon as a wound was discovered, and appropriate monitoring and care planning should be completed.
A review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Wound Care, revised 07/2021, indicated, Pressure injury prevention. 1. identify individuals at risk for skin breakdown using the Braden scale. 2. A skin assessment will be completed on admission, readmission or transfer, and skin assessment/observation daily thereafter.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-27.1(e)
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to assess the bladder function and implement a bladder retraining program to restore continence for 1 (Resident #254) of 44 residents admitted to the [NAME] Wing within the past 30 days. The facility also failed to follow the policy for providing indwelling urinary catheter care and failed to secure the indwelling urinary catheter for 1 (Resident #121) of 8 residents reviewed for having an indwelling urinary catheter.
Findings included:
1. The facility's policy titled, Incontinence Management, with an effective date of 07/2021, indicated the purpose was to ensure a resident who was incontinent of urine or stool would receive appropriate treatment and services to restore as much normal function as possible. Under Procedure, the policy indicated The Registered Nurse is responsible for the completion of the nursing assessment for bowel and bladder. The assessment is to begin by day three and be completed by day 10. The elimination record will be kept on the CNA clipboard until complete.
The facility admitted Resident #254 with diagnoses that included an unspecified fracture of the femur, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and generalized muscle weakness.
The admission Nursing Assessment, dated 09/21/2021, indicated Resident #254 had very limited mobility but walked occasionally. Bowel and bladder continence was not assessed on the admission nursing assessment.
A review of the baseline care plan, dated 09/21/2021, indicated Resident #254 was alert, verbal, and had clear speech. The assessment indicated Resident #254 was incontinent of bowel and bladder and should be checked and changed to maintain skin integrity.
The psychosocial care plan, dated 09/21/2021, indicated Resident #254 did not adjust easily to change in routine and had a strong identification with the past. The goal was Resident #254 would be involved in care at the highest level of independence to be achieved by involving the resident in decisions and reinforcing independent behavior. The care plan did not address the resident's use of briefs or incontinence.
The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated Resident #254 was cognitively intact with a score of 13. No behaviors were identified. The MDS indicated Resident #254 required extensive assistance with transferring, toilet use, and personal hygiene. The MDS indicated the resident had not had a trial toileting program and was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder.
Physician orders received on 09/29/2021, indicated Resident #254 could bear weight as tolerated, and the resident had instructions to get up and walk more frequently.
During an interview with Resident #254 on 10/06/2021 at 10:21 AM, the resident stated briefs were not needed if staff answered the call light promptly. Resident #121 stated that upon admission, a choice about wearing briefs, pull-ups, or personal under garments was not given. The resident added that staff placed the resident in briefs when morning care was provided without asking a preference.
Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #2 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 10:42 AM. The CNA worked with Resident #254 and stated the resident was able to communicate their needs. CNA #2 added Resident #254 would be found wet when the CNA arrived for work in the morning, but during her shift, Resident #254 was taken to the bathroom on request and remained continent. The CNA added she found Resident #254 in adult briefs in the morning so that's what she put on the resident during the day, although the resident was able to remain continent during the day shift. CNA #2 stated that sometimes, due to the resident's continence, she would place the resident in briefs with an elastic waist that could easily be pulled up and down, adding that was what she had placed on the resident that morning.
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 11:30 AM, Resident #254 confirmed they had on a brief with taped sides and not a pull-up, adding that pull-ups were what was worn at home.
Registered Nurse (RN) #5 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 2:28 PM. RN #5 had cared for Resident #254 previously. The RN stated prior to placing a resident on a bowel and bladder retraining program, a physician's order must be obtained. After the order was obtained, the CNA would be informed. RN #5 stated each resident and/or responsible family member should be asked if the resident was continent or incontinent and asked if the resident wished to wear a brief. RN #5 stated she did not think the facility used bowel and bladder assessments to determine if a resident was appropriate for a bladder retraining program.
RN #7 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 2:54 PM. RN #7 was familiar with Resident #254. The RN stated both bowel and bladder assessments were done by the admission nurse on admission. The RN stated a toileting schedule had not been attempted for Resident #254. RN #7 described Resident #254 as alert and oriented. She stated she was unsure if Resident #254 knew when urinary voiding was needed but would verify with Resident #254 if the resident was aware when voiding was needed. RN #7 added that if Resident #254 chose not to wear a brief and a brief was placed, wearing the brief could negatively affect the resident's dignity and self-respect.
RN #2 was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 8:52 AM. RN #2 was the charge nurse for the unit where Resident #254 lived. The RN stated that routinely the CNA would offer residents to toilet every two hours and offer incontinence care if needed. RN #2 stated she was unsure if any resident was participating in a personalized bladder retraining program. The RN added residents had a right not to wear a brief if they did not want. RN #2 stated Resident #254 had not told her a brief had been required.
The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 10:38 AM The ADON stated incontinence management included taking residents to the bathroom. She stated staff should ask residents if they need to void. The ADON stated that on admission, bowel and bladder assessments are completed which indicated if the resident was continent or incontinent. The facility's bladder policy was reviewed with the ADON. The bladder and bowel assessment form and elimination diary for Resident #254 was requested as outlined by the facility's policy. The ADON stated the facility had not completed those forms for the resident. The ADON added she was unaware of any resident currently enrolled in a bladder retraining program.
An interview with the Administrator was held on 10/10/21/2021 at 1:30 PM. The Administrator stated a bladder retraining program included residents wearing briefs. He added the facility was the residents' home, and each resident should be able to thrive, enjoy their stay, and engage in stimulating activities that would make staying at the facility a worthwhile experience. The Administrator stated if Resident #254 was continent during the day, the resident should be provided a means, such as a pull-up, that would make staying continent easier.
2. The facility's procedure on Catherization of the Urinary Bladder, with an effective date of 04/2021, indicated staff should secure catheter to thigh to prevent catheter movement and tractions on the urethra. Under Section B, Catheter Care, the instructions were for staff to cleanse around the area where the catheter enters the urethral meatus with soap and water daily. Under Performance Phase, staff were instructed to cleanse with a downward stroke from tip to foreskin Discard after each stroke.
The facility admitted Resident #121 on 08/04/2021 with diagnoses that included osteomyelitis of vertebra, abnormalities of gait, Parkinson's disease, polyneuropathy, and urinary retention.
Nurse's progress notes, dated 08/10/2021, indicated the indwelling urinary catheter was removed, but Resident #121 was unable to void. A bladder scan was completed which indicated 957 milliliters of urine was left in the resident's bladder. The physician was notified, and an order was obtained to replace the catheter.
The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated Resident #121 was moderately cognitively impaired. At the time of the assessment, the resident was identified with an indwelling urinary catheter.
A physician's order, dated 08/11/2021, indicated Resident #121 should have a follow-up with a urologist due to urinary retention.
Nurse progress notes, dated 09/09/2021 at 4:03 PM, indicated Resident #121 failed attempts to remove the catheter, with a documented 324 milliliters urinary residual in the resident's bladder. The last attempt to remove the catheter was documented in the progress notes for 09/28/2021, with the resident failing that attempt as well.
Current October 2021 physician's orders indicated Resident #121 had a size 16 French indwelling urinary catheter with a 20 cubic centimeter balloon foley catheter.
Resident #121 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 10:28 AM. The resident stated staff came in daily and cleaned around the catheter. Resident #121 raised the pant leg and observation revealed there was no leg band holding the indwelling urinary catheter tubing securely in place.
An observation of Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #3 performing catheter care on Resident #121 was conducted on 10/08/2021 at 10:47 AM. The CNA initially emptied the catheter drainage bag and stated she had completed catheter care. When questioned, CNA #3 stated she was only responsible for emptying the drainage bag, and nurses were responsible for cleaning the catheter where the catheter entered the body. At this time, no privacy bag was observed covering the urinary drainage bag, and the catheter tubing had not been secured to the resident's leg.
Registered Nurse (RN) #2 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 10:56 AM. RN #2 stated that CNA #3 must have misunderstood, adding that CNAs did complete catheter care. At 11:06 AM, CNA #3 again demonstrated catheter care. The urinary catheter tubing for Resident #121 was pulled taunt and the CNA pulled up on the catheter tubing to loosen the catheter prior to cleaning. CNA #3 wet her cloth, applied soap, and then, holding the washcloth three to four inches above the resident, squeezed the cloth, allowing soapy water to pour on the resident. Taking the soapy cloth, CNA #3 wiped around the resident, where the catheter entered the resident's body, in circles using the same cloth. The CNA then took the same cloth and washed from distal section of the catheter tubing toward the resident's body to the point where the catheter entered the resident's body. No visible means of securing the catheter to the resident's leg was observed. The urinary drainage bag was not covered.
RN #7 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 12:07 PM. The RN stated that during catheter care, the CNA should clean the area around the catheter using one swipe and then either discard the cloth or use a different section of the cloth. She stated another cloth should be used to clean the tubing, with the correct technique being to start where the catheter enters the resident's body and go away from the body. RN #7 stated this was to avoid cross contamination with bacteria. The RN stated the facility's policy included having the indwelling urinary catheter secured in place to avoid any tension or pulling on the catheter. She stated the CNA had not reported to her that Resident #121 did not have the indwelling urinary catheter secured. The RN also stated the urinary drainage bag should be covered to provide privacy, adding that she had received no reports that the drainage bag was not covered.
Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2, who was working with RN #7, was interviewed at 12:23 PM on 10/08/2021. The LPN verified at this time there was no privacy bag covering the drainage bag, and Resident #121's catheter was not secured. The LPN stated the danger of not having the catheter secured was accidently pulling the catheter out, causing bleeding and trauma.
On 10/08/2021 at 2:08 PM. CNA #3 was interviewed. She stated she was not expected to have the urinary drainage bag in a privacy bag if the bag was on the opposite side of the bed away from the door. When asked, if the room mate or anyone else entering the room could see the urine in the drainage bag she stated she had not given thought that the roommate of Resident #121, staff, and visitors that entered the room would be able to view the urinary drainage bag no matter which side of the bed the bag was positioned. CNA #3 stated she knew it was the policy of the facility to secure the catheter to keep the catheter from causing harm to the resident and acknowledged she had not reported the lack of securement to anyone. The CNA stated when she went into Resident #121's room to complete catheter care, the resident was already dressed, so she had not noticed the catheter was not secured. The CNA stated she was taught to #a clean cloth or a different section of the cloth for each swipe when providing catheter care. She added that typically she would not have provided catheter care for Resident #121 since she had not been assigned to that resident and had only provided catheter care due to the charge nurse asking her to do the care.
An observation made on 10/09/2021 at 8:25 AM revealed the urinary drainage bag for Resident #121 continued to hang on the side of the bed without the benefit of a privacy bag. The catheter for the resident had been secured with a leg band.
CNA #4 was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 8:33 AM. She had been assigned to Resident #121 on 10/08/2021 and had provided catheter care earlier in the morning. The CNA stated since she was an agency CNA, she had been asked not to provide catheter care for the surveyor. CNA #4 stated she observed CNA #3 use the same cloth multiple times to provide catheter care for Resident #121. She stated she had worked in the facility previously with Resident #121 and acknowledged that sometimes the resident had a privacy bag for the urinary drainage bag and sometimes not. The CNA stated she had removed the leg strap from Resident #121 on 10/08/2021 around 7:30 AM when she had provided catheter care and had forgotten to place the leg strap back.
RN #2 was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 8:52 AM. RN #2 stated the facility's policy was to secure the foley catheter to the resident's leg to keep the catheter from pulling and causing hematuria. The RN stated in this facility privacy bags for urinary drainage bags were not used, since the bags were always kept on the side of the bed away from the door.
The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 10:38 AM. ADON #1 stated the facility's policy was always to secure indwelling urinary catheters to prevent the catheter from being pulled. She stated this would prevent pain and bleeding. ADON #1 stated the facility's policy was to provide privacy bags to keep urinary drainage bags covered, and the drainage bag should also be kept on the side of the bed away from the door. The ADON added that when a CNA provided incontinent care, the CNA should clean from the catheter's insertion site away from the body. The facility's preference was to use disposable wipes for providing catheter care and for the disposable wipe to be discarded and a new cloth used after each swipe to clean.
An interview with the Administrator was held on 10/10/2021 at 1:30 PM. The Administrator stated that securing the urinary catheter was a normal practice to keep from pulling the catheter out or being moved about. He added not covering the drainage bag was a dignity issue. He stated the description of CNA #3's catheter care for Resident #121 did not meet the standard for catheter care, and the CNA required retraining.
New Jersey Administrative Code 8:39-27.1(a)
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensur...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment was cleaned and stored properly for a bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) machine (Resident #249) and failed to provide oxygen therapy as ordered by the physician (Resident #254). This affected 2 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility identified 23 residents followed by respiratory therapy.
Findings included:
1. The facility admitted Resident #249 on 09/16/2021with a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea.
A review of the admitting Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 09/23/2021 revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13 out of 15. Section O - Special Programs and Treatments revealed the resident was not using a bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) machine.
During an observation on 10/06/2021 at 9:42 AM, the BiPAP machine, tubing, and mask were sitting uncovered on the nightstand.
During an observation on 10/07/2021 at 11:15 AM, the BiPAP machine, tubing, and mask were sitting uncovered on the nightstand.
During an observation on 10/07/2021 at 2:33 PM, the BiPAP machine, tubing, and mask were sitting on the nightstand uncovered.
During an observation on 10/08/2021 at 8:34 AM, the BiPAP machine was on the nightstand, and the tubing and mask were hanging over the mattress uncovered.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 2:25 PM, Resident #249 stated they were able to put on and take off the mask. The resident stated the mask had never been cleaned or placed in a protective bag since the resident had been in the facility.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 2:26 PM with Registered Nurse (RN) # 3, she stated respiratory therapy took care of all BiPAP machines.
During an interview with Respiratory Therapist #1 on 10/08/2021 at 8:35 AM, he stated he was unaware that the resident had a BiPAP machine. He stated if the resident owned the machine, then nursing usually took care of adding the water and cleaning the mask and tubing and keeping the facemask bagged. Respiratory Therapist #1 stated the tubing needed to be cleaned weekly and the mask daily because it could get greasy when worn. He stated there did not appear to be any type of storage bag in the room to cover the mask when it was not in use. The therapist stated he would clean the tubing and bring in a bag to put the mask into when not in use. Respiratory Therapist #1 further stated if the BiPAP was a personal machine, Respiratory Therapy should have been notified on admission so they could have checked the machine to ensure it was working properly.
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 8:37 AM with the resident and Respiratory Therapist #1, the resident stated no one had cleaned the tubing or bagged the mask since admission.
During an interview with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 on 10/08/2021 at 12:15 PM, she stated there should have been an order for the BiPAP which would have placed the equipment into the system. Then respiratory therapy would have been monitoring, cleaning, and storing the equipment as needed.
During an interview with the Administrator on 10/10/2021 at 1:39 PM, he stated it would be expected that the facility had an order for the BiPAP machine, that the machine would be cleaned and stored properly, and that the use of the BiPAP would be care planned.
A review of the policy titled, Medical Equipment Selection, Evaluation, Inventory, and Inspection, dated 10/98 and effective date 5/21, did not address the storage or cleaning of the BiPAP machine.
2. The facility admitted Resident #254 with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with a dependence on oxygen.
Review of admission Nursing Assessment, dated 09/21/2021, indicated Resident #254 received oxygen at two liters per minute (2L/min) via nasal cannula (NC) and indicated the resident was short of breath with exertion.
Review of Resident #254's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated Resident #254 was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13. The resident was identified on the MDS as receiving oxygen therapy both prior to admission and since admission.
Review of physician's orders, received on 09/29/2021, indicated Resident #254 required oxygen at two liters/min per nasal cannula continuously.
Review of Resident #254's comprehensive care plan, with an effective date of 10/08/2021, identified a focus of respiratory dysfunction with a goal of improvement in activity intolerance and an improvement in the resident's oxygenation level. These goals were to be obtained in part by providing respiratory assessments to include lung sounds, vital signs, and oxygen saturation. Interventions listed also included pulmonary rehabilitation as ordered and provision of respiratory medications as ordered.
On 10/06/2021 at 10:26 AM, Resident #254 was interviewed. Resident #254 stated the physician had ordered oxygen to be delivered at 2 L/min by NC. An observation at this time indicated the oxygen concentrator for Resident #254 was set at 3 L/min. The resident added that oxygen at home had only been used during times of sleep.
Review of nurse progress notes written on 10/06/2021 at 9:18 AM, indicated Resident #254's oxygen saturation was 96%. Lung sounds were identified as diminished. The progress notes indicated the resident was given a breathing treatment.
An observation of Resident #254 was made on 10/07/2021 at 12:17 PM. The resident was sitting up in the wheelchair. The oxygen concentrator had been turned off. Resident #254 stated staff (unknown) had checked the resident's oxygen saturation the prior afternoon and found the oxygen saturation to be 95% (normal range 90% to 100%) and stated oxygen delivery was not required.
A review of physician's orders for Resident #254, completed on 10/07/2021 after speaking with Resident #254, did not reveal a physician's order to discontinue the continuous oxygen had been obtained. A review of progress notes did not document any conversations with the physician regarding the delivery of oxygen or a verbal order to use the oxygen as needed. Nurse progress notes failed to reveal documentation of a respiratory assessment to include lung sounds and oxygen saturation for Resident #254.
A review of the October 2021 Treatment Administration Record on 10/07/2021 indicated oxygen was checked as given to Resident #254 on 10/06/2021 for the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift, the 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM shift, and the current 10/07/2021 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM shift. Oxygen delivery for Resident #254 remained an active order.
Resident #254 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 11:16 AM. The resident's oxygen concentrator was not on, and oxygen was not being delivered per nasal cannula. Resident #254 stated no shortage of breath had been experienced since oxygen removal on 10/06/2021.
Registered Nurse (RN) #7 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 2:54 PM. RN #7 stated oxygen was a medication, and physician's orders were required to start oxygen and to discontinue oxygen. The RN reviewed the orders for Resident #254 and acknowledged there was not a physician's order to discontinue the resident's continuous oxygen. The RN acknowledged she had signed the oxygen as given that day (referring to 10/08/2021), although the resident had not received oxygen, and stated she had no answer as to why she had signed the oxygen off as being administered. The RN stated she would take care of notifying the physician and obtaining an order to discontinue the oxygen if the physician agreed. The RN was unaware of what staff member had discontinued the oxygen.
Review of a nurse progress note for the removal of the oxygen was not written until 10/08/2021 at 4:02 PM. The note indicated the resident had removed the oxygen prior to the nurse entering the room. The nurse, RN #7, documented Resident #254 told her oxygen was not used during day light hours. At this time the resident's oxygen level was measured at 95% with no shortness of breath noted. The nurse practitioner was notified and approved using the oxygen only as needed.
The nurse had documented that the resident had removed the oxygen prior to them entering the room, but at that time, the resident had not received oxygen for approximately 24 hours.
The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 was interviewed on 10/9/2021 at 11:20 AM. The ADON stated oxygen was a medication, and a physician's order would be required before adding oxygen, discontinuing oxygen, or changing the amount of oxygen a resident received. The ADON added she would have expected the person that discontinued the oxygen to have obtained an order before discontinuing oxygen therapy and would have expected documentation after discontinuation that described the resident's respiratory effort and at a minimum record the resident's oxygen saturation without the oxygen.
On 10/10/2021 at 1:30 PM, the Administrator was interviewed. The Administrator stated his expectations were for an order to have been obtained from the physician before discontinuing the oxygen therapy for Resident #254. He stated his background was in respiratory therapy, and he did not understand why someone would turn off the resident's oxygen when the physician had ordered continuous oxygen. The Administrator added that follow-up assessment and documentation was expected to make sure the removal of the oxygen had not compromised Resident #254.
The facility's policy titled, Oxygen Therapy, undated, indicated prior to therapy the physician's order should be verified.
The facility's policy titled, Discontinued Medications, with an effective date of 09/2018, indicated the nurse documented the physician's order to discontinue the medication in the resident's record. The Medication Administration Record is then updated to indicate the order is discontinued.
New Jersey Administrative Code 8.39-19.4(k)
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
Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility's consultant pharmacist failed to notify the facility about the lack of side effects and behavior monito...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility's consultant pharmacist failed to notify the facility about the lack of side effects and behavior monitoring for 1 (Resident #121) of 2 residents reviewed for receiving an antipsychotic medication on the [NAME] Wing.
Findings included:
1. The facility admitted Resident #121 on 08/04/2021with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, anxiety, depression, unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, and unspecified psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition.
A review of physician orders, received on 08/04/2021, indicated Resident #121 had required a psychiatry consultation due to being a new admission and taking alprazolam, bupropion, mirtazapine, and risperidone.
Pharmacy consultation notes, dated 08/05/2021 at 12:25 PM, indicated Resident #121's Risperidone order required review. There was no explanation of what part of the order needed review, and no follow-up documentation was found.
The current October 2021 physician's orders for Resident #121 included the following: bupropion HCL XL 300 milligrams (mg) daily for depression, Buspirone 5 mg three times a day for anxiety, Mirtazapine 7.5 mg daily for depression, and Risperidone 0.5 mg daily for psychosis not otherwise specified.
A review of the August, September, and October 2021 nurse progress notes and the Medication Administration Record (MAR) did not identify target behaviors for Resident #121 and did not record any episodes of behaviors exhibited by Resident #121.
A review of the consultant pharmacist notes, dated 08/05/2021 did not indicate the lack of behavior monitoring or the lack of target behavior identification had been brought to the facility's attention.
A call was placed to the consultant pharmacist on 10/10/2021 at 1:00 PM d a message left to call for a telephone interview. There was no return call received.
During an interview with the Administrator on 10/10/2021 at 1:30 PM, the Administrator stated he would have expected the consultant pharmacist to notify the facility of the need to monitor for target behaviors and side effects of the antipsychotic medication received by Resident #121.
Review of the facility's Medication Management policy, with an effective date of 08/2020, indicated to optimize the therapeutic benefit of medication therapy and minimize or prevent potential adverse consequences the consultant pharmacist along with other members of the team should monitor for appropriate, effective, and safe medication use.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-29.3(a)(1)
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to monitor and document the potential side effects and failed to monitor and document any behavior...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to monitor and document the potential side effects and failed to monitor and document any behaviors exhibited by one (Resident #121) of two residents reviewed for receiving an antipsychotic medication.
Findings included:
1. The facility's policy titled, Medication Management, with an effective date of 08/2020, indicated if a resident was admitted on an antipsychotic, ongoing monitoring for appropriate, effective, and safe medication use was required.
The facility admitted Resident #121 on 08/04/2021 with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, anxiety, depression, unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, and unspecified psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition.
A review of physician orders, received on 08/04/2021, indicated Resident #121 had required a psychiatry consultation due to being a new admission and taking alprazolam, bupropion, mirtazapine, and risperidone.
Pharmacy consultation notes, dated 08/05/2021 at 12:25 PM, indicated Resident #121's Risperidone order required review. There was no explanation of what part of the order needed review and no follow-up documentation was found.
The consultant psychiatrist's initial psychiatric evaluation, dated 08/06/2021, indicated he had been asked by staff to evaluate Resident #121 for depression. The psychiatrist documented Resident #121 had a sad mood, spontaneous speech, blunt affect, and normal thought content with no homicidal or suicidal thoughts. He added in documentation that Resident #121 was alert, oriented to person and place, memory was well preserved, and attention and concentration was adequate with fair insight and judgment. Under the review of systems section, the psychiatrist had indicated Resident #121 had no complaints of depression, anxiety, delusion, or hallucination. The psychiatrist noted Resident #121 had a history of psychosis not otherwise specified and recommended continuing medications as ordered. No behaviors were identified on the physician's evaluation. Presence or absence of tardive dyskinesia or any other side effects of the medications taken by Resident #121 were not documented on the evaluation completed by the psychiatrist.
A review of Resident #121's comprehensive care plan, with an onset date of 08/25/2021, indicated Resident #121 had a problem of psychiatric pharmacy with a goal of assuring the resident received the lowest possible dose to achieve the desired outcome. Interventions included monitoring for side effects. The care plan did not identify the target behaviors (behaviors that required the use of an antipsychotic medication) or non-pharmacological interventions.
The current October 2021 physician's orders for Resident #121 included the following: bupropion HCL XL 300 milligrams (mg) daily for depression, Buspirone 5 mg three times a day for anxiety, Mirtazapine 7.5 mg daily for depression and Risperidone 0.5 mg daily for psychosis not otherwise specified.
A review of the August, September, and October 2021 nurse progress notes and the Medication Administration Record (MAR) did not identify target behaviors for Resident #121 and did not record any episodes of behaviors exhibited by Resident #121.
Registered Nurse (RN) #7 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 12:07 PM. RN #7 described Resident #121 as pleasant as pie and exhibited no behaviors. RN #7 added Resident #121 had received antipsychotic medication since admission, but the nurse was unaware of target behaviors or behavior monitoring.
RN #2 was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 2:44 PM. The RN stated any behaviors exhibited by a resident were recorded in nurse progress notes along with target behaviors. RN #2 stated she was not aware of any type of behavior monitoring sheet or any place that resident-specific target behaviors were recorded.
Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 was interviewed on 10/9/2021 at 10:38 AM. The ADON stated she was not familiar with the term target behaviors. When the term was explained by the surveyor, the ADON stated she was not aware what Resident #121's target behaviors were. She added that to identify target behaviors, the nurses on the hall would be expected to read the psychiatric consultation notes, since the psychiatrist documented behaviors in his notes. The ADON added that short-term residents in the Post-Acute Care Unit (PACU), where Resident #121 lived, were not given behavior monitoring sheets, and behavior monitoring and target behaviors were not added to the Medication Administration Record. The ADON stated the MDS nurse was responsible for care planning any behaviors exhibited by a resident.
The Social Worker (SW) was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 3:51 AM. The SW stated she was not familiar with the terms AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale), DISCUS (Dyskinesia Identification System), or target behaviors. The SW stated she was not sure what target behaviors Resident #121 exhibited. She added when a resident on psycho-active medications was admitted , the psychiatrist followed that resident.
ADON #1 was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 4:20 PM. The ADON stated she was not familiar with the AIMS or the DISCUS and verified the tests were not used on the post-acute care unit, where Resident #121 lived.
RN #2 was interviewed on 10/10/2021 at 11:45 AM. RN #2 stated she was unaware of the facility's Monthly Antipsychotic and Anxiolytic Review form and added the forms were not used in PACU.
An interview with the ADON #1 was held on 10/10/2021 at 11:50 AM. She reviewed the Monthly Antipsychotic and Anxiolytic Review form and stated nurses completed this monthly for residents receiving psychotropic medications. When this writer asked to review the forms that had been completed for Resident #121, the ADON stated there were none, adding no monitoring was done for residents in the PACU, and residents in PACU were followed by the psychiatrist.
The Administrator was interviewed on 10/10/2021 at 1:30 PM. The Administrator stated he expected nursing staff to complete the appropriate monitoring for not only antipsychotic medications but any medication a resident had been ordered.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-5.1(a)
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interviews and facility document review, it was determined the facility failed to notify all residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interviews and facility document review, it was determined the facility failed to notify all residents, including the 158 residents who resided in a locked unit, in advance of Resident Council meetings. This had the potential to affect the 143 residents residing on East Wing by their needs, recommendations, concerns, or grievances not being heard and acted upon.
Findings included:
1. A Resident Council meeting was conducted on 10/07/2021 at 10:34 AM with seven residents (Resident #161, #209, #100, #82, #176, #161, and #83). Resident #161, Resident #209, and Resident #100 all resided on the locked East Wing. When asked if they regularly attended the Resident Council meetings, Residents #161, #209 and # 100, stated that it was the first time they had ever been invited to the meeting. All three residents stated they would attend future Resident Council meetings if they were invited.
A review of Resident #161's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated the resident had no cognitive impairment.
A review of Resident #209's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated the resident had no cognitive impairment.
A review of Resident #100's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident had no cognitive impairment.
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 12:50 PM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 stated they believed 90% of residents on East Wing had a diagnosis of dementia and would not be able to attend the meeting. When asked if there were any residents that resided on the East Wing who were cognitively intact, ADON #1 stated, no.
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 1:13 PM, ADON #2 stated residents with higher BIMS scores were permitted to transfer to the [NAME] Wing to reside. When asked how many residents currently residing on the East Wing had a BIMS score between 13 and 15 (cognitively intact), ADON #2 stated they were not sure. When asked if they were aware there were 22 residents residing on East Wing with a BIMS score between 13 and 15, ADON #2 stated they were not aware. When ADON #2 was made aware that there were currently 22 residents residing on East Wing with a BIMS between 13 and 15, ADON #2 stated they were surprised. ADON #2 confirmed residents on East wing were not invited to the Resident Council meetings.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 1:11 PM, Social Worker (SW) #1 stated the residents on [NAME] Wing are the more cognitively aware residents. SW #1 is the person who invites the residents to the meeting and stated the East wing used to have resident council meetings as well, but residents did not attend because of their poor cognition. SW#1 stated the residents on East wing have not been invited since for years and does not know who made that decision. SW #1 reported the facility had looked into restarting the East wing Resident council meetings and confirmed the first one was the one conducted on 10/07/21 with the survey team. This meeting was attended by Resident #169, #100, #209 who resided on the East wing. SW#1 also stated the meetings were attended by all administrative staff and the meeting was lead by SW#1.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 2:25 PM, the Administrator stated they were unaware that residents that resided on East Wing were not invited to Resident Council meetings. The Administrator stated all residents should be invited and have the right to attend.
The facility did not provide a policy and procedure regarding Resident Council meetings. The facility did provide a note, which was not dated or titled, but indicated, Resident Council meetings for East Wing was initiated on or about 2018. At that time, we had approximately 4-5 residents who are cognitively suitable to attend. Over time, the East Resident Council meetings were found to be ineffective due to lack of interest and cognitive impairment. This remained the same throughout the year into the next year and during the height of the pandemic. However, we had 2 East Wing residents that we felt would benefit from the opportunity to attend the [NAME] Wing Resident Council meetings and did so on 9/26/18 among a few other dates. In September 2021 we revisited the opportunity to re-establish monthly resident Council meetings for East Wing. The September Resident Council meeting was well attended, and residents were looking forward to the upcoming monthly meetings.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-4.1(a)29
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. The facility admitted Resident #249 on 09/16/2021 with a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea.
A review of the admission Mini...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. The facility admitted Resident #249 on 09/16/2021 with a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea.
A review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 09/23/2021, revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13 out of 15. The MDS also indicated the resident was not using a bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) machine.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 2:25 PM, Resident #249 stated they were able to put on and take off the mask.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 2:26 PM with Registered Nurse (RN) #3, she stated respiratory therapy took care of all BiPAP machines.
During an interview with Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator #1 on 10/08/2021 at 10:01 AM, she stated the resident had triggered for oxygen and BiPAP use on the five-day admission assessment on 09/23/2021 because the look-back period was 14 days, and the resident used the BiPAP while in the hospital. She stated she was unaware that the resident was using the BiPAP there at the facility since there was not an order for BiPAP use. She further stated since she was unaware the BiPAP was in use, there was no care plan for the BiPAP use.
During an interview with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 on 10/08/2021 at 12:15 PM, she stated there should have been a care plan for the use of the BiPAP machine.
During an interview with the Administrator on 10/10/2021 at 1:39 PM, he stated it would be expected that the facility would have done a care plan for the BiPAP use.
A review of the facility policy titled, Interdisciplinary Care Planning and Assessment, dated 01/2021, revealed, A comprehensive assessment and care plan shall be developed for each resident by the Minimum Data Set Coordinator/Charge Nurse or designee and reviewed by the Interdisciplinary Team.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-11.2(e)1
Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to develop person centered, comprehensive care plans for four (Residents #213, #182, #121, #249) of 39 residents reviewed for care planning. This had the potential to affect all residents.
Findings included:
1. A review of Resident #213's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses included hypertension, obstructive uropathy, diabetes, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and depression. The MDS also indicated a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The resident's hearing ability was moderately difficult (speaker had to increase volume and speak distinctly). The MDS indicated the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter.
A review of Resident #213's care plan, dated 08/31/2021, revealed there was no care plan for the resident's indwelling urinary catheter. There was also no care plan that the resident was hard of hearing or for the use of hearing aids.
A review of Resident #213's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for September 2021 indicated a physician's order to apply a hearing aid in the morning (AM) and remove in the evening (PM). The start date was 09/14/2021. A review from September 14 through September 30 indicated by nurse signature that hearing aids were applied and removed each day except for 9/21/2021, where there was no indication for removal of hearing aids. The MAR for October 2021 contained a nurse's signature from October 1 through October 6 that hearing aids were placed into the ears in the morning and removed in the evening.
A review of a physician order, dated 10/2021, indicated an indwelling urinary catheter (18F (French) /10cc (cubic centimeter) balloon) for obstructive uropathy, change every four weeks and as needed by nursing staff. The date ordered was 09/16/2021.
An observation of Resident #213 on 10/07/2021 at 7:52 AM, revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. An indwelling urinary catheter leg bag was visible under the pant leg on the left leg. The resident was observed to be very hard of hearing, cupping their hand to their ear to assist in hearing. The resident was not wearing any hearing aids. Resident #213 stated the hearing aids were missing.
An observation and interview with Resident #213 on 10/8/2021 at 8:38 AM, revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. The resident became frustrated when answering questions. Resident #213 stated, I can't hear anything you are saying. The resident was not wearing any hearing aids.
An interview was conducted on 10/08/2021 at 7:31 PM with a family member for Resident #213. The family member stated the resident's hearing aids had been lost for several weeks. The family member stated the facility had found one hearing aid and last week found the other hearing aid. The family member stated Resident #213 was very hard of hearing and became very frustrated when they could not hear, which was why the resident used the hearing aids.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 9:27 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) #1 stated that care plans were updated and initiated by MDS coordinators or the RNs on the floor. When asked if there was a care plan regarding the need for an indwelling urinary catheter for Resident #213, RN #1 stated no, there was none, but there was an intervention to change the catheter bag. When asked if there was care plan developed for the use of hearing aids, RN#1 stated no.
2. A review of Resident #182's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses included history of falling, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), Alzheimer's disease, and dementia with behavioral disturbance. The MDS also indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident was receiving an anti-psychotic medication.
A review of Resident #182's Mood/Behavior care plans, dated 08/27/2021, did not address interventions related to dementia or the monitoring of target behaviors and side effects of the use of psychotropic medications.
A review of Resident #182's physician's orders for October 2021 indicated an order for risperidone 2.5 milligram (an antipsychotic used to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and irritability caused by autism) to be given daily. The order date was 06/17/2021.
An observation on 10/06/2021 at 9:24 AM, revealed Resident #182 was lying in bed, awake, smiling, and unable to answer questions. Resident #182 was exhibiting teeth grinding and picking at things in the air that were not there. Resident #182 was talking but words did not make sense.
An observation on 10/07/2021 at 7:41 AM, revealed Resident #182 was lying in bed. The bed was in a low position, and the alarm was in place. The resident was talking out loud and appeared angry or frustrated. The resident was picking and grasping at the air as if something was there and was grinding their teeth.
An observation on 10/08/2021 at 7:50 AM, revealed Resident #182 was lying in bed. The resident was grinding their teeth and reaching for things in the air. The resident appeared frustrated and angry.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 9:27 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) #1 stated that care plans were updated and initiated by MDS coordinators or the RNs on the floor. When asked if there were interventions regarding dementia or the monitoring of target behaviors and side effects of psychotropic medications and RN #1 stated that there was not and that it was the responsibility of RN #1 to complete the care plan.
A review of the facilities policy and procedure titled, Interdisciplinary Care Planning and Assessment, revised on 01/2021, revealed, Policy: a comprehensive assessment and care plan shall be developed for each resident by the MDS coordinator/charge nurse or designee and reviewed by the interdisciplinary team. They will include measurable objectives, timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing and psychological needs and incorporate goals and objectives which lead to the resident's highest obtainable level of independence.
3. The facility admitted Resident #121 with diagnoses that included osteomyelitis of vertebra, protein calorie malnutrition, Parkinson's disease, anxiety, depression, unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, and unspecified psychosis.
A review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #121 was at risk of developing pressure ulcers but at the time of the assessment was free from pressure ulcers. The resident was identified as receiving an antipsychotic medication for six days during the assessment period. Resident #121 had no behaviors identified during the assessment period.
A. Skin alteration for Resident #121 captured on the baseline care plan, dated 08/04/2021, was a surgical wound. The comprehensive care plan dated, 08/25/2021, indicated Resident #121 was at risk for skin breakdown, but at the time of the care plan had no skin breakdown.
A review of the September 2021 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) indicated an entry dated 09/01/2021 at 12:42 PM that indicated Resident #121 had bilateral heel redness that would be cleaned daily, skin prep applied, and the heels would be covered with a dressing. On 09/03/2021 at 6:47 PM, the order on the TAR for Resident #121 was changed. The treatment order for the resident's bilateral heels now read to clean the bilateral unstageable pressure ulcers with normal saline or a wound cleanser, continue the skin prep, and cover with a foam dressing every 72 hours and as needed. The care plan for Resident #121 had not been revised to include the development of bilateral unstageable pressure ulcers to the heels.
The MDS Coordinator was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 1:50 PM. The MDS Coordinator stated facility-acquired pressure ulcers were care planned by the nurse on the hall that first identified the pressure ulcer. The MDS Coordinator stated her duties were strictly MDS scheduling and assessments and completion of the initial comprehensive care plan.
Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1, for the [NAME] Wing, was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 10:38 AM. The ADON stated care plans for pressure ulcers were the responsibility of the MDS nurse and the nurses on the hall. The ADON stated care planning of a pressure ulcer should occur as soon as the pressure ulcer is identified. The ADON reviewed the care plan for Resident #121, acknowledged the resident had two unstageable pressure ulcers, and verified the care plan did not accurately reflect the resident's current situation.
On 10/10/2021 at 1:30 PM, the Administrator was interviewed. The Administrator stated he was unsure who would be responsible for revising care plans for pressure ulcers but added Resident #121's care plan should have been revised when the pressure ulcers were identified to reflect the status of the resident.
The facility's policy titled, Wound Care, with an effective date of 07/2021, was reviewed. The policy did not address who would be responsible for care planning wounds.
B. The facility's policy titled, Medication Management, with an effective date of 08/2020, indicated information gathered during the initial and ongoing evaluation is incorporated into a comprehensive care plan that reflects appropriate medication-related goals and parameters for monitoring the resident's condition and ongoing need for the medication. The care plan should include what is monitored, who will be responsible, and how often and when re-evaluation is necessary.
Review of Resident #121's physician orders, dated 08/04/2021, indicated Resident #121's physician had ordered a psychiatry consultation for new admission since Resident #121 took multiple psychoactive medications including Risperidone (an antipsychotic medication).
A review of Resident #121's comprehensive care plan, with an onset date of 08/25/2021, indicated Resident #121 had a problem of psychiatric pharmacy with a goal of assuring the resident received the lowest possible dose to achieve the desired outcome. Interventions included monitoring for side effects. The care plan did not identify the target behaviors (behaviors that required the use of an antipsychotic medication) or non-pharmacological interventions.
The MDS Coordinator was interviewed on 10/08/2021 at 1:50 PM. The MDS nurse stated her duties were strictly MDS scheduling and assessments and completion of the initial comprehensive care plan. She was only aware psychoactive medications required a care plan for potential side effects.
Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1, for the [NAME] Wing, was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 10:38 PM. ADON #1 stated the term target behaviors was unfamiliar, and she was not sure what the target behaviors were for Resident #121. The ADON stated the MDS nurse was responsible for behavior care plans.
Social Worker (SW) #1 was interviewed on 10/09/2021 at 3:51 PM. SW #1 stated she was not familiar with the term target behavior and was not sure why Resident #121 received the antipsychotic medication.
The Administrator was interviewed on 10/10/2021 at 1:30 PM. The Administrator stated a behavioral care plan to include target behaviors would be the responsibility of the nurse on the hall.
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. The facility admitted Resident #58 with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbances, depression, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. The facility admitted Resident #58 with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbances, depression, anxiety, and psychosis. The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was a 2 out of 15, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The significant change was related to the resident being admitted to hospice services.
A review of Resident #58's care plan, with a revision date of 08/25/2021, indicated the resident would remain comfortable and pain free during the end-of-life process. Resident #58 had behaviors of .calling out, yelling out, screaming, disrobing, and removing dressings.
Resident #58's physician's orders for October 2021 were reviewed and the resident had the following physician's orders:
- lorazepam (antianxiety medication) 0.5 milligram (mg) tablet. Take one tablet (0.5 mg) by oral route every six hours for anxiety. The resident was scheduled to take this medication every day at 12:00 AM, 6:00 AM, 12:00 PM, and 6:00 PM. The start date was 08/25/2021.
- quetiapine (antipsychotic medication) 50 mg tablet. Give one tablet twice daily for anxiety. The resident was scheduled to take this medication every day at 6:00 AM and 2:00 PM. The start date was 08/25/2021.
A review of a progress note written on 09/26/2021 at 2:52 PM, by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5, indicated Resident #58 had a sudden change in normal behavior. The resident had restlessness not relieved by routine care, repositioning, and/or resident specific interventions. The resident exhibited facial expressions, such as grimacing, fearful, frowning and/or sad expression. Interventions provided were emotional support, comfort measures, and distractions. The interventions were not effective, and pain medication was given, which was effective.
During an observation on 10/06/2021 at 9:59 AM, Resident #58 was lying in bed, in their bedroom. The resident's eyes were closed tight, with facial grimacing. At 10:04 AM, Resident #58 yelled out, Mommy! numerous times. The resident's eyes remained closed but no longer closed tightly.
During an observation on 10/06/2021 at 12:42 PM, Resident #58 yelled out, My head hurts! Mommy! My head hurts! Nursing Assistant (NA) #1 was in the hallway, near the resident's room. NA #1 stated that the resident yelling was a common behavior and stated the resident was okay, and the nurse was aware of the resident's behavior.
A review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for October 2021 indicated the resident did not receive their 6:00 AM medication for quetiapine 50 mg and lorazepam 0.5 mg on 10/01/2021, 10/02/2021, and 10/06/2021 as indicated by a -.
In an interview on 10/07/2021 at 11:05 AM, LPN #6 stated the resident received routine medication to control their pain and anxiety and had as-needed medications for pain. LPN #6 stated that the resident cried out often and could not be comforted at times. The resident had a normal behavior of yelling out, but the resident was unable to make their needs known. When asked why the resident did not get their 6:00 AM medications on October 1, 2, and 6, she stated she worked the 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM shift and was not aware the resident did not receive their medications, and that was not their shift.
In an interview on 10/09/2021 at 3:45 PM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated that the facility was controlling the resident's pain and behaviors by hospice putting the resident on round-the-clock antianxiety medication. ADON #2 stated that the family, hospice, and interdisciplinary team felt that since the resident was in the dying process, hospice was focused on pain management and antipsychotic medication. ADON #2 stated the resident also had as-needed medication that should be offered. When asked what the - meant on the MAR, ADON #2 stated that it meant the medication was not administered, and there should be a reason documented. ADON #2 reviewed the MAR and stated there was not a reason documented on why the medication was not administered. ADON #2 stated, I expect us to follow the physician's orders. We have had challenges on the night shift. The patient needs the adequate medications.
In an interview on 10/10/2021 at 2:40 PM, the Administrator stated the facility should address medications not received, and staff should follow orders as prescribed by the resident's physician and provide those medications.
A policy regarding documentation of physician's orders was requested from the facility. The facility did not provide a policy, as they did not have one.
5. The facility admitted Resident #249 on 09/16/2021 with a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea.
A review of the admitting Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the resident was alert and oriented with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13 out of 15. The MDS also revealed the resident was not using a bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) machine.
The BiPAP machine, tubing, and mask were observed on the resident's nightstand on 10/06/2021 at 9:42 AM, 10/07/2021 at 11:15 AM, 10/07/2021 at 2:33 PM and 10/08/2021 at 8:34 AM.
During an interview with Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator #1 on 10/08/2021 at 10:01AM, she stated the resident had triggered for oxygen and BiPAP use on the five-day admission assessment on 09/23/2021 because the look-back period was 14 days, and the resident used the BiPAP while in the hospital. She stated she was unaware that the resident was using the BiPAP there in the facility since there was not an order for BiPAP use. She further stated since she was unaware the BiPAP was in use, there was no care plan for the BiPAP use.
An interview with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #1 on 10/08/2021 at 12:15 PM was done. She stated there should have been an order for the BiPAP machine.
During an interview with the Administrator on 10/10/2021 at 1:39 PM, he stated it would be expected that the facility had a physician's order for the BiPAP machine use.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-27.1(a)
Complaint Intake: NJ146851
Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide treatment and care according to professional standards of practice for 5 of 39 (Resident #58, Resident #249, Resident #38, Resident #213, and Resident #214) residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to provide pain management to Resident #58. The facility failed to receive or follow physician's orders for Resident #249 regarding respiratory treatments, for Resident #38 regarding fall precautions, for Resident #213 regarding the use of hearing aids, and for Resident #214 regarding the use of splints.
Findings included:
1. A record review of Resident #38's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses included dementia with behavioral disturbance, repeated falls, muscle weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, anxiety disorder, depression, and limitation of activities due to disability. The MDS indicated the resident had both short-term and long-term memory problems, inattention, and disorganized thinking. The MDS also indicated the resident required extensive assistance of two staff with transfers.
A review of Resident #38's care plan, dated 07/20/2021, indicated a focus for falls. Interventions included the following: apply tab alarm as ordered to bed, apply tab alarm as ordered to chair, assist with applying hip protectors to be used at all times, and maintain bed in low position.
A review of physician's orders, dated October 2021, indicated an order for a special awareness-low bed, hip protectors, tab alarm to bed and chair. The order date was 07/01/2021.
A review of Resident #38's Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for the months of September 2021 and October 2021 indicated no documentation of the use of bed in low position, hip protectors or tab alarms to the bed.
An observation on 10/06/2021 at 11:26 AM revealed Resident #38 sitting in a wheelchair in the resident's room. There was no tab alarm attached to the wheelchair.The bed was not in the low position.There was a fall mat on the floor. There were no hip protectors seen in the room.
An observation on 10/07/2021 at 7:46 AM revealed Resident #38 lying in bed. There were no hip protectors noted. There was no tab alarm noted. There was a fall mat at the edge of the bed, and the bed was in the low position.
An observation on 10/08/2021 at 7:39 AM revealed Resident #38 lying in bed, yelling for a car. There were no hip protectors noted. The bed was in the low position. There was a fall mat at the side of the bed, and the tab alarm was in place.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 7:44 AM, Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #1, who was assigned to Resident #38, stated that they were unaware Resident #38 was to wear hip protectors. CNA #1 stated they were also unaware of the need to attach the tab alarm.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 10:31 AM, CNA #9, who was assigned to Resident #38, stated they did not know Resident #38 was to wear hip protectors. CNA #9 stated they were also not aware of the need to attach a tab alarm.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 11:18 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated the CNAs accessed the interventions for the residents from the Kiosk. The Kiosk was where the CNAs documented their daily observations. ADON #2 stated that the interventions listed on the care plan were to be sent to the Kiosk. ADON #2 stated that the physician's orders should transfer to either the MAR or TAR. When asked who was monitoring and ensuring the interventions of the tab alarm, bed in the low position and the hip protectors for Resident #38 were completed, ADON #2 stated the nurses documented the interventions in the MAR or TAR. ADON #2 confirmed there was nothing on the MAR or TAR. ADON #2 stated that the facility would look into the issue.
During an interview conducted on 10/10/2021 at 10:30 AM, the Administrator stated the expectation of staff was to obtain a physician's order for every medication, treatment, or assistive device and to document in the medical record that the medication was received, treatment was provided, or assistive device was placed as ordered.
A policy regarding documentation of physician's orders and/or following physician's orders was requested from the facility. The facility did not provide a policy, as they did not have one.
2. A review of Resident #213's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses included hypertension, obstructive uropathy, diabetes, personal history of traumatic fracture, and muscle weakness. The resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 13, which indicated no cognitive impairment. The resident's hearing ability was moderately difficult (speaker had to increase volume and speak distinctly).
A review of Resident #213's the care plan, dated 08/31/2021, indicated there was no care plan indicating that the resident was hard of hearing or that the resident wore hearing aids.
A review of Resident #213's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for September 2021 indicated a physician's order to apply a hearing aid in the morning (AM) and remove in the evening (PM). The start date was 09/14/2021. A review from September 14 through September 30 indicated by nurse signature that hearing aids were applied and removed each day except for 9/21/2021, where there was no indication for removal of hearing aids. The MAR for October 2021 contained a nurse's signature from October 1 through October 6 that hearing aids were placed into the ears in the morning and removed in the evening.
An observation of Resident #213 on 10/07/2021 at 7:52 AM revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. The resident was observed to be very hard of hearing. The resident would cup their hand to their ear to assist in hearing. The resident was not wearing hearing aids. Resident #213 stated the hearing aids were missing.
An observation and interview with Resident #213 on 10/08/2021at 8:38 AM revealed the resident sitting on the edge of the bed. The resident became frustrated when trying to answer questions. Resident #213 stated, I can't hear anything you are saying. The resident was not wearing hearing aids.
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 7:31 PM, a family member for Resident #213 stated the resident had lost their hearing aids for several weeks. The family member stated the facility had found one hearing aid and last week found the other hearing aid. The family member stated Resident #213 was very hard of hearing and became very frustrated when they could not hear.
During an interview on 10/08/2021 at 8:42 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 confirmed the hearing aids for Resident #213 were lost. When asked when they were found, ADON #2 stated one hearing aid was found last week. When questioned why staff continued to document they were applying and removing the resident's hearing aids even though the hearing aids were missing, ADON #2 stated the facility would do some re-education. ADON #2 stated they were not sure why they were documenting that they were applying and removing the resident's hearing aids.
During an interview conducted on 10/10/2021 at 10:30 AM, the Administrator stated the expectation of staff was to obtain a physician's order for every medication, treatment, or assistive device and to document in the medical record that the medication was received, treatment was provided, or assistive device was placed as ordered.
A policy regarding documentation of physician's orders and/or following physician's orders was requested from the facility. The facility did not provide a policy, as they did not have one.
3. A review of Resident #214's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses including catatonic disorder, abnormalities of gait and mobility, limitation of activities due to disability, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disease. There was no Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score, as the resident was unable to answer questions. The significant change MDS was initiated when Resident #214 was discharged from hospice.
A review of Resident #214's care plans, dated 02/13/2021 indicated no care plan regarding the use of splints.
A record review of physician's orders, dated October 2021, indicated an order for bilateral C bar orthoses (used to help lessen hand contractures) to be worn on the right and left upper extremity for approximately five to six hours a day. This could be included in morning (AM) care. The order date was 09/23/2021.
A record review of Resident #214's Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for the months of September 2021 and October 2021 indicated no documentation that the splints were applied as ordered.
An observation on 10/06/2021 at 9:20 AM revealed Resident #214 lying in bed. The resident had bilateral heel protectors in place. There were splints lying on top of the air conditioning unit by the window.
An observation on 10/07/2021 at 7:58 AM revealed Resident #214 lying in bed. The resident had disposable wash cloths in bilateral hands. The splints were noted on top of the air conditioning unit by the window.
An observation on 10/08/2021 at 7:29 AM revealed no hand splints in Resident #214's room. Wash cloths were noted in the resident's bilateral hands.
An observation on 10/09/2021 at 8:14 AM revealed Resident #214 did not have hand splints. The resident had wash cloths in bilateral hands.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 7:44 AM, Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #1 , who was assigned to Resident # 214, stated they did not have any idea what to do about splints for Resident #214. CNA #1 stated they were unaware the resident had splints.
During an interview on 10/09/2021 at 10:31 AM, CNA #9, who was assigned to Resident #214, stated they did not know what the splints were for. CNA #9 stated they were not aware Resident #214 was to wear splints.
During an interview on 10/06/2021 at 9:14 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 stated there was nothing documented in the MAR or TAR regarding splint use for Resident #214. When asked if the LPN was aware Resident #214 was to wear splints, LPN #2 stated, no.
During an interview on 10/10/2021 at 11:18 AM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #2 stated the splint order should have been on the TAR for Resident #214. When asked if there was any documentation regarding the splint placement, ADON #2 confirmed there was no documentation. ADON #2 stated that the facility would look into why the order for the splints did not transfer to the MAR or TAR.
During an interview conducted on 10/10/2021 at 10:30 AM, the Administrator stated the expectation of staff was to obtain a physician's order for every medication, treatment, or assistive device and to document in the medical record that the medication was received, treatment was provided, or assistive device was placed as ordered.
A policy regarding documentation of physician's orders and/or following physician's orders was requested from the facility. The facility did not provide a policy, as they did not have one.
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, interviews, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines, and the New Jersey Administrative Code (NJAC) 8:24, it was determined that the facility failed to follow proper sanitat...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines, and the New Jersey Administrative Code (NJAC) 8:24, it was determined that the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure sanitizer used to disinfect food preparation surfaces and cooking utensils did not record zero parts per million (PPM) for three of three sanitization buckets. The facility also failed to ensure dietary staff performed hand hygiene between tasks, between gloves changes and after repeatedly touching their facemasks. This failed practice had the potential to affect all residents living in the facility who ate from the kitchen.
Findings included:
Reference: NJAC 8:24-3.3, Protection from contamination after receiving indicates, (m) Requirements for wiping cloths shall include the following: 2. Cloths used for wiping food spills shall be: ii. Wet and cleaned as specified under N.J.A.C. 8:24-4.10(b)4, stored in a chemical sanitizer at a concentration specified in N.J.A.C. 8:24-4.8(j) 1, and used for wiping spills from food-contact and non food-contact surfaces of equipment.
1. On 10/06/2021 at 8:44 AM, an initial tour observation of the kitchen was conducted with the Assistant Director of Dining and Nutrition Services (ADDNS). The tour revealed the facility was serving the morning meal. Dietary Aides (DA) #1 and #2 cleaned the counter tops in the kitchen with a solution in red buckets labelled Sanitizer solution. Portioning scoops and spoons were in another similar bucket. The ADDNS tested the solution in the buckets and reported the solution indicated zero PPM.
On 10/06/2021 at 9:07 AM, the AADNS stated that dietary staff completed a log which recorded the PPM of the sanitizing solution. The AADNS stated it was the individual staff's responsibility to ensure the solution was changed out as needed to ensure it maintained its recommended concentration. The AADNS stated the sanitizing solution needed to be at a minimum of 200 PPM to be considered potent enough to perform its sanitizing function. He acknowledged, however, that the sanitizing solution indicated zero PPM when the DA used it. The AADNS acknowledged that dietary staff had prepared meals, which were served to residents, on the food preparation table that was not properly disinfected. The AADNS stated that the consequence of the observed practice was that food preparation surfaces and utensils were not sanitized appropriately and could result in the spread of foodborne illnesses across the facility.
On 10/09/2021 at 12:33 PM, the Infection Control Preventionist (ICP) stated she was part of the quality assessment (QA) committee and conducted training with dietary staff in collaboration with the director of dining and nutrition services (DDNS) on infection control and prevention practices. The ICP stated she in-serviced with staff on a weekly and as-needed (PRN) basis. The ICP enumerated the training she had provided to staff to include proper use of chemical disinfectant, hand hygiene, cough etiquette, and proper use of personal protective equipment. The ICP stated that it was important to follow the manufacturer's recommended concentrations for disinfecting sanitizers used in the kitchen. The ICP stated that failure to adhere to the recommended concentrations for the sanitizers meant that the food preparation surfaces were not adequately disinfected. The ICP stated when there was a breach in infection control practice in the kitchen, it affected the entire population of the residents, as they all ate meals which came from the kitchen.
On 10/10/2021 at 3:02 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that the kitchen was central to the facility. The NHA stated when there was a breach in infection control practice in the kitchen, it affected the entire population of the residents, as they all ate meals which came from the kitchen.
Reference: NJAC 8:24-2.3, Personal cleanliness indicates (f) Food employees shall clean their hands and exposed portions of their arms immediately before engaging in food preparation including working with exposed food, clean equipment and utensils, and unwrapped single-service and single-use articles, and: 5. After handling soiled equipment or utensils; 6. During food preparation, as often as necessary to remove soil and contamination and to prevent cross contamination when changing tasks; 8. Before donning gloves for working with foods; and 9. After engaging in other activities that contaminate the hands.
2. During an observation on 10/08/2021 at 11:40 AM, Dietary Aide (DA) #1 intermittently adjusted her mask and scratched her head during the noon meal service. DA #1 stood behind the serving line and was responsible for placing cold beverages on the residents' meal trays. The observation revealed DA #1 placed her right hand on the serving portion of the residents' plates after having intermittently adjusted her mask and scratched her head. DA #1 was wearing a pair of gloves and failed to remove her gloves and perform hand hygiene after her gloved hands had been contaminated when she intermittently adjusted her face mask and scratched herself. The gloves worn by DA #1 contacted the serving surface portion of the residents' plates when she transferred them to the rack.
On 10/08/2021 at 11:45 AM, DA #2 was observed in the kitchen as he emptied the filter from a coffee maker. DN #2 proceeded to dispose of the filter in a full trash can which sat next to the serving line. DA #2 pulled open the trash can lid with his gloved hands, disposed of the filter, then rubbed his hands against his shirt. DA #2 then returned to the coffee maker and started another round of setup to make the coffee without changing out his gloves and/or performing hand hygiene. DA #2 drew coffee into a portable cup with a plastic lid. During the process of drawing the coffee, DA #2 repeatedly adjusted his mask, and without performing glove changes or hand hygiene, he held the coffee cups such that his fingers were in contact with the inner part of the cups. Although the surveyor advised DA #2 of the need to change his gloves, DA #2 changed his gloves without performing hand hygiene.
On 10/08/2021 at 2:18 PM, DA #1 stated she did not know that there was the potential to cross-contaminate the dishes by touching the plating portion of the dishes after adjusting her mask and scratching her head. DA #1 acknowledged that she did not perform glove changes and hand hygiene after the identified practice. DA #1 stated she received hand hygiene training every week through facility-wide in-service.
On 10/09/2021 at 11:33 AM, the Director of Dining and Nutrition Services (DDNS) stated that dietary staff received hand hygiene training weekly, and it was taught to them by the infection control preventionist (ICP). The DDNS stated dietary staff were trained to wash their hands when they were visibly soiled, between completing different tasks, and before they donned and after they doffed gloves. The DDNS stated that dietary staff should not be touching body parts or adjusting masks without hand hygiene.
On 10/09/2021 at 12:33 PM, the infection control preventionist (ICP) stated she was part of the quality assessment (QA) committee and conducted training with dietary staff in collaboration with the director of dining and nutrition services (DDNS) on infection control and prevention practices. The ICP stated she in-serviced with staff on weekly and as-needed (PRN) basis. The ICP enumerated the training she had provided to staff to include proper use of chemical disinfectant, hand hygiene, cough etiquette, and proper use of personal protective equipment. The ICP went through an overview of the importance of hand hygiene. The ICP stated hand hygiene was a standard infection control practice in healthcare setting. The ICP stated that dietary staff's failure to perform proper hand hygiene was a fast way to spread germs. The ICP stated staff should perform hand hygiene when they went in the bathroom, when they adjusted their masks, and before they donned new gloves.
On 10/10/2021 at 3:02 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated that the kitchen was central to the facility. The NHA stated when there was a breach in infection control practice in the kitchen, it affected the entire population of the residents, as they all ate meals which came from the kitchen.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-17.2(g)
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0577
(Tag F0577)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to make survey results readily available to all resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to make survey results readily available to all residents, staff, and visitors. This had the potential to affect all residents.
Findings included:
1. During the Resident Council meeting on 10/07/2021 at 10:35 AM, Residents #220, #82, #83, #176, #161, #209, and #100 stated that they were unaware of where the survey results were kept. These seven residents were cognitively intact and could communicate effectively.
An observation on 10/07/2021 at 11:18 AM, revealed a sign posted in the front lobby that indicated to ask the receptionist for the state survey book. There was no survey book visible in the area.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 11:19 AM, Receptionist #1 stated they were unaware of where the book was kept. Receptionist #1 left the area and went into a back office and brought out the survey book. When asked what time the reception area closed, Receptionist #1 stated at 8:00 PM.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 11:24 AM, the Assistant Administrator stated the survey book was kept in a file folder box attached to the wall behind the front desk, which was attended by a receptionist from 8AM until 8PM. When asked if there were any other copies of the survey book available, the Assistant Administrator stated, no.
An observation on 10/07/2021 at 11:24 AM, revealed the Assistant Administrator placed the survey book into the file folder box behind the front desk. The front desk counter was approximately 4.5 feet from the ground and approximately 2.5 feet wide. A table was observed in front of the counter which was approximately 2 feet wide. The reach from the table to the survey book was approximately 4.5 feet. This surveyor attempted to return the survey binder to the file folder box but was unable to do so without assistance from staff behind the desk because the reach was too far.
A review of the facility census, dated 10/07/2021, indicated there were 120 residents that resided on a locked unit called East Wing, and 38 residents that resided on a locked unit called [NAME]. The residents residing on these units would not have direct access to the survey binder since the units were locked.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 at 11:30 AM, the Assistant Administrator confirmed the 158 residents that resided in those locked units did not have direct access to the survey results. The Assistant Administrator stated they would fix the problem.
During an interview on 10/07/2021 11:45 AM, the Administrator confirmed there was no policy and procedure regarding access to the state survey book. The Administrator stated that they were aware the survey results had to be available to all residents and that currently they were not.
A policy regarding access to the state survey binder was requested from the facility. The facility did not provide a policy, as they did not have one.
New Jersey Administrative Code § 8:39-9.4 (b)