Belaire Health Care Center

2065 Lyon Street, Gastonia, NC 28052 (704) 867-7300
For profit - Limited Liability company 80 Beds LIFEWORKS REHAB Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
11/100
#236 of 417 in NC
Last Inspection: July 2025

Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.

Overview

Belaire Health Care Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. It ranks #236 out of 417 nursing homes in North Carolina, placing it in the bottom half of facilities statewide, and #6 out of 10 in Gaston County, meaning only four local options are worse. The facility's trend is worsening, with issues increasing from 1 in 2024 to 2 in 2025, and it has a concerning $193,993 in fines, which is higher than 97% of facilities in the state. Staffing is rated poorly at 1 out of 5 stars, although turnover is average at 49%, and the facility has average RN coverage, which is important for addressing health issues. Specific incidents include a critical failure to communicate significant changes in a resident's condition related to a previous Clostridium difficile infection, leading to a hospital visit for sepsis, and another critical issue where staff did not complete necessary assessments, delaying medical intervention for a resident showing signs of distress. While the facility has some strengths in quality measures with a 5-star rating, these serious deficiencies raise significant concerns for families considering care options.

Trust Score
F
11/100
In North Carolina
#236/417
Bottom 44%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
1 → 2 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
49% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
⚠ Watch
$193,993 in fines. Higher than 75% of North Carolina facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 32 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for North Carolina. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
12 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 1 issues
2025: 2 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below North Carolina average (2.8)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 49%

Near North Carolina avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Federal Fines: $193,993

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Chain: LIFEWORKS REHAB

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 12 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening 2 actual harm
Jun 2025 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0628 (Tag F0628)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and staff, Resident Representative, and Home Health Nurse interviews, the facility failed to include dis...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and staff, Resident Representative, and Home Health Nurse interviews, the facility failed to include discharge instructions for a daily surgical wound dressing change for 1 of 3 sampled residents with wound care (Resident #1). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was discharged home on 5/18/25. Review of Resident #1's consultation records revealed an orthopedic consultation dated 5/16/25 with an order for daily dry dressing change to right hip. Resident #1's discharge Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was independent for decision making. Review of Resident #1's facility discharge instructions dated 5/18/25 for home care revealed no daily surgical wound dressing instructions. An interview on 6/24/25 at 9:56 AM with Resident #1's Representative revealed Resident #1 did not receive surgical wound care instructions when the resident was discharged from the facility on 05/18/25 until seen by Home Health on 05/21/25. An interview on 6/24/25 at 11:01 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that Resident #1 had been transported to an outside orthopedic follow-up appointment on 5/15/25. The DON stated it was an oversight, and she had not entered the order for the resident to have daily dry dressing change to her right hip. An interview on 6/24/25 at 1:11 PM with Nurse #2 revealed she had discharged Resident #1 on 5/18/25. She stated she was not aware of the order for daily dressing change to right hip and had not told the resident or resident representative about the surgical dressing changes. An interview on 6/24/25 at 1:30 PM with the Home Health Nurse revealed she had seen and assessed Resident #1 on 5/21/25 in her home. She stated there were no instructions for the surgical wound dressing changes on the facility referral orders. She stated she had changed the right hip surgical dressing on 5/21/25 and there were no signs or symptoms of infection. She stated the wound had slight drainage and the staples were intact.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and staff, and orthopedic office Practice Manager interviews, the facility failed to provide care for a ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and staff, and orthopedic office Practice Manager interviews, the facility failed to provide care for a surgical wound as ordered by the consultant orthopedic physician for a daily surgical dressing for 1 of 3 sampled residents with wound care (Resident #1). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had diagnoses which included closed fracture of neck of right femur with routine healing. No surgical wound care instructions were noted on the hospital discharge summary. Review of facility orders revealed Resident #1 had a physician's order dated 5/08/25 to monitor the surgical dressing to right hip every shift and report any signs or symptoms of infection to physician every day and night shift for surgical wound care. Review of Resident #1's consultation records revealed an orthopedic consultation dated 5/16/25 with an order for daily dry dressing change to right hip. Review of facility orders revealed no order for daily dry dressing change to right hip. Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) dated May 2025 revealed no record of a daily dry dressing for Resident #1. Resident #1's discharge Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was independent for decision making. An interview on 6/24/25 at 11:01 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that Resident #1 had been transported to an outside orthopedic follow-up appointment on 5/15/25. She stated the consultation note was dated incorrectly and the resident had been seen on 5/15/25 instead of 5/16/25. She also stated she had been filling in as the unit manager on 5/15/25 and had been responsible for reviewing the orthopedic note and ensuring the orders were entered into the resident's electronic health record. The DON stated it was an oversight, and she had not entered the order for the resident to have daily dry dressing change to her right hip. An interview on 6/24/25 at 12:39 PM with Nurse #1 revealed she had been on duty and assigned to Resident #1 on 5/15/25 when she went for her orthopedic surgical follow up visit. She stated that she could not recall if she had received Resident #1's consultation paperwork when she returned to the facility. She stated she did not know why the surgical dressing change order was not entered in the resident's electronic health record. An interview on 6/24/25 at 1:11 PM with Nurse #2 revealed she had worked on 5/17/25 and been assigned to Resident #1. She was unaware of any orders for surgical wound dressing to be changed and had not changed the dressing. She also worked on 5/18/25 and had provided discharge instructions for Resident #1 on 5/18/25. She stated she was not aware of the order for daily dressing change to right hip and had not changed the dressing prior to discharge and had not told Resident #1 or Resident Representative about the daily dry dressing. An interview on 6/24/25 at 2:06 PM with the orthopedic office Practice Manager revealed it was normal practice for the surgical dressing to stay in place until the 1st post operative visit. He also stated that the surgeon noted no signs or symptoms of wound infection on her 5/15/25 visit. An interview on 6/24/25 at 2:21 PM with the Administrator revealed the facility staff should transcribe and follow physician's orders.
May 2024 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

PASARR Coordination (Tag F0644)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) application was completed for a resident admitted with mental health diagnoses for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #12 and #55) reviewed for PASRR. The findings included: 1. Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included, in part, schizoaffective disorder. Review of Resident #12's medical record revealed the resident had a PASRR level I completed prior to her admission to the facility. The resident had a history of schizoaffective disorder and major depressive disorder as part of her admission. No PASRR level II had been completed per review of Resident #12's medical record. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #12 was severely cognitively impaired, and she had no mood or behaviors. The MDS was not coded for a level II PASRR. Resident #12's care plan dated 10/05/2023 revealed she was care planned for psychotropic medications, behavior related to schizoaffective disorder, anxiety disorders, and psychiatric services. Interventions included to administer medications as ordered, assure the resident that they were safe if they became distressed, continue psychiatric services as ordered, redirect resident to subjects that matter to her if behaviors occurred, and to take the resident to a quiet place if she became overstimulated. Review of Resident #12 medical record revealed she was followed by psychiatric services for medication management. During an interview on 05/08/2024 at 6:30 PM with the admission Director, she revealed she received the resident's hospital information which included the PASRR number. She stated that the PASRR number was entered into the resident's chart and the Social Worker handled the PASRR process after that. An interview was conducted on 05/09/2024 at 10:38 AM with the Regional Discharge Planning Specialist. The Regional Discharge Planning Specialist stated that the facility had recently hired a Social Worker, but the position had been vacant for about one month. The Regional Discharge Planning Specialist further stated that a PASRR application should be completed upon a resident's admission with a serious mental health diagnosis, when there was a change in condition or behavior, and when a resident had received a new mental health diagnosis. She also revealed that based on Resident #12's admission diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder and major depression, paperwork for a PASRR level II referral should have been completed. Unsuccessful attempts were made to contact the previous Social Worker. An interview was conducted on 05/09/24 at 11:00 AM with the Administrator. The Administrator revealed a PASRR application should be completed for any resident with a serious mental health diagnosis or anytime a resident has had a change of condition or a newly added mental health diagnosis. He stated that based on Resident #12's diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder and major depressive disorder, a PASRR level II referral should have been completed. 2. Resident #55 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, in part, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major depressive disorder (MDD), anxiety disorder, and suicidal ideations. Review of Resident #55's medical record revealed the resident had a PASRR level I completed prior to his admission to the facility. The resident had a history of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and suicidal ideations upon admission to the facility. No PASRR level II had been completed per review of Resident #55's medical record. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] reveal Resident #55 had intact cognition. The MDS also revealed Resident #55 had no mood or behaviors for the 7-day look back period. The MDS was not coded for a level II PASRR. Review of Resident 55's care plan dated 01/26/2024 revealed he had a risk for behaviors related to depressive disorder, anxiety, and use of psychotropic medications. Interventions included to administer medications as ordered, assure the resident that they were safe if they became distressed, continue psychiatric services as ordered, redirect resident to subjects that matter to him if behaviors occurred, and to take the resident to a quiet place if he became overstimulated. Resident #55 received psychiatric services for medication management beginning 01/29/2024 and continued on psychiatric service case load during his stay at the facility. An interview was conducted with Resident #55 on 05/06/2024 at 2:34 PM. Resident #55 stated that he had mental health issues for quite a long while. He also revealed that he served in the military and most of his mental health issue resulted from his military service. He stated that he had been doing much better since being admitted to the facility and seeing the psychiatrist. During an interview on 05/08/2024 at 6:30 PM with the admission Director, she revealed she received the resident's hospital information which included the PASRR number. She stated that the PASRR number was entered into the resident's chart and the Social Worker handled the PASRR process after that. An interview was conducted on 05/09/2024 at 10:38 AM with the Regional Discharge Planning Specialist. The Regional Discharge Planning Specialist stated that the facility had recently hired a Social Worker, but the position had been vacant for about one month. The Regional Discharge Planning Specialist further stated that a PASRR application should be completed upon a resident's admission with a serious mental health diagnosis, when there was a change in condition or behavior, and when a resident had received a new mental health diagnosis. She also revealed that based on Resident #55's admission diagnoses of PTSD, MDD, anxiety disorder and suicidal ideations, paperwork for a PASRR level II referral should have been completed. Unsuccessful attempts to contact the previous Social Worker were made. An interview was conducted on 05/09/24 at 11:00 AM with the Administrator. The Administrator revealed a PASRR application should be completed for any resident with a serious mental health diagnosis or anytime a resident had a change of condition or a newly added mental health diagnosis. He stated that based on Resident #55's diagnoses of PTSD, MDD, anxiety disorder and suicidal ideations, a PASRR level II referral should have been completed.
Nov 2023 2 deficiencies 2 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, family, staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Physician's Assistant (PA), and physician (MD) interviews, the f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, family, staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Physician's Assistant (PA), and physician (MD) interviews, the facility failed to communicate with Resident #1's Medical Provider about intermittent loose stools following an order for polyethylene glycol (a medication used to treat occasional constipation and soften stool) with a history of Clostridium difficile (a bacterial infection in the colon which have symptoms that range from diarrhea to life-threatening damage to the colon), also known as C-difficile. The facility failed to notify the medical provider of an abnormal stool culture for a resident with C-difficile. The facility failed to notify the medical provider of acute changes in condition consisting of multiple loose stools, increased confusion, disorientation, and new behavior of attempting to climb out of bed on 11/6/23, and low blood pressure that were not at her baseline. Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room and was diagnosed with sepsis (a life-threatening complication of a current infection), hypothermia, and type 2 myocardial infarction (heart attack). Resident #1 expired on 11/10/23. This deficient practice affected 1 of 2 residents reviewed for physician notification. The immediate jeopardy began on 11/7/23 when Resident #1's physician was not notified of acute changes in the resident's condition. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 11/23/23 when the facility implemented a credible allegation of immediate jeopardy removal. The facility will remain out of compliance at a lower scope and severity of D no actual harm to ensure the completion of education and monitoring systems put into place are effective. The findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included status post cystitis without hematuria (bladder inflammation without blood present in the urine) and surgical intervention of calculus of the bile duct with chronic cholecystitis without obstruction (gallstones) and abdominal hernia without obstruction or gangrene and a history of C-Difficile colitis. A hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 presented to the emergency room (ER) with abdominal pain and vomiting which required abdominal surgery for the gallstones. A physician's order dated 10/5/23 indicated Amoxicillin/Clavulanate 500-125 milligrams (mg) (antibiotic used to treat infection) three times per day for 3 days for cystitis. Additionally, Lisinopril (ace-inhibitor used to treat heart failure and blood pressure)10mg daily by mouth was ordered for hypertension. A one-day post admission progress note dated 10/6/23 written by the NP indicated Resident #1 was admitted to the facility after being hospitalized from [DATE] through 10/5/23 status post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (a procedure using a scope to diagnose and treat problems of the biliary or pancreatic system) on 9/28/23 and cholecystitis with choledocholithiasis (gallstones), incarcerated hiatal hernia (part of intestine trapped in the sac of a hernia which can become life threatening if untreated) on 10/3/23. The note indicated Resident #1 was to receive Amoxicillin/ Clavulanate 500-125 mg by mouth three times per day from 10/6/23 through 10/9/23. The note also indicated she was positive for constipation as she was pushing and straining to have a bowel movement last night (10/5/23) with her abdomen soft, non-tender, and without hepatospleenomegaly (liver and spleen enlargement). The note also revealed Resident #1 had hospital labs on 10/4/23 which indicated the following values: slightly elevated white blood cells (WBC) 12.07 and a normal creatinine (test used to monitor kidney function) level of 0.9. The assessment listed the following: negative for behaviors, no gastrointestinal (GI) upset with ability to tolerate foods and liquids, and hypertension with systolic blood pressures ranging between 120's to 140's on treatment of Lisinopril daily and monitor blood pressure daily. A physician's order dated 10/7/23 indicated Loperamide 2 mg (medication used to treat loose stools) tablet after each loose stool as needed for diarrhea x 1 day. A review of the nurses' progress notes for 10/07/23 revealed nothing related to loose stools or contacting the Medical Provider to obtain an order for Loperamide. A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated October 2023 revealed Nurse #6 administered Resident #1 a single dose of Loperamide on 10/7/23. Attempts to contact Nurse #6 were unsuccessful. A skilled progress note written by Nurse #7 dated 10/8/23 at 4:23 PM indicated Resident #1 complained of loose stool after lunch. The note did not indicate Nurse #7 notified the Medical Provider of Resident #1's loose stools. A review of the MAR dated October 2023 indicated Nurse #7 administered Resident #1 a single dose of Loperamide on 10/8/23. An interview on 11/28/23 at 10:00 AM with Nurse #7 revealed she could not recall Resident #1 as she was moved to the South Unit shortly after admission and Nurse #7 had no further involvement with her care. She could not recall notifying the Medical Provider of the loose stools. A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated October 2023 indicated Resident #1 received Loperamide 2mg on 10/7/23 at 10:29 AM and again on 10/8/23 at 5:14 PM. A provider progress note was written by the NP on 10/9/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a 3-day post admission visit. The note indicated Resident #1 was not feeling well and had complained to her (the NP) that she began to experience loose stools over the weekend, and she had already experienced 3 diarrhea/ water stools that day prior to the visit. Resident #1 complained of abdominal pain but no nausea or vomiting. Resident #1 felt bloated with indigestion. The note indicated Resident #1 had reported to the NP about her history of C-Difficile on 2/20/23. The note further indicated orders were provided to obtain a stool specimen to test for C-Difficile and discontinue Loperamide that was administered over the weekend. A physician order dated 10/9/23 indicated obtain stool specimen to test for C-Difficile. A laboratory report dated 10/10/23 indicated Resident #1 was positive for C -difficile colitis. A progress note written by the NP on 10/11/23 for a 5-day post admission visit. The note indicated Resident #1 continued to complain of diarrhea, abdominal pain, and indigestion. C-Difficile culture continued to be pending at the time of the visit. Resident #1 is currently not able to eat well, continued to have a soft, non-tender abdomen with hyperactive bowel sounds and negative for bladder distention. The note indicated Resident #1 had experienced 6 watery stools that day prior to the visit. The note further indicated new orders were received to start Cholestyramine 1 packet by mouth daily (used off label for bile acid diarrhea) and continue to monitor Resident #1's condition pending C-Difficile laboratory results. The note further indicated Resident #1 had blood pressure of 136/66 and to continue the Lisinopril as ordered. A nurse progress note written by the Unit Manager dated 10/11/23 indicated she spoke with the family member regarding Resident #1's abnormal lab results and testing positive for C-Difficile colitis and antibiotic therapy would be initiated. A physician's order dated 10/11/23 indicated Cholestyramine Light Oral Packet 4 grams (GM) give one packet by mouth one time a day related to diarrhea. A physician's order dated 10/11/23 indicated Vancomycin (antibiotic) 125 milligrams give one tablet four times a day for C-difficile. The order was discontinued on 10/12/23. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 was cognitively intact. An admission History and Physical (H&P) written by the MD dated 10/12/23 indicated Resident #1 was positive for diarrhea, negative for confusion, and negative for dysuria or bladder distension. It also revealed Resident #1's abdomen was soft, non-tender, and no guarding or rebound present with normal cognition with good memory recall both recent and remote. The note stated Resident #1 had a laboratory test on 10/10/23 which was positive for C-Difficile. A laboratory report dated 10/12/23 indicated Resident #1's white blood cell (test to determine immune ability to fight infection) count was elevated to 26.7 (normal being 4.1 to 10.9), Creatinine (test for kidney function) was normal at 1.16 (normal being 0.5 to 1.20) and C-reactive protein was 28.70 (test for inflammation in the body- normal being less than 0.50). This report indicated it was reviewed by the Nurse Practitioner on 10/13/23 at 10:31 AM. A provider progress note written by the NP dated 10/13/23 indicated Resident #1 had been placed on quarantine for C-Difficile and continued to have watery stools, abdominal pain, and now nausea was present. Laboratory results were reviewed with the following noted: elevated WBC of 26.7, low calcium at 8, elevated BUN 21.1, normal creatinine at 1.16, low sodium at 132, and a high CRP of 28.7. At this visit, Resident #1 was positive for weakness and fatigue, decrease strength and mobility, and negative for confusion or bladder distension. Resident #1's plan of care listed included the following: Start intravenous (IV) fluids (Normal Saline 60 cubic centimeters (cc) per hour for 48 hours) secondary to a low sodium level. Repeat CBC and CMP on Monday (10/16/23) to compare trends. Resident was previously prescribed Vancomycin orally, but secondary to high WBC she was switched to Flagyl 500mg IV every 6 hours x 7 days. Discontinue Vancomycin once Flagyl had started. At this visit, Resident #1's blood pressures were reviewed to be between 120's and 140's systolic and staff were to administer Lisinopril as ordered. A physician's order dated 10/13/23 indicated Sodium Chloride 0.45% intravenous. Give 60 (ml) milliliters per hour for 3 days for dehydration, acute kidney injury and C-Difficile. The order was discontinued on 10/16/23. A physician's order dated 10/13/23 indicated Flagyl (antibiotic) 500 mg per 100 (ml). Provide 500 mg (IV) intravenously every six hours for Enterocolitis (fecal bacteria) due to C-difficile for 7 days. A laboratory report dated 10/16/23 indicated Resident #1's white blood cell count was normal at 9.0, C-reactive protein remained elevated at 15.8 and Creatinine was normal at 0.90. These lab reports indicated they were reviewed by both the PA and NP on 10/17/23 at 9:47 AM and 8:37 PM. A provider progress note written by the NP dated 10/16/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a 14-day post admission visit. The note indicated during this visit Resident #1 remained on IV fluids which completed 10/16/23 and Flagyl via midline IV and reported the diarrhea was uncontrollable. A review of the laboratory results dated [DATE] listed the following values: white blood cell count was normal at 9.0, C-reactive protein (a protein produced by the liver) remained elevated at 15.8 and Creatinine was normal at 0.90. The plan of care included the following: Continue Flagyl until completed and addressed a significant improvement in Resident #1's laboratory results with a normal WBC and improving BUN, Creatinine, and sodium levels. The note also indicated Resident #1's blood pressure remained between 120's and 140's systolic and continued on Lisinopril for treatment. No new orders were given on this visit. A provider progress note written by the NP dated 10/20/23 indicated Resident #1 had a slight improvement but continued to have diarrhea with staff reports of decrease odorous stools. New orders included: extend the Flagyl IV for a total of 10 days. A physician's order dated 10/20/23 indicated Flagyl (antibiotic) 500 mg per 100 milliliters (ML). Provide 500 mg (IV) intravenously every six hours for Enterocolitis due to C-difficile for an additional 3 days. A physician's order dated 10/24/23 indicated Flagyl 500 mg by mouth twice daily for C-difficile. The order was discontinued on 10/25/23. A surgeon's consultation form dated 10/25/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a follow up with constipation and new orders were given for polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation. A nurse progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 10/25/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a surgical consult and new orders to advance diet and give polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation. The note did not indicate Nurse #4 notified the Medical Provider of the new order or ongoing loose stools following antibiotic therapy. An interview with Nurse #4 on 11/28/23 at 9:00 AM revealed she could not recall the order provided by the surgical consult but entered as previously educated from the surgical consultation communication form. Nurse #4 did not question the order because the antibiotic treatment for C-Difficile was completed. Nurse #4 also could not recall if she notified the Medical Provider of the new order or that Resident #1 continued to have loose stools following antibiotic therapy. A physician's order dated 10/25/23 indicated polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation. A provider note written by the NP dated 10/27/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a 21-day post admission visit. The noted reflected Resident #1 had improved with GI symptoms but continued with on and off diarrhea mixed with some semi-formed stools. The note indicated Resident #1's had completed her IV antibiotics. The note also indicated Resident #1's blood pressure remained between 120's and 140's systolic and continued Lisinopril for treatment. No new orders were given on this visit. A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated October 2023 indicated Resident #1 received the following: - Amoxicillin/Clavulanate 500-125 mg one tablet every 8 hours for 3 days (10/6/23 through 10/8/23 for a total 8 doses) - Lisinopril 10 mg daily (10/6/23 through 10/31/23 except 10/20/23, 10/21/23, and 10/22/23 because BP was outside of the parameters) - Cholestyramine Light Oral Packet 4 GM give one packet by mouth one time a day related to diarrhea (10/12 through 10/31) - Vancomycin 125 milligrams give one tablet. Four times a day for C difficile (10/12 and 10/13) - Sodium chloride intravenous solution 0.4%. Used 60 milliliters per hour intravenously every shift for acute kidney injury, dehydration, and C difficile times three days (10/13 through 10/16) - Flagyl 500 milligrams per 10ML. Provide 500 milligrams intravenously every six hours for Enterocolitis due to C difficile (10/14/23 x 2 doses, 10/15/23-10/23/23 x 4 doses, and 10/24/23 x 1 dose) - Flagyl 500 mg by mouth twice daily for C difficile (10/24/23 x 2 doses) - Polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation (10/25/23-10/31/23) A nurse progress note written by Nurse #5 dated 10/29/23 indicated Resident #1 was noted to have yellow liquid jelly like stool. The note also indicated Resident #1 had recently stopped IV antibiotics for C-difficile and a stool sample had been collected. The note did not indicate that a Medical Provider was contacted about the ongoing loose stools or that the order had been obtained from the Medical Provider for the stool culture. A review of the daily nurse assignment sheets indicated Nurse #5 was being oriented by Nurse #1 on 10/29/23. Nurse #5 was unavailable for interview. An interview on 11/20/23 at 11:30 AM with Nurse #1 revealed she had been the primary day shift nurse (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) on the South Unit on 10/29/23 where Resident #1 resided. Nurse #1 indicated she recalled Resident #1 was positive for C difficile and had been transferred to her unit last month due to requirements of isolation for the infection. Nurse #1 stated Resident #1 was, at baseline, alert and oriented x 4 (person, place, time and event), incontinent of bowel and bladder and had frequent loose stools containing a mucus while on her unit. Nurse #1 said that she recalled Resident #1 continued to have loose stools after being taken off precautions and therefore on 10/29/23, she placed a note in the medical provider's binder to alert them of the ongoing loose stools so they would provide an order for the laboratory test for C-Difficile but did not contact a Medical Provider in person or via telephone. Nurse #1 explained she obtained a stool sample at that time and sent it to the laboratory to test for C-Difficile. Attempts were made to interview Nurse #8 who worked 10/29/23 (7:00 PM- 7:00 AM) without success. Nurse Aide documentation dated 10/29/23 reflected Resident #1 had four loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 10/30/23 indicated Resident #1's orientation (ability to recall person, place, time, and event) changed throughout the day and had semi formed stools on day shift. The note did not reflect the Medical Provider was notified of the ongoing loose stools or Resident #1's orientation changes. An interview with Nurse #4 on 11/28/23 at 9:00 AM revealed worked day shift on 10/30/23 and she could not recall the resident other than what was charted regarding orientation changes. She recalled throughout Resident #1's stay, she experienced diarrhea so frequently that after a while she no longer got out of bed. Nurse Aide documentation dated 10/30/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. An interview on 11/20/23 at 11:25 AM with Nurse Aide (NA) #1 revealed she had worked the unit where Resident #1 resided for approximately 4 months on day shift and documented on the following days in October 2023: 10/13/23, 10/14/23, 10/15/23, 10/19/23, 10/24/23, 10/28/23, and 10/29/23. NA#1 indicated she could not recall any specific day, but Resident #1 was normally alert and oriented, able to make her needs known, incontinent of bowel and bladder with multiple loose stools which frequently contained mucous the entire time she had been on the South Unit. NA #1 stated she made Nurse #1 aware of the ongoing loose stools. An interview with Nurse Aide #2 (NA #2) on 11/20/23 at 11:55 AM revealed that she worked on the South unit on night shift and documented on 10/17/23, 10/18/23, 10/22/23, 10/23/23, 10/26/23, 10/27/23, and 10/31/23. NA #2 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented but rang the call light frequently due to loose stools. NA #2 described the stools as slimy and thick. NA #2 stated she made the nurse aware of loose stools but could not recall the names of each nurse daily. An interview with Nurse Aide #3 (NA #3) on 11/20/23 at 1:45 PM revealed she worked on the South unit where Resident #1 resided and documented on night shift on the following dates in October 2023: 10/16/23, 10/19/23, 10/20/23, 10/24/23, 10/25/23, 10/28/23, 10/29/23, 10/30/23. NA #3 stated Resident #1 diarrhea and mucous like stools on each shift she worked and had alerted the nurse on duty each shift but could not recall the names of all nurses she alerted. A laboratory report dated 10/30/23 indicated Resident #1 was positive for C difficile. The report reflected the laboratory notified the facility of the abnormal lab and spoke with Nurse #2 on 10/30/23 at 9:34 PM. The report indicated it was reviewed by the Physician's Assistant on 10/31/23 at 1:18 PM. It however did not indicate a provider was notified of the abnormality on 10/30/23 when the laboratory notified Nurse #2 of the critical results. A review of Resident #1's medical record revealed she was not seen by a facility Medical Provider after the abnormal C. difficile result. Attempts were made to interview Nurse #2 without success. A review of Resident #1's medical record did not reflect Nurse #2 assessed Resident #1. The review of the nurses' progress notes indicated Nurse #2 had not notified the MD or NP of the abnormal lab or received any orders for medical interventions. An interview with the PA on 11/21/23 at 11:20 AM revealed she was not familiar with Resident #1 and had not provided her with any direct care. The PA stated because a resident can test positive for C-Difficile for up to 90 days she would not have treated her with Resident #1 experiencing ongoing intermittent loose stools. A review of Resident #1's medical record revealed the last time she was seen by a medical provider was on 10/27/23 and there were no physician orders for the treatment of C-Difficile colitis after the positive test results were received. An interview with the Nurse Practitioner (NP) on 11/21/23 at 3:24 PM and 4:02 PM revealed she was familiar with Resident #1 and recalled her to be alert and oriented x 4 (accurately aware of person, place, time and event). The NP stated shortly after her admission she began having loose stools and she ordered a laboratory test for C-Difficile which resulted as positive, and treatment was ordered at the time. The NP indicated the treatment was for Vancomycin oral and Flagyl both IV and oral. The NP recalled Resident #1 continuing to have loose stools but thought another provider had placed her on treatment following the second positive stool culture and therefore did not order any further treatment. The NP could not recall anything other than thinking another provider had handled the 2nd C-Diff lab nor being aware of orientation changes noted on 10/30/23. An interview with the Physician (MD) on 11/21/23 at 4:08 PM revealed he was aware Resident #1 had been treated for C-Difficile shortly after her admission; however, he had not been made aware of the abnormal laboratory results on 10/30/23 and did not prescribe treatment for the ongoing loose stools. The MD stated the ongoing loose stools could have been exacerbated from the Polyethylene glycol prescribed by the surgeon at Resident #1's follow-up appointment on 10/25/23. He acknowledged the only visit he had with Resident #1 was on 10/12/23. He did not recall any further updates to Resident #1's condition. The MD indicated he would expect the lab to be reviewed by the PA and proper monitoring or interventions to be placed. A nurse's progress note dated 10/31/23 indicated Resident #1 had semi formed stools on day shift. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the stools. Nurse Aide documentation dated 10/31/23 reflected Resident #1 had seven loose/diarrhea stools. A review of the MAR dated November 2023 indicated Resident #1 received the following: - Lisinopril 10mg daily (11/1/23 through 11/7/23) - Loperamide 2 mg tablet after each loose stool as needed for diarrhea x 1 day (11/3/23) - Cholestyramine Light Oral Packet 4 GM give one packet by mouth one time a day related to diarrhea (11/1/23 through 11/7/23) - Polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth one time a day related to Constipation (11/1/23, 11/3/23, 11/4/23) A nurse progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/1/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented with a blood pressure of 137/65. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with diarrhea. The note indicated MD was aware and staff should continue to monitor. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/1/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/2/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented and her BP was 121/79. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had loose stools during day shift and Polyethylene glycol was held due to loose stools. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools or that Polyethylene glycol was held. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/2/23 reflected Resident #1 had eight loose/diarrhea stools. A late entry nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 11/3/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented with inconsistent cognitive status and her blood pressure was 110/54. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with a mixture of diarrhea stools and semi formed stools during day shift. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/3/23 reflected Resident #1 had thirteen loose/diarrhea stools. An interview on 11/20/23 at 11:25 AM with Nurse Aide (NA) #1 revealed she had worked the unit where Resident #1 resided for approximately 4 months on day shift and was on duty on the following days in November 2023: 11/1/23 and 11/2/23. NA #1 indicated she had made the hall nurse on duty aware of the ongoing loose stools each shift although she could not recall the names of each nurse daily. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 11/4/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented with inconsistent cognitive status and her blood pressure was 110/54. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with a mixture of diarrhea stools and semi formed stools during day shift. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/4/23 reflected Resident #1 had one loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 11/5/23 did not indicate Resident #1's cognitive status Her blood pressure was listed as 90/50. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with a mixture of diarrhea stools and semi formed stools during day shift. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools or that Resident #1 had experienced a low blood pressure. An interview with Nurse #4 on 11/28/23 at 9:00 AM revealed she could not recall the resident other than what was charted regarding orientation changes or low blood pressure. She recalled throughout Resident #1's stay, she experienced diarrhea so frequently that after a while she no longer got out of bed. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/5/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #2 dated 11/6/23 indicated on night shift (11/5 at 7:00 PM through 11/6 at 7:00 AM) Resident #1 was alert and oriented and able to make needs known. Resident#1 had a blood pressure of 110/56. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and she had multiple loose stools during night shift. The note indicated Loperamide was administered without any favorable effects. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools or that Loperamide had to be administered. Attempts to interview Nurse #2 were unsuccessful. A nurse's Progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/6/23 indicated Resident #1's Polyethylene glycol was held secondary to loose stools on day shift. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools or that Polyethylene glycol was held. A nurse progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/6/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented and able to make her needs known. Resident #1's blood pressure was 161/88. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and she had multiple loose stools during day shift and Polyethylene Glycol was held secondary to loose stools. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools or that Polyethylene glycol was held. A review of Resident #1's medical record revealed no progress notes written by Nurse #3 on 11/6/23. A telephone interview with Nurse #3 on 11/21/23 at 9:38 AM revealed she acknowledged she worked the South unit on 11/6/23 on night shift but could not recall Resident #1 to include any stools or behaviors on 11/6/23 due to her working all the units and her working on an as needed basis only. She could not recall notifying the Medical Provider of Resident #1's loose stools, change in cognition, or behaviors. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/6/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. An interview with Nurse Aide #2 (NA #2) on 11/20/23 at 11:55 AM revealed that she worked on the South unit on night shift and documented on the following dates in November 2023: 11/1/23, 11/4/23, 11/5/23, and 11/6/23. NA #2 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented but rang the call light frequently due to loose stools. NA #2 described the stools as slimy and thick. NA #2 stated she was aware Resident #1 had C-Difficile and therefore alerted Nurse #2 of the resident having loose stools but did not alert the nurse with each loose stool because they were aware of them. An interview with Nurse Aide #3 (NA #3) on 11/20/23 at 1:45 PM revealed she worked on the South unit where Resident #1 resided on night shift on 11/6/23. NA #3 stated on the night of 11/6/23, Resident #1 was more confused than normal. She indicated during her shift, Resident #1 continued to have mucous stools but did not ring her light to be changed as she normally would, was disoriented and trying to climb out of bed. NA #3 said she told Nurse #2. Attempts were made to contact Nurse #2 without success. A review of Resident #1's medical record did not reflect Nurse #2 assessed Resident #1. The review indicated Nurse #2 had not notified the MD or NP of the abnormal lab or received any orders for medical interventions. Attempts to interview Nurse #2 were unsuccessful. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/7/23 reflected Resident #1 eight had loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's Progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/7/23 at 2:30 PM indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented and able to make her needs known. Resident #1's blood pressure was 107/48. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and she had multiple loose stools during day shift and Polyethylene Glycol was held secondary to loose stools. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of the loose stools or that Polyethylene glycol was held. A late entry nurse progress note written by Nurse #1 on 11/13/23 at 3:19 PM indicated on 11/7/23 at approximately 3:30 PM, Nurse #1 was informed that Resident #1 had a low blood pressure and appeared confused. The note indicated Nurse #1 assessed Resident #1's blood pressure manually and found the value to be at baseline for the patient at 106/51. Confusion noted also to be at baseline. The note did not indicate a Medical Provider was notified of Resident #1's low blood pressure, lethargy, confusion, behaviors, her inability to take her morning medications, or ongoing loose stools. An interview on 11/20/23 at 1:00 PM with Physical Therapy Assistant #1 revealed he was assigned to Resident #1's therapy treatment for physical therapy on 11/7/23. PTA #1 indicated when he entered the room between 3:00 and 4:00 PM, he noticed Resident #1 was not herself as she had previously had a very social based personality when he had worked with her a couple of weeks prior. PTA #1 indicated on this date, Resident #1 appeared more lethargic and confused. PTA #1 stated he made attempts to sit Resident #1 on the edge of the bed thinking she would arouse to her normal self with stimulation. He indicated he alerted Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA #1) who was nearby and asked him to look at obvious concerns of Resident #1's change from the previous time he had worked with her. He indicated that COTA #1 entered the room and agreed that Resident #1 was not at her baseline as he routinely provided therapy for her. During this discussion between PTA #1 and COTA #1, Nurse #1 entered the room to give Resident #1 her medications. He said he mentioned to Nurse #1 that Resident #1 was acting different, but the nurse did not respond to his statement. PTA #1 stated when medications were administered by Nurse #1, [TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and family, staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Physician Assistant (PA), and physician (MD) interviews, the ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and family, staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Physician Assistant (PA), and physician (MD) interviews, the facility failed to complete comprehensive assessments and determine the need for medical interventions for a resident who continued to experience loose stools post antibiotic treatment for Clostridium Difficile (C-Difficile) which ended on 10/24/23. (C-difficile is a bacterium that causes an infection of the colon. Symptoms can range from diarrhea to life-threatening damage to the colon.). The afternoon of 11/07/23 the resident had a significant change in condition including increased lethargy and confusion, low blood pressure, spitting out her pills and hollering out. There was no comprehensive assessment completed to determine if there was the need to seek medical attention. Staff did not recognize the significant change in condition until late in the evening on 11/07/23 and the resident was sent to the hospital for an evaluation. Hospital records dated 11/7/23 indicated the resident was diagnosed with sepsis with acute organ dysfunction, acute encephalopathy secondary to infectious process, hypothermia, and type 2 myocardial infarction (heart attack). The resident expired on 11/10/23. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for quality of care/providing care according to professsional standards (Resident #1). The immediate jeopardy began on 11/7/23 when the facility failed to effectively respond to and seek medical attention when Resident #1 had a significant change in condition. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 11/23/23 when the facility implemented a credible allegation of immediate jeopardy removal. The facility will remain out of compliance at a lower scope and severity of D no actual harm to ensure the completion of education and monitoring systems put into place are effective. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for quality of care. The findings included: A hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 presented to the emergency room (ER) with abdominal pain and vomiting which required abdominal surgery for the gallstones. The discharge summary reflected Resident #1 received intravenous (IV) antibiotics for chronic leukocytosis (high white blood cell count) (WBC 11.41) and cholecystitis (inflammation of the gall bladder) which was corrected with the cholecystectomy (surgical removal of the gallbladder). It also listed cystitis without hematuria as resolved and orders for Amoxicillin-Clavulanate (antibiotic) 500-125 milligrams (mg) 1 tablet by mouth every 8 hours for 3 days. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included status post cystitis without hematuria (bladder inflammation without blood present in the urine) and surgical intervention of calculus of the bile duct with chronic cholecystitis without obstruction (gallstones) and abdominal hernia without obstruction or gangrene and hypertension. A physician's order dated 10/5/23 indicated Amoxicillin 500-125 milligrams (mg) three times per day for 3 days for cystitis. Additionally, Lisinopril 10mg daily by mouth was ordered for hypertension. A one-day post admission progress note dated 10/6/23 written by the NP indicated Resident #1 was admitted to the facility after being hospitalized from [DATE] through 10/5/23 status post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (a procedure using a scope to diagnose and treat problems of the biliary or pancreatic system) on 9/28/23 and cholecystitis with choledocholithiasis (gallstones), incarcerated hiatal hernia (part of intestine trapped in the sac of a hernia which can become life threatening if untreated) on 10/3/23. The note indicated Resident #1 was to receive Amoxicillin 500/125 by mouth three times per day from 10/6/23 through 10/9/23. The note also indicated she was positive for constipation as she was pushing and straining to have a bowel movement last night (10/5/23) with her abdomen soft, non-tender, and without hepatospleenomegaly. The note also revealed Resident #1 had hospital labs on 10/4/23 which indicated the following values: slightly elevated white blood cells (WBC) 12.07 and a normal creatinine level of 0.9. The assessment listed the following: negative for behaviors, no gastrointestinal (GI) upset with ability to tolerate foods and liquids, and hypertension with systolic blood pressures ranging between 120's to 140's on treatment of Lisinopril daily and monitor blood pressure daily. A physician's order dated 10/7/23 indicated Loperamide 2 mg tablet after each loose stool as needed for diarrhea x 1 day. A review of the nurses' progress notes for 10/07/23 revealed nothing related to loose stools. A skilled progress note written by Nurse #7 dated 10/8/23 at 4:23 PM indicated Resident #1 complained of loose stool after lunch. A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated October 2023 indicated Resident #1 received Loperamide 2mg on 10/7/23 at 10:29 AM by Nurse #6 and again on 10/8/23 at 5:14 PM by Nurse #7. Attempts to contact Nurse #6 were unsuccessful. An interview on 11/28/23 at 10:00 AM with Nurse #7 revealed she could not recall Resident #1 as she was moved to the South Unit shortly after admission and Nurse #7 had no further involvement with her care. A provider progress note written by the NP on 10/9/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a 3-day post admission visit. The note indicated Resident #1 was not feeling well and had complained that loose stools began over the weekend, and she had already experienced 3 diarrhea water stools that day. Resident #1 complained of abdominal pain but no nausea or vomiting. Resident #1 felt bloated with indigestion. The note indicated Resident #1 had reported a history of C-Difficile on 2/20/23. Orders were provided to obtain a stool specimen to test for C-Difficile and discontinue Loperamide that was administered over the weekend. A physician order dated 10/9/23 indicated obtain stool specimen to test for C-Difficile. A laboratory report dated 10/10/23 indicated Resident #1 was positive for C -difficile colitis. A progress note was written by the NP on 10/11/23 for a 5-day post admission visit. The note indicated Resident #1 continued to complain of diarrhea, abdominal pain, and indigestion. C-Difficile culture continued to be pending at the time of the visit. Resident #1 is currently not able to eat well. Continues to have a soft, non-tender abdomen with hyperactive bowels sounds and negative for bladder distention. The note indicated Resident #1 had experienced 6 watery stools the day prior to the visit. New orders were received to start Cholestyramine 1 packet orally daily and continue to monitor Resident #1's condition pending C-Difficile laboratory results. The note further indicated Resident #1 had blood pressure of 136/66 and to continue the Lisinopril as ordered. A nurse progress note written by the Unit Manager dated 10/11/23 indicated she spoke with the family member regarding Resident #1's abnormal lab results and testing positive for C-Difficile colitis and antibiotic therapy would be initiated. A physician's order dated 10/11/23 indicated Cholestyramine (used for bile acid diarrhea) Light Oral Packet 4 grams (GM) give one packet by mouth one time a day related to diarrhea. A physician's order dated 10/11/23 indicated Vancomycin (antibiotic) 125 milligrams give one tablet four times a day for C-difficile. The order was discontinued on 10/12/23. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 was cognitively intact and no behaviors were noted. An admission History and Physical (H&P) written by the MD dated 10/12/23 indicated Resident #1 was positive for diarrhea, negative for confusion, and negative for dysuria or bladder distension. It also revealed Resident #1's abdomen was soft, non-tender, and no guarding or rebound present with normal cognition with good memory recall both recent and remote. The note stated Resident #1 had a laboratory test on 10/10/23 which was positive for C-Difficile. A laboratory report dated 10/12/23 indicated Resident #1's white blood cell (test to determine immune ability to fight infection) count was elevated to 26.7 (normal being 4.1 to 10.9), Creatinine (test for kidney function) was normal at 1.16 (normal being 0.5 to 1.20) and C-reactive protein was 28.70 (test for inflammation in the body- normal being less than 0.50). A provider progress note written by the NP dated 10/13/23 indicated Resident #1 had been placed on quarantine for C-Difficile and continued to have watery stools, abdominal pain, and now nausea. Laboratory results were reviewed with the following noted: elevated WBC of 26.7, low calcium at 8, elevated BUN 21.1, normal creatinine at 1.16, low sodium at 132, and a high CRP of 28.7. At this visit, Resident #1 was positive for weakness and fatigue, decrease strength and mobility, and negative for confusion or bladder distension. Resident #1's plan of care listed included the following: Start IV fluids (Normal Saline 60 cubic centimeters (cc) per hour for 48 hours) secondary to a low sodium level. Repeat CBC and CMP on Monday (10/16/23) to compare for trends. Resident was previously prescribed Vancomycin, but secondary to high WBC she was switched to Flagyl 500mg every 6 hours x 7 days. Discontinue Vancomycin once Flagyl has started. At this visit, Resident #1's blood pressures were reviewed to be between 120's and 140's systolic and continued on Lisinopril. A physician's order dated 10/13/23 indicated Sodium Chloride 0.45% intravenous. Give 60 milliliters per hour for 3 days for dehydration, acute kidney injury and C-Difficile. The order was discontinued on 10/16/23. A physician's order dated 10/13/23 indicated Flagyl (antibiotic) 500 mg per 100 milliliters (ML). Provide 500 mg (IV) intravenously every six hours for Enterocolitis due to C-difficile for 7 days. A laboratory report dated 10/16/23 indicated Resident #1's white blood cell count was normal at 9.0, C-reactive protein remained elevated at 15.8 and Creatinine was normal at 0.90. A provider progress note written by the NP dated 10/16/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a 14-day post admission visit. The note indicated during this visit Resident #1 remained on IV fluids which completed 10/16/23 and Flagyl via midline IV and reported the diarrhea was uncontrollable. A review of the laboratory results dated [DATE] listed the following values: white blood cell count was normal at 9.0, C-reactive protein remained elevated at 15.8 and Creatinine was normal at 0.90. The plan of care included the following: Continue Flagyl until completed and addressed a significant improvement in Resident #1's laboratory results with a normal WBC and improving BUN, Creatinine, and sodium levels. The note also indicated Resident #1's blood pressure remained between 120's and 140's systolic and continued on Lisinopril for treatment. No new orders were given on this visit. A provider progress note written by the NP dated 10/20/23 indicated Resident #1 had a slight improvement but continued to have diarrhea with staff reports of decrease odorous stools. New orders included: extend the Flagyl IV for a total of 10 days. A physician's order dated 10/20/23 indicated Flagyl (antibiotic) 500 mg per 100 milliliters (ML). Provide 500 mg (IV) intravenously every six hours for Enterocolitis due to C-difficile for an additional 3 days. A physician's order dated 10/24/23 indicated Flagyl 500 mg by mouth twice daily for C-difficile. The order was discontinued on 10/25/23. A surgeon's consultation form dated 10/25/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a follow up with constipation and new orders were given for polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop, a laxative used to treat occasional constipation and soften stool. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation. A nurse progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 10/25/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a surgical consult and new orders to advance diet and give polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop, a laxative used to treat occasional constipation and soften stool. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation. An interview with Nurse #4 on 11/28/23 at 9:00 AM revealed she could not recall the order provided by the surgical consult but entered as previously educated from the surgical consultation communication form. Nurse #4 did not question the order because the antibiotic treatment for C-Difficile was completed. A physician's order dated 10/25/23 indicated polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation. A provider note written by the NP dated 10/27/23 indicated Resident #1 was seen for a 21-day post admission visit. The noted reflected Resident #1 had improved with GI symptoms but continued with on and off diarrhea mixed with some semi-formed stools. The note indicated Resident #1's had completed her IV antibiotics. The note also indicated Resident #1's blood pressure remained between 120's and 140's systolic and continued Lisinopril for treatment. No new orders were given on this visit. A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated October 2023 indicated Resident #1 received the following: - Amoxicillin/Clavulanate 500-125 mg one tablet every 8 hours for 3 days (10/6/23 through 10/8/23 for a total 8 doses) - Lisinopril 10 mg daily (10/6/23 through 10/31/23 except 10/20/23, 10/21/23, and 10/22/23 because BP was outside of the parameters) - Loperamide 2 mg tablet after each loose stool as needed for diarrhea x 1 day (10/7/23 and 10/8/23) - Cholestyramine Light Oral Packet 4 GM give one packet by mouth one time a day related to diarrhea (10/12 through 10/31) - Vancomycin 125 milligrams give one tablet. Four times a day for C difficile (10/12 and 10/13) - Sodium chloride intravenous solution 0.4%. Used 60 milliliters per hour intravenously every shift for acute kidney injury, dehydration, and C difficile times three days (10/13 through 10/16) - Flagyl 500 milligrams per 10ML. Provide 500 milligrams intravenously every six hours for Enterocolitis due to C difficile (10/14/23 x 2 doses, 10/15/23-10/23/23 x 4 doses, and 10/24/23 x 1 dose) - Flagyl 500 mg by mouth twice daily for C difficile (10/24/23 x 2 doses) - Polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth once a day related to constipation (10/25/23-10/31/23) A nurse progress note written by Nurse #5 dated 10/29/23 indicated Resident #1 was noted to have yellow liquid jelly like stool. The note also indicated Resident #1 had recently stopped IV antibiotics for C-difficile and a stool sample had been collected. A review of the daily nurse assignment sheets indicated Nurse #5 was being oriented by Nurse #1 on 10/29/23. Nurse #5 was unavailable for interview. An interview on 11/20/23 at 11:30 AM with Nurse #1 revealed she had been the primary day shift nurse (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) on the South Unit on 10/29/23 where Resident #1 resided. Nurse #1 indicated she recalled Resident #1 was positive for C difficile and had been transferred to her unit last month due to requirements of isolation for the infection. Nurse #1 stated Resident #1 was, at baseline, alert and oriented x 4 (person, place, time and event), incontinent of bowel and bladder and had frequent loose stools containing a mucus while on her unit. Nurse #1 said that she recalled Resident #1 continued to have loose stools after being taken off precautions and therefore on 10/29/23, she placed a note in the medical provider's binder to alert them of the ongoing loose stools so they would provide an order for the laboratory test for C-Difficile. Nurse #1 explained she obtained a stool sample at that time and sent it to the laboratory to test for C-Difficile. Attempts were made to interview Nurse #8 who worked 10/29 (7:00 PM- 7:00 AM) without success. Nurse Aide documentation dated 10/29/23 reflected Resident #1 had four loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 10/30/23 indicated Resident #1's orientation (ability to recall person, place, time, and event) changed throughout the day and had semi formed stools on day shift. An interview with Nurse #4 on 11/28/23 at 9:00 AM revealed worked day shift on 10/30/23 and she could not recall the resident other than what was charted regarding orientation changes. Nurse Aide documentation dated 10/30/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. An interview on 11/20/23 at 11:25 AM with Nurse Aide (NA) #1 revealed she had worked the unit where Resident #1 resided for approximately 4 months on day shift and documented on the following days in October 2023: 10/13/23, 10/14/23, 10/15/23, 10/19/23, 10/24/23, 10/28/23, and 10/29/23. NA#1 indicated she could not recall any specific day, but Resident #1 was normally alert and oriented, able to make her needs known, incontinent of bowel and bladder with multiple loose stools which frequently contained mucous the entire time she had been on the South Unit. NA #1 stated she made Nurse #1 aware of the ongoing loose stools. An interview with Nurse Aide #2 (NA #2) on 11/20/23 at 11:55 AM revealed that she worked on the South unit on night shift and documented on 10/17/23, 10/18/23, 10/22/23, 10/23/23, 10/26/23, 10/27/23, and 10/31/23. NA #2 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented but rang the call light frequently due to loose stools. NA #2 described the stools as slimy and thick. NA #2 stated she made the nurse aware of loose stools but could not recall the names of each nurse daily. An interview with Nurse Aide #3 (NA #3) on 11/20/23 at 1:45 PM revealed she worked on the South unit where Resident #1 resided and documented on night shift on the following dates in October 2023: 10/16/23, 10/19/23, 10/20/23, 10/24/23, 10/25/23, 10/28/23, 10/29/23, 10/30/23. NA #3 stated Resident #1 diarrhea and mucous like stools on each shift she worked and had alerted the nurse on duty each shift but could not recall the names of all nurses she alerted. A laboratory report dated 10/30/23 indicated Resident #1 was positive for C-difficile. The report reflected the laboratory notified the facility of the abnormal lab and spoke with Nurse #2 on 10/30/23 at 9:34 PM. The report indicated it was reviewed by the Physician Assistant on 10/31/23 at 1:18 PM. Attempts were made to interview Nurse #2 without success. A review of Resident #1's medical record did not reflect Nurse #2 assessed Resident #1. The review indicated Nurse #2 had not notified the MD or NP of the abnormal lab or received any orders for medical interventions. An interview with the PA on 11/21/23 at 11:20 AM revealed she was not familiar with Resident #1 and had not provided her with any direct care. The PA stated because a resident can test positive for C-Difficile for up to 90 days she would not have treated her with ongoing intermittent loose stools. A review of Resident #1's medical record revealed the last time she was seen by a medical provider was on 10/27/23 and there were no physician orders for the treatment of C-Difficile colitis after the positive test results were received on 10/30/23. An interview with the Nurse Practitioner (NP) on 11/21/23 at 3:24 PM and 4:02 PM revealed she was familiar with Resident #1 and recalled her to be alert and oriented x 4. The NP stated shortly after admission she began having loose stools and she ordered a laboratory test for C-Difficile which resulted as positive, and treatment was ordered at the time. The NP indicated the treatment was for Vancomycin oral and Flagyl both IV and oral. The NP recalled Resident #1 continuing to have loose stools but thought another provider had placed her on treatment and therefore did not order any further treatment. The NP could not recall anything other than thinking another provider had handled the 2nd C-Diff lab nor being aware of orientation changes noted on 10/30/23. An interview with the Physician (MD) on 11/21/23 at 4:08 PM revealed he was aware Resident #1 had been treated for C-Difficile shortly after her admission; however, he had not been made aware of the abnormal laboratory results on 10/30/23 and did not prescribe treatment for the ongoing loose stools. The MD stated the ongoing loose stools could have been exacerbated from the Polyethylene glycol prescribed by the surgeon at Resident #1's follow-up appointment on 10/25/23. He acknowledged the only visit he had with Resident #1 was on 10/12/23. He did not recall any further updates to Resident #1's condition. The MD indicated he would expect the lab to be reviewed by the PA and proper monitoring or interventions to be placed. A nurse's progress note dated 10/31/23 indicated Resident #1 had semi formed stools on day shift. Nurse Aide documentation dated 10/31/23 reflected Resident #1 had seven loose/diarrhea stools. A review of the MAR dated November 2023 indicated Resident #1 received the following: - Lisinopril 10mg daily (11/1/23 through 11/7/23) - Loperamide 2 mg tablet after each loose stool as needed for diarrhea x 1 day (11/3/23) - Cholestyramine Light Oral Packet 4 GM give one packet by mouth one time a day related to diarrhea (11/1/23 through 11/7/23) - Polyethylene glycol 17 grams per scoop. Give one scoop by mouth one time a day related to Constipation (11/1/23, 11/3/23, 11/4/23) A nurse progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/1/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented with a blood pressure of 137/65. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with diarrhea. The note indicated MD was aware and staff should continue to monitor. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/1/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/2/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented and her BP was 121/79. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had loose stools during day shift and Polyethylene glycol was held due to loose stools. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/2/23 reflected Resident #1 had eight loose/diarrhea stools. An interview on 11/20/23 at 11:25 AM with Nurse Aide (NA) #1 revealed she had worked the unit where Resident #1 resided for approximately 4 months on day shift and was on duty on the following days in November 2023: 11/1/23 and 11/2/23. NA #1 indicated she had made the hall nurse on duty aware of the ongoing loose stools each shift although she could not recall the names of each nurse daily. A late entry nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 11/3/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented with inconsistent cognitive status and her blood pressure was 110/54. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with a mixture of diarrhea stools and semi formed stools during day shift. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/3/23 reflected Resident #1 had thirteen loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 11/4/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented with inconsistent cognitive status and her blood pressure was 110/54. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with a mixture of diarrhea stools and semi formed stools during day shift. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/4/23 reflected Resident #1 had one loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #4 dated 11/5/23 did not indicate Resident #1's cognitive status. Her blood pressure was listed as 90/50. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and Resident #1 had incontinence with a mixture of diarrhea stools and semi formed stools during day shift. An interview with Nurse #4 on 11/28/23 at 9:00 AM revealed she recalled throughout Resident #1's stay, she experienced diarrhea so frequently that after a while she no longer got out of bed. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/5/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's progress note written by Nurse #2 dated 11/6/23 indicated on night shift (11/5/23 at 7:00 PM through 11/6/23 at 7:00 AM) Resident #1 was alert and oriented and able to make needs known. Resident#1 had a blood pressure of 110/56. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and she had multiple loose stools during night shift. The note indicated Imodium AD was administered without any favorable effects. Attempts to interview Nurse #2 were unsuccessful. A nurse progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/6/23 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented and able to make her needs known. Resident #1's blood pressure was 161/88. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and she had multiple loose stools during day shift and Polyethylene Glycol was held secondary to loose stools. A review of Resident #1's medical record revealed no progress notes written by Nurse #3 on 11/6/23. A telephone interview with Nurse #3 on 11/21/23 at 9:38 AM revealed she acknowledged she worked the South unit on 11/6/23 on night shift but could not recall Resident #1 to include any stools or behaviors on 11/6/23 due to her working all the units and her working on an as needed basis only. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/6/23 reflected Resident #1 had six loose/diarrhea stools. An interview with NA #2 on 11/20/23 at 11:55 AM revealed that she worked on the South unit on night shift and documented on the following dates in November 2023: 11/1/23, 11/4/23, 11/5/23, and 11/6/23. NA #2 indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented but rang the call light frequently due to loose stools. NA #2 described the stools as slimy and thick. NA #2 stated she was aware Resident #1 had C-Difficile and therefore alerted Nurse #2 of the resident having loose stools but did not alert the nurse with each loose stool because they were aware of them. An interview with NA #3 on 11/20/23 at 1:45 PM revealed she worked on the South unit where Resident #1 resided on night shift on 11/6/23. NA #3 stated on the night of 11/6/23, Resident #1 was more confused than normal. She indicated during her shift, Resident #1 continued to have mucous stools but did not ring her light to be changed as she normally would, was disoriented and trying to climb out of bed. NA #3 said she told Nurse #2. A review of Resident #1's medical record did not reflect Nurse #2 assessed Resident #1. The review indicated Nurse #2 had not notified the MD or NP of the abnormal lab or received any orders for medical interventions. Attempts were made to interview Nurse #2 without success. Nurse Aide documentation dated 11/7/23 reflected Resident #1 eight had loose/diarrhea stools. A nurse's Progress note written by Nurse #1 dated 11/7/23 at 2:30 PM indicated Resident #1 was alert and oriented and able to make her needs known. Resident #1's blood pressure was 107/48. A gastrointestinal observation revealed all 4 quadrants of the abdomen were normal and she had multiple loose stools during day shift and Polyethylene Glycol was held secondary to loose stools. A late entry nurse progress note written by Nurse #1 on 11/13/23 at 3:19 PM indicated on 11/7/23 at approximately 3:30 PM, Nurse #1 was informed that Resident #1 had a low blood pressure and appeared confused. The note indicated Nurse #1 assessed Resident #1's blood pressure manually and found the value to be at baseline for the patient at 106/51. Confusion noted also to be at baseline. An interview on 11/20/23 at 1:00 PM with Physical Therapy Assistant #1 revealed he was assigned to Resident #1's therapy treatment for physical therapy on 11/7/23. PTA #1 indicated when he entered the room between 3:00 and 4:00 PM, he noticed Resident #1 was not herself as she had previously had a very social based personality when he had worked with her a couple of weeks prior. PTA #1 indicated on this date, Resident #1 appeared more lethargic and confused. PTA #1 stated he made attempts to sit Resident #1 on the edge of the bed thinking she would arouse to her normal self with stimulation. He indicated he alerted Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA #1) who was nearby and asked him to look at obvious concerns of Resident #1's change from the previous time he had worked with her. He indicated that COTA #1 entered the room and agreed that Resident #1 was not at her baseline as he routinely provided therapy for her. During this discussion between PTA #1 and COTA #1, Nurse #1 entered the room to give Resident #1 her medications. He said he mentioned to Nurse #1 that Resident #1 was acting different, but the nurse did not respond to his statement. PTA #1 stated when medications were administered by Nurse #1, Resident #1 spit the medications out, the nurse collected the pills, and the nurse left the room. PTA #1 indicated Resident #1 continued to remain confused and uncooperative with therapy after the nurse left the room. He explained he and COTA #1 obtained vital signs using the robot-nurse. He stated it took them approximately 20 minutes or so to obtain two blood pressures due to Resident #1 was fidgety and restless. Resident #1's blood pressure was obtained and readings for blood pressure reflected between the 60s and 70s mmHg (millimeters of mercury) systolic (normal being greater than 90/60). PTA #1 stated he and COTA #1 placed Resident #1 back in a supine position in bed and left the room to locate Nurse #1. PTA #1 stated Resident #1 was fidgety and agitated during the therapy treatment but did not recall any behaviors such as hollering out while he was in her room. PTA #1 stated he approached Nurse #1 who was at her medication cart in the hallway and alerted her that Resident #1's blood pressure readings had been low, stated what they were, and she had increase confusion, not acting like herself, and was unable to participate in therapy. PTA #1 stated Nurse #1 replied to him that Resident #1's blood pressure was normally low at baseline and did not appear concerned with reports by him. PTA #1 stated Nurse #1 never told him that she would assess Resident #1 and evaluate his concerns of the change of condition. PTA #1 stated he left the nurse at the medication cart and proceeded towards the therapy room. When he passed the MDS Nurse Coordinator's office, he entered the office and requested the nurse to review Resident #1's previous blood pressures and alerted her of the low blood pressure readings that he and COTA #1 had obtained. PTA #1 stated the MDS Nurse noted the blood pressures obtained by the PTA #1 and COTA #1 were lower than Resident #1's baseline. PTA #1 stated the MDS Nurse contacted the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) Nurse via phone who said she was leaving for the day but would go and recheck Resident #1's blood pressure. An interview with COTA #1 on 11/20/23 at 12:30 PM revealed he was alerted on 11/7/23 in the afternoon (he could not recall exact time) by PTA #1 that he was concerned that Resident #1 was not her normal self. COTA #1 stated he entered Resident #1's room with PTA #1 and recognized Resident #1 appeared drowsy, confused, and agitated. He said while he and PTA #1 were in the room the hall nurse (Nurse #1) entered the room with the resident's medications and attempted to administer them, but Resident #1 spit them all out on her clothes. COTA #1 stated while Nurse #1 was in the room, PTA #1 mentioned to Nurse #1 that Resident #1 did not seem to be at her baseline, but Nurse #1 did not acknowledge the statement, but instead quickly retrieved the medications Resident #1 spit out and left the room. COTA #1 indicated he and PTA #1 continued to attempt to get Resident #1 to participate without success then decided to obtain vital [TRUNCATED]
Jan 2023 7 deficiencies 2 Harm
SERIOUS (H) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

A resident was harmed · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain the dignity of residents by f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain the dignity of residents by failing to provide enough size 3X briefs for 4 of 4 residents that wore 3X briefs (Residents #8, #55, #40, and #28). This resulted in residents experiencing fear of embarrassment, physical discomfort, not participating in activities, feeling upset, bothered, and crying. This practice affected all residents that wore size 3X briefs. The findings included: 1) Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included diastolic heart failure, hypertension, and muscle weakness. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set for Resident #8 dated 10/28/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no behaviors or rejection of care. She required extensive 1 person assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and hygiene. She required limited 1 person assist with walking in her room. Resident #8 was occasionally incontinent of bladder and bowel. During an interview with Resident #8 on 1/4/22 at 12:19 PM she revealed she wore a size 3X brief and the facility frequently ran out. She stated they were running low on that day, and she knew because NA #4 came to her room to find a brief for another resident. NA #4 came to her room and said they could not find a 3X brief for a resident down the hall. NA #4 asked Resident #8 if she could take a 3X brief from her room. Resident #8 stated this happened frequently, we run out of briefs weekly, that's why I keep a few stashed away in my room. She stated when the facility was low on briefs, she would frequently wear the green (2X) so that some of the other residents could have what was left of the 3X briefs. She stated the 2X briefs were too small for her, but she could fit them better than some of the other residents. Resident #8 further stated she could go to the restroom with staff assistance. She stated making it to the restroom without wetting was difficult because she was on 160 milligrams (mg) of a diuretic (a medication that rid the body of excess fluid through the kidneys) daily. She explained that she sometimes wore a pull up when she was up in the chair, but if she didn't make it to the restroom in time those things don't hold, my clothes will be wet. She further explained that when they have activities she does not go if there were no 3X briefs available for her to wear. She stated sometimes residents wet themselves during activities and it may be visible on their clothing and other residents stare and point. She said this had happened to her once in the past and her clothing and the floor was wet, and she was embarrassed. She revealed she does not go to activities without a 3X brief because I am afraid to be embarrassed like that again. She further revealed the NAs encouraged her to go to activities anyway, they told her things happen, and not to worry about it. If she was wet, they would help her get changed. Resident #8 stated she was sure the NAs would help her if she was wet, but she would still be embarrassed. On 01/04/23 at 4:48 PM an interview conducted with NA #4 revealed earlier on her shift she had to go to Resident #8's room and ask for a brief because a resident down the hall did not have one and was upset and crying. She stated she also found a few more briefs for that resident. NA #8 stated she did not report being short of 3X briefs to anyone on that day. During an interview on 1/5/23 at 10:54 AM, NA #5 revealed Resident #8 wore size 3X briefs. Resident #8 had recently needed to use more briefs because of a medication she was taking. NA #5 explained when the facility ran out of 3X briefs Resident #8 would stay in her room rather than go to activities. Resident #8 would not go to activities because she was afraid the smaller briefs would leak, and she would be embarrassed. An interview conducted on 1/6/23 at 10:23 AM with NA #6 revealed Resident #8 knew when she needed to use the restroom, but often her brief would have to be changed because she could not always make it before wetting the brief. She stated Resident #8 was a very heavy wetter. During an interview on 01/06/23 11:28 AM the Activities Director revealed Resident #8 had told her in the past that she didn't want to come to activities related to her diuretic, but she was not aware of issues with briefs. She stated she encouraged residents to come to activities anyway. She told them they could try coming to activities with a blanket covering their lap. 2) Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, shortness of breath, diabetes, and muscle weakness. The most recent Minimum Data Set for Resident #55 dated 10/15/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no behaviors or rejection of care. She required extensive one person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #55 was frequently incontinent of bladder and bowel. During an interview and observation on 1/4/23 at 5:25 PM Resident #55 revealed she was told she was supposed to wear a green (size 2X) brief, but they were too tight. She told the NAs the 2X briefs were too small and the white (3X) briefs fit better and were more comfortable. She further stated she had an old scar from a surgery she had last year, and the 2X brief rubbed that area and caused her pain, I told them (staff) it hurts. Resident #55 revealed she had on a 3X brief that day, but when the facility ran out, they would bring her the 2X brief. An observation was made, Resident #55 was wearing a 3X brief that fit well. Resident #55 explained that she gets upset when the facility runs out of the 3X briefs. She felt like the NA's were trying to stuff her into something she couldn't fit, and it hurt her stomach. During an interview and observation on 1/5/23 at 10:51 AM Resident #55 revealed she was changed by staff 3 times during night shift and each change was with a 2X brief. She stated staff said that was all they had; they could not find any 3X briefs. Resident #55 was observed with a 2X brief on that fit tightly around her waist. Resident #55 pointed out a reddened area wear the brief was fastened. The reddened area was observed as irritation, the resident's skin was intact. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 10:53 AM NA #6 revealed Resident #55 was incontinent and wore 3X briefs. Resident #55 had expressed to NA #6 that she did not like to wear the 2X briefs because they were too small and rubbed her stomach. 3) Resident #40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke, muscle weakness, dysphagia, seizures, shortness of breath, and major depressive disorder. The most recent Minimum Data Set for Resident #40 dated 12/15/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no behaviors or rejection of care. She required extensive 1 person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #40 was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. During an interview on 1/4/23 at 5:47 PM Resident #40 revealed she was often told that the facility was out of size 3X briefs. The NAs would often go check other resident's rooms for a 3X brief. If they could not find one, they would put her on the smaller green (2X) brief. Resident #40 stated the 2X briefs were too small and uncomfortable. The 2X briefs were too tight and rubbed, they sometimes made her skin sore. She further stated when she voids in the green briefs it leaks and gets her bed wet, and she did not like to be in a wet bed. Resident #40 recalled a time when the facility was almost out of briefs and an NA told her she needed to pee more than once in her brief before she could be changed. She stated that she did not remember the NAs name, but she was very upset and bothered about the whole situation with the briefs. She revealed this had been an ongoing issue and she did not understand why the facility could not order enough 3X briefs. During an interview on 10/5/23 at 10:54 AM NA #5 revealed Resident #40 was incontinent and wore a size 3X brief. 4) Resident #28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, muscle weakness, shortness of breath, neuropathy, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. The most recent Minimum Data Set for Resident #28 dated 10/10/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no rejection of care. She required extensive 1 person assist with toileting and personal hygiene. Resident #28 was occasionally incontinent of bladder and frequently incontinent of bowel. An interview conducted with Resident #28 on 1/4/23 at 5:37 PM that revealed one of the NAs told her there were no more briefs today. She revealed she was crying but declined to say why she was crying. Resident #28 stated NA #4 found some briefs for her and brought them to her room. The facility was sometimes short on 3X briefs, and she usually had some extras in her room. During an interview on 1/4/22 at 4:48 PM NA #4 revealed that morning Resident #28 did not have any briefs and the resident was upset and crying. She further revealed sometimes the NAs put briefs in the resident's rooms, and she went to another room and got a brief for Resident #28. NA #4 stated that Resident #28 wore a 3X brief and the facility sometimes ran out of 3X briefs. An interview was conducted on 1/5/23 at 8:53 AM where Central Supply revealed she was aware that Resident #28 would get upset because she thought she was going to run out of briefs. Yesterday staff let her know the resident was upset and more briefs were brought to Resident #28's room. During an interview on 10/5/23 at 10:54 AM NA #5 revealed Resident #28 was crying on the day before (10/4/23) because she had no briefs. She stated she thought another NA found some briefs for her from another resident's room. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 12:32 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed she was unaware of any issue with the amount of 3X briefs available to residents until 1/4/23 when Resident #28 told her she was upset because the NAs told her there were no more 3X briefs. The DON stated the NAs found some briefs for the resident. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 11:52 AM the Administrator revealed Central Supply ordered supplies for the facility and she used an inventory list to do so. The facility received supply shipments on Mondays. The Administrator further revealed she was not aware of any issues or a shortage of 3X briefs in the facility. No issues had been reported to her. She indicated that having 3-4 briefs per resident per day until the next shipment on 1/9/23 was insufficient. She stated if there were not enough briefs or an issue with ordering, she should be notified so she could help by reaching out to a sister facility or go out and purchase what was needed for the residents. She further stated the residents should not have to worry about having briefs or how many they could use. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 12:32 PM with the DON revealed she was unaware of any issue with the amount of 3X briefs available to residents until 1/4/23 when she was told by one of the residents. The DON further revealed she does not recall ever obtaining supplies from a sister facility. The DON indicated the number of briefs that were in the facility on that day would not be enough to last until Monday when the next delivery would arrive. She stated she expected the NAs to round and provide incontinent care as needed. She also expected the residents to have the briefs they needed and not have to worry about it.
SERIOUS (H)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

A resident was harmed · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to order and provide enough size 3X brief...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to order and provide enough size 3X briefs for 4 of 4 residents that wore 3X briefs (Residents #8, #55, #40, and #28). The residents reported the facility was often out of 3X briefs and the 2X briefs were too small, hurt my stomach, uncomfortable, too tight, rubbed and sometimes made my skin soreand they leaked. Resident #55 was observed wearing a 2X brief that fit tightly around her waist and there was a reddened area where the brief was fastened. This practice affected all residents that wore size 3X briefs. The findings included: 1) Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included diastolic heart failure, hypertension, and muscle weakness. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set for Resident #8 dated 10/28/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no behaviors or rejection of care. She required extensive 1 person assist with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and hygiene. She required limited 1 person assist with walking in her room. Resident #8 was occasionally incontinent of bladder and bowel. Resident #8's care plan revised on 11/12/22 revealed: Resident #8 had bladder incontinence related to impaired mobility. The interventions included provide peri-care as needed and with each incontinent episode. Resident #8 had bowel incontinence related to impaired mobility. The interventions included assist with toileting as needed, provide peri-care after each incontinent episode, and provide loose fitting easy to remove clothing. Resident #8 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) related to heart failure. The interventions included assist resident with bed mobility, transfers, and repositioning. ¼ rails to aid in the resident's mobility. Review of Physician orders for Resident #8 included: Furosemide tablet 80 milligrams (mg), give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for edema related to heart failure, do not change times. 10/14/22 During an interview with Resident #8 on 1/4/22 at 12:19 PM she revealed she wore a size 3X brief and the facility frequently ran out. She stated they were running low on that day, and she knew because NA #4 came to her room to find a brief for another resident. NA #4 came to her room and said they could not find a 3X brief for a resident down the hall. NA #4 asked Resident #8 if she could take a 3X brief from her room. Resident #8 stated this happened frequently, We run out of briefs weekly, that's why I keep a few stashed away in my room. She stated when the facility was low on briefs, she would frequently wear the green (2X) so that some of the other residents could have what was left of the 3X briefs. She stated the 2X briefs were too small for her, but she could fit them better than some of the other residents. Resident #8 further stated she could go to the restroom with staff assistance. She stated making it to the restroom without wetting was difficult because she was on 160mg of a diuretic (a medication that rid the body of excess fluid through the kidneys) daily. She explained that she sometimes wore a pull up when she was up in the chair, but if she doesn't make it to the restroom in time those things don't hold, my clothes will be wet. On 01/04/23 at 4:48 PM an interview conducted with NA #4 revealed earlier on her shift she had to go to Resident #8's room and ask for a brief because a resident down the hall did not have one and was upset and crying. She stated she also found a few more briefs for that resident. NA #8 stated she did not report being short of 3X briefs to anyone on that day. During an interview on 1/5/23 at 10:54 AM, NA #5 revealed Resident #8 wore size 3X briefs. Resident #8 had recently needed to use more briefs because of a medication she was taking. NA #5 explained when the facility ran out of 3X briefs Resident #8 would stay in her room rather than go to activities. Resident #8 would not go to activities because she was afraid the smaller briefs would leak, and she would be embarrassed. An interview conducted on 1/6/23 at 10:23 AM with NA #6 revealed Resident #8 knew when she needed to use the restroom, but often her brief would have to be changed because she could not always make it before wetting the brief. She stated Resident #8 was a very heavy wetter. During an interview on 01/06/23 11:28 AM the Activities Director revealed Resident #8 had told her in the past that she didn't want to come to activities related to her diuretic, but she was not aware of issues with briefs. 2) Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, shortness of breath, diabetes, and muscle weakness. The quarterly Minimum Data Set for Resident #55 dated 10/15/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no behaviors or rejection of care. She required extensive one person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #55 was frequently incontinent of bladder and bowel. Review of Resident #55's care plan updated on 10/25/22 revealed: Resident #55 was frequently incontinent of bladder and bowel and was not a candidate for a toileting program due to lack of bowel and bladder control. The interventions included check and change briefs frequently and as needed and provide toileting hygiene with brief changes. Resident #55 required assistance with ADLs related to chronic health conditions and weakness. The interventions included assist with bed mobility. During an interview and observation on 1/4/23 at 5:25 PM Resident #55 revealed she was told she was supposed to wear a green (size 2X) brief, but they were too tight. She told the NAs the 2X briefs were too small and the white (3X) briefs fit better and were more comfortable. She further stated she had an old scar from a surgery she had last year, and the 2X brief rubbed that area and caused her pain. I told them (staff) it hurts. Resident #55 revealed she had on a 3X brief that day, but when the facility ran out, they would bring her the 2X brief. An observation was made, Resident #55 was wearing a 3X brief that fit well. She felt like the NAs were trying to stuff her into something she couldn't fit, and it hurts her stomach. During an interview and observation on 1/5/23 at 10:51 AM Resident #55 revealed she was changed by staff 3 times during night shift and each change was with a 2X brief. She stated staff said that was all they had; they could not find any 3X briefs. Resident #55 was observed with a 2X brief on that fit tightly around her waist. Resident #55 pointed out a reddened area where the brief was fastened. The reddened area was observed as irritation, the resident's skin was intact. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 10:53 AM NA #6 revealed Resident #55 was incontinent and wore 3X briefs. Resident #55 had expressed to NA #6 that she did not like to wear the 2X briefs because they were too small and rubbed her stomach. 3) Resident #40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included stroke, muscle weakness, dysphagia, seizures, shortness of breath, and major depressive disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set for Resident #40 dated 12/15/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no behaviors or rejection of care. She required extensive 1 person assist with bed mobility, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #40 was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of Resident #40's care plan revised on 11/15/22 revealed: Resident #40 required assistance with activities of daily living related to deficits from a stroke. The interventions included assist with bed mobility and repositioning, 1/4 rail to assist with bed mobility. Resident #40 had bladder incontinence related to impaired mobility. The interventions included clean peri-area with each incontinent episode. Resident #40 had bowel incontinence related to impaired mobility. The interventions included assist with toileting, provide peri-care with each incontinent episode and provide loose fitting, easy to remove clothing. During an interview on 1/4/23 at 5:47 PM Resident #40 revealed she was often told that the facility was out of size 3X briefs. The NAs would often go check other resident's rooms for a 3X brief. If they could not find one, they would put her on the smaller green (2X) brief. Resident #40 stated the 2X briefs were too small and uncomfortable. The 2X briefs were too tight and rubbed, they sometimes made her skin sore. She further stated when she voids in the green briefs it leaks and gets her bed wet, and she did not like to be in a wet bed. She revealed this had been an ongoing issue and she did not understand why the facility could not order enough 3X briefs. During an interview on 10/5/23 at 10:54 AM NA #5 revealed Resident #40 was incontinent and wore a size 3X brief. 4) Resident #28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, muscle weakness, shortness of breath, neuropathy, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. The most recent Minimum Data Set for Resident #28 dated 10/10/22 revealed she was cognitively intact with no rejection of care. She required extensive 1 person assist with toileting and personal hygiene. Resident #28 was occasionally incontinent of bladder and frequently incontinent of bowel. Review of Resident #28's care plan dated 10/13/22 revealed: Resident #28 required assistance with activities of daily living related to advanced age and chronic health conditions. The interventions included assist resident with toileting and transfers Resident #28 was at risk for pressure ulcers related to incontinence. The interventions included keep skin as clean and dry as possible. Review of Physician orders for Resident #28 included: Furosemide Tablet 40 MG, give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to essential hypertension 4/28/22 An interview conducted with Resident #28 on 1/4/23 at 5:37 PM that revealed one of the NAs told her there were no more briefs today. Resident #28 stated NA #4 found some briefs for her and brought them to her room. The facility was sometimes short on 3X briefs, and she usually had some extras in her room. During an interview on 1/4/22 at 4:48 PM NA #4 revealed sometimes the NAs put briefs in the resident's rooms, and she went to another room and got a brief for Resident #28. NA #4 stated that Resident #28 wore a 3X brief and the facility sometimes ran out of 3X briefs. NA #4 indicated when she provided incontinent care to her residents, she knew what sized brief they needed by looking at their body size. She stated the briefs were stored in the north and south unit supply rooms. She explained that NAs sometimes left briefs in the resident's rooms, so when they could not find briefs in the supply rooms they would look in other residents rooms for the briefs. During an interview on 1/5/23 at 10:54 AM, NA #5 revealed that finding 3X briefs in the facility was difficult at times. She would sometimes need to go to other resident's rooms to look for 3X briefs. NA #5 further revealed if the facility was short or out of briefs, she would let Central Supply know and sometimes the residents would have to wear the next size down. She thought there were about 12 residents in the facility that wore 3X briefs. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 11:13 AM Nurse #6 revealed the facility frequently ran low on briefs, especially the 3X. She knew when the facility was running low or out because she would see the NAs scrambling around and looking in other resident's rooms for briefs. She further stated when they were out of 3X briefs the NAs would have to use a smaller size and leave the sides unfastened. An interview conducted on 1/6/23 at 10:23 AM with NA #6 revealed the facility sometimes ran low on size 3X briefs. She stated she worked 12-hour shifts and on a normal shift she changed the brief of her incontinent residents 3 to 5 times per shift. Residents that were on diuretics she had to change more often, possibly 6 or 7 times. An interview and observation were conducted on 1/5/22 at 8:53 AM with Central Supply that revealed when she ordered supplies for the facility, she used a list for items that she orders weekly. She also placed a clipboard at the nurse station for each unit. Staff were to write in any supplies they were running low on and needed to be reordered on the clipboard. These requests were picked up on Tuesday mornings. Staff could also tell her when they needed supplies. She placed orders for the following week on Tuesdays by lunch, and supply deliveries arrived on the following Monday. This surveyor asked Central Supply how she calculated the number of briefs she needed to order. She stated, I know what size brief each resident wears. She reported there were approximately 10 resident that wore 3X briefs in the facility. She stated she did not have an actual list of residents and their brief sizes, but she had a mental list. She further stated there was a list that the home office had, and she would try to obtain that list. An observation of the north and south unit supply rooms were made with Central Supply. The North supply room had a total of 41 size 3X briefs and the south supply room had a total of 9 size 3X briefs. Central Supply stated the next scheduled delivery for briefs was on Monday 1/9/23. She further stated the NAs sometimes store briefs inside the resident's rooms and she was sure there were more briefs in the building. An observation of the north and south unit clipboards revealed no requests for 3X briefs for that week. Central Supply stated she was in the process of trying to place an emergency order for the facility, but it had not been placed yet. Review of the weekly supply order placed on 1/4/23 by Central Supply revealed there were 6 cases of 3X briefs ordered for the facility. Each case contained 48 briefs, for a total of 288 briefs for the facility for the week of 1/9/23 - 1/15/23. Approximately 4 briefs per resident per day were ordered for the week of 1/9/23 - 1/15/23. A second interview and observation were conducted on 1/5/22 at 11:20 AM with Central Supply. Central Supply stated there were more 3X briefs found in resident's rooms. An observation with Central Supply was completed of 9 resident's rooms where extra briefs were found. A total of 66 size 3X briefs were counted from resident's rooms. Central Supply revealed that with the 50 briefs that were in the supply room the total 3X briefs for the residents in the facility would be 116 briefs until delivery on Monday 1/9/23. There would be approximately 3 briefs per resident per day until delivery on Monday 1/9/23. Central Supply stated she was unable to obtain a copy of the list of residents that wore 3X briefs from the home office. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 11:43 AM Central Supply revealed she had not completed the emergency order yet, she was still working on it. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 12:32 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed she was unaware of any issue with the amount of 3X briefs available to residents until 1/4/23 when Resident #28 told her she was upset because the NAs told her there were no more 3X briefs. The DON stated the NAs found some briefs for the resident. She further stated she was not involved in ordering or inventory of briefs. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 12:32 PM with the DON revealed she was unaware of any issue with the amount of 3X briefs available to residents until 1/4/23 when she was told by one of the residents. The DON further revealed she does not recall ever obtaining supplies from a sister facility. The DON indicated the number of briefs that were in the facility on that day would not be enough to last until Monday when the next delivery would arrive. She stated she expected the NAs to round and provide incontinent care as needed. She also expected the residents to have the briefs they needed and not have to worry about it. During an interview on 1/6/23 at 11:52 AM the Administrator revealed Central Supply ordered supplies for the facility and she used an inventory list to do so. The facility received supply shipments on Mondays. The Administrator further revealed she was not aware of any issues or a shortage of 3X briefs in the facility. No issues had been reported to her. She indicated that having 3-4 briefs per resident per day until the next shipment on 1/9/23 was insufficient. She stated if there were not enough briefs or an issue with ordering, she should be notified so she could help by reaching out to a sister facility or go out and purchase what was needed for the residents. She further stated the residents should not have to worry about having briefs or how many they could use.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interviews with resident and staff, the facility failed to maintain wheelchair armrests...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interviews with resident and staff, the facility failed to maintain wheelchair armrests in good repair for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for mobility device (Resident #177 and #180). The findings included: 1.a. Resident #177 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed Resident #177 with severe impairment in cognition and her primary mobility device was a wheelchair. During an observation conducted on 01/03/23 at 11:15 AM, the right armrest of Resident #177's wheelchair was in disrepair with multiple torn spots and ripped lines. During the interview, Resident #177 was unable to tell the surveyor whether the broken armrest had caused any skin irritation to her right arm. On 01/04/23 at 12:39 PM, Resident #177 was seen sitting in her wheelchair in dining room and the right armrest remained in disrepair. She was wearing short sleeves and her right arm was seen in contact with the armrest during the observation. b. Resident #180 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #180's MDS was not completed at the time of the observation. During an observation conducted on 01/04/23 at 12:39 PM, Resident #180 was seen sitting in her wheelchair at the same table with Resident #177 in the dining room. The left armrest was in disrepair with multiple torn spots, ripped lines, and cracks. She was wearing short sleeves and her left arm was seen in contact with the armrest during the observation. During an interview conducted on 01/04/23 at 12:52 PM, Resident #180 stated she had used the wheelchair for just a couple days, and the armrest had not caused any skin irritation so far. Interview with Nurse Aide (NA) #3 on 01/04/23 at 12:42 PM revealed Resident #177 and Resident #180 were from the same hall, and she was the NA who had transported Resident #177 to the dining room this afternoon. She acknowledged that both Residents' wheelchair armrests were in disrepair. She explained she did not pay attention to Resident #177's armrest when she transported her to the dining room. During an interview conducted on 01/04/23 at 12:47 PM, Nurse #4 stated she had provided care for Resident #177 and Resident #180 in the past few days. She stated the armrests for both Residents' wheelchairs were in disrepair and needed to be fixed immediately. She had not noticed both Residents' armrests were torn, ripped, and cracks. She assessed both Residents immediately and noted intact skin. During a joint observation with the Maintenance Director on 01/04/23 at 1:10 PM, he acknowledged that both Resident #177 and Resident #180's armrests were in disrepair and needed to be fixed immediately. During the subsequent interview conducted on 01/04/23 at 1:12 PM, the Maintenance Director stated that he did not know both wheelchairs were in disrepair and explained he had not received any work orders for wheelchair repairs recently. He explained he did not check all wheelchairs routinely, but mainly depended on work orders submitted by rehab and nursing staff to report repair needs. He checked work order boxes located in the nurse stations at least once daily. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 01/04/23 at 1:22 PM revealed she expected all the staff to report repair needs to maintenance department either via work orders or verbal notification in timely manner. It was her expectation for all the wheelchairs to be in good repair all the time. Interview with the Administrator on 01/06/23 at 11:33 AM revealed it was her expectation to have all the care equipment to remain in good repair all the time.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to remove 1 blister card of discontinued and expired promethazine, medication used for nausea and vomiting, for 1 of 5 me...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to remove 1 blister card of discontinued and expired promethazine, medication used for nausea and vomiting, for 1 of 5 medication carts (North medication cart #1) and 1 bottle of expired cranberry juice extract from 1 of 2 medication storage rooms (North medication storage room). The findings included: 1. a. Review of the facility's policy and procedures revised in August 2020 for discontinued medication under Section 5.3 indicated discontinued medications must be marked as discontinued and stored in a secure and separate area from the active medication until they were destroyed per facility policy or returned to the pharmacy when permissible by state regulation. Review of facility's policy and procedures revised in August 2020 for medication storage under Section 4.1 revealed all expired medications must be removed from the active supply immediately and destroyed in accordance with facility policy, regardless of amount remaining. During a medication storage check conducted on 01/04/23 at 2:20 PM, a blister card contained 30 tablets of promethazine 12.5 milligram (mg) that expired on 12/15/22 for Resident #35 was found in North medication cart #1 and ready to be used. Review of physician order revealed Resident #35 was to receive 1 tablet of promethazine 12.5 mg once every 6 hours as needed for nausea and vomiting since 07/24/19. It had been discontinued on 03/14/22. During an interview conducted on 01/04/23 at 2:23 PM, Nurse #2 stated Resident #35 was no longer taking the expired promethazine. She checked the medication cart at least twice weekly and explained she might have overlooked the blister card containing discontinued and expired promethazine. She stated the discontinued medication should be pulled and separated from the active medications immediately. An interview was conducted on 01/04/23 at 2:28 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON). She stated the second shift hall nurses were assigned to check the medication carts on their halls for expired or discontinued medications every week on Monday and Wednesday. She added expired and discontinued medications should be pulled and separated immediately from the active medications in the medication cart. The Unit Manager (UM) also conducted random follow-up medication storage checks on a regular basis. In addition, the consultant pharmacist would audit the medication carts and medication storage rooms during the monthly visit. She attributed the incident as an oversight. It was her expectation for the facility to remain free of expired or discontinued medication. b. An observation made on 01/04/23 at 2:40 PM revealed 1 bottle of opened cranberry juice extract 425 mg with 98 capsules that expired on 10/31/2022 was found in North medication storage room and ready to be used. The bottle indicated it was opened on 04/11/22. During an interview conducted on 01/04/23 at 2:42 PM, the DON stated the medication storage rooms were checked by the designated nurse on the North side and South side on second shift every Monday and Wednesday. She did not know why the expired cranberry extract was not removed from the shelf. During an interview conducted on 01/06/23 at 11:33 AM, the Administrator did not know why the expired and discontinued medications were still being found in the medication cart and medication storage room as the facility had assigned a designated nurse on the North side and South side on second shift every Monday and Wednesday to check for expired and discontinued medications. It was her expectation for the facility to be free of expired and discontinued medications.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0806 (Tag F0806)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide 2 of 2 sampled residents with double p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide 2 of 2 sampled residents with double portions per their preference (Residents #1 and #7). The findings included: 1. Resident #1 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included low body mass index (BMI), vitamin D deficiency, and dysphagia. A physician (MD) order dated 8/29/22 recorded a diet order for regular minced and moist diet, for dysphagia. A significant change Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], assessed Resident #1 with unclear speech, usually understood by others, sometimes understands, severely impaired cognition, and able to feed himself with set up assistance. A care plan revised 12/6/22 identified Resident #1 with low BMI, stable weights, received double portions and fed himself with adaptive equipment. Interventions included to provide and serve a diet per order and preferences. A Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] written by the Registered Dietitian (RD) recorded Resident #1 received a regular minced and moist diet with double portions, he was underweight, weights were stable and trended upward, and he fed himself 75 - 100% of his meals with adaptive equipment. The RD recommendations included to continue the current nutrition regimen and encourage food intake. Resident #1 was observed on 1/03/23 at 12:18 PM in the main dining room. Nurse #5 was observed to set up his meal tray. Review of the tray card with Nurse #5 revealed a diet order for regular minced and moist foods with double portions and adaptive equipment. Resident #1 received one portion of cream corn in a 4-ounce bowl, one portion of mashed potatoes, and one portion of chopped crab cake. Nurse #5 reviewed the tray card and stated Resident #1 should have received double portions and she would notify the Dietary Manager (DM). The DM observed the meal tray for Resident #1 in the main dining room on 01/03/23 at 12:20 PM. The DM stated that Resident #1 had a diet order for double portions and since she did not see his plate from the beginning of the meal, she was not certain if he received double portions. The DM stated that Resident #1 should have received double portions of the crab cake, cream corn and mashed potatoes. A follow up interview with the DM on 1/3/23 at 1:59 PM revealed the diet order for Resident #1 included double portions because she noticed he wanted more to eat, so she asked him if he wanted double portions, and he said yes. Resident #1 was observed feeding himself dinner in his room on 1/04/23 at 5:43 PM. Resident #1 received double portions of his foods. When asked if he wanted double portions of his foods, Resident #1 stated Yes, the food is good. The RD stated in an interview on 1/04/23 at 6:19 PM that the DM communicated to her that Resident #1 wanted more to eat so the RD recommended double portions due to his history of low BMI. The RD stated she expected residents with a preference for double portions to receive double portions of the entree, vegetable and starch. An interview with Dietary Aide #1 occurred on 01/05/23 at 12:02 PM. Dietary Aide #1 stated that she plated the lunch meal on 1/3/23 and would take responsibility for not providing double portions to Resident #1. Dietary Aide #1 stated that she should have looked at the tray ticket for Resident #1 and provided him double portions per his tray card, she stated That was my fault. During an interview on 1/05/23 at 6:00 PM, the Administrator stated she expected the dietary staff to provide residents with foods in the portions per their diet order and preferences. 2. Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included vitamin deficiency, adult-onset diabetes mellitus, severe malnutrition, and dementia, among others. A physician (MD) order dated 8/23/22 recorded a diet order for a diabetic diet. A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], assessed Resident #7 with clear speech, usually understood by others, usually understands, intact cognition, and able to feed himself with set up assistance. A Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] written by the Registered Dietitian (RD) recorded Resident #7 received a diabetic diet, had a BMI of 16.9 (underweight), weights fluctuated, and he fed himself 75 - 100% of his meals. The RD recommendations included to provide double portions due to adequate food intake and monitor for changes. A care plan revised 11/23/22 identified Resident #7 received double portions. Interventions included to provide and serve a diet per order and preferences. Resident #7 was observed on 1/03/23 at 12:05 PM in the main dining room. Review of the tray card revealed a diet order for double portions. Resident #7 received one portion of cream corn in a 4-ounce bowl, one portion of mashed potatoes, and one crab cake. During the observation, Resident #7 stated This does not look like double portions to me, does it to you? I would like double portions. The Dietary Manager (DM) observed the lunch meal of Resident #7 in the main dining room on 1/03/23 at 12:06 PM and stated that she did not see his plate from the beginning, so she could not say if he received double portions. The DM stated that Resident #7 ate a lot and will eat all of whatever he received. The DM stated Resident #7 should have double portions because he requested to have more to eat. The DM stated that Resident #7 should have received double portions of the crab cake, cream corn and mashed potatoes. A follow up interview with the DM on 1/3/23 at 1:59 PM revealed the diet order for Resident #7 included double portions because he often came to the kitchen and asked for more to eat, so she asked him if he wanted double portions, and he said yes. The RD stated in an interview on 1/04/23 at 6:19 PM that the DM communicated to her that Resident #7 wanted more to eat so the RD recommended double portions due to his history of low BMI and skin breakdown. The RD stated she expected residents with a preference for double portions to receive double portions of the entree, vegetable and starch. An interview with Dietary Aide #1 occurred on 01/05/23 at 12:02 PM. Dietary Aide #1 stated that she plated the lunch meal on 1/3/23 and would take responsibility for not providing double portions to Resident #7. Dietary Aide #1 stated that she should have looked at the tray ticket for Resident #7 and provided him double portions per his tray card, she stated That was my fault. During an interview on 1/05/23 at 6:00 PM, the Administrator stated she expected the dietary staff to provide residents with foods in the portions per their diet order and preferences.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately enter the code status as full code ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately enter the code status as full code in the Care Plan for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #35) and the facility failed to revise the Care Plan for 1 of 1 sampled resident to include fluid restrictions and non-compliance with fluid restrictions (Resident #64). The findings included: 1. Resident# 35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A physician's order dated 7/5/22 indicated Resident # 35 was a full code. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident# 35 had severely impaired cognition. A signed MOST form revealed Resident #35 had a full code status. A Care Plan dated 11/17/22 indicated Resident #35 had a code status of Do Not Resuscitate. A Care Plan dated 8/19/22 indicated Resident #35 had a code status of Do Not Resuscitate. An interview with the MDS Coordinator on 1/4/23 at 4:20 PM revealed she was responsible for entering the code status into the Care Plan. During the interview, she reviewed the Care Plan that showed Do Not Resuscitate (DNR), the physician's order that showed full code, and the Resident's medical record profile that showed full code for Resident #35. She then stated she must have made a mistake when she entered the wrong code status of DNR into the Care Plan. She further revealed she would normally transcribe the code status from the orders or during morning meetings, after a resident is admitted and enter the information into the MDS and the Care Plan. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated she expected the code status to be accurately entered into the Care Plan as a result of a transcription from physician orders. An interview with the Administrator revealed it was her expectation that all orders such as a code status, are reflected accurately on the Care Plan. 2. Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #64's diagnoses included cellulitis of right and left lower limbs and localized edema, among others. Review of October 2022 physician orders revealed an order to restrict fluids to 1500 cubic centimeters (cc) daily. A care plan dated 10/28/22 recorded Resident #64 was at risk for nutritional decline with a goal to provide optimal nutrition and hydration status by meeting her nutrition and hydration needs. The care plan did not include the 1500 cc fluid restriction or that Resident #64 was non-compliant. A quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], assessed Resident #64 with clear speech, able to understand/be understood, adequate hearing/vision, independent with eating and intact cognition. Resident #64 was observed on 1/3/23 at 1:00 PM and 1/5/23 at 12:50 PM in her room drinking ice water independently from a 20-ounce cup kept at her bedside. Resident #64 stated on 1/5/23 at 12:50 PM that the physician placed her on fluid restrictions, but that she drank water all the time throughout the day. Resident #64 stated that staff knew that she drank a lot of water and provided her water whenever she asked. She stated, I might drink too much, but I like my water. An interview with Nurse #1 on 1/5/23 at 12:53 PM revealed Resident #64 drank water with her medications and staff provided her water whenever she asked. An interview with Nurse #3 on 1/5/23 at 1:33 PM revealed Resident #64 was aware of her fluid restrictions but drank independently and asked for water whenever she wanted. During an interview with the Registered Dietitian (RD) on 01/05/23 at 4:09 PM, the RD stated that she completed the nutrition section of the care plans. The RD stated that Resident #64 was non-compliant with her fluid restrictions and kept water at the bedside at her request. The RD stated that her non-compliance with her fluid restrictions should have been added to the care plan. The Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed on 1/5/23 at 2:15 PM. The interview revealed that Resident #64 was non-compliant with her fluid restrictions and that the family of Resident #64 was adamant that she keeps water at the bedside. The DON stated that the care plan did not currently include her fluid restriction or non-compliance but that it would be updated. The Administrator stated on 1/05/23 at 6:00 PM that Resident #64 was non-compliant with fluid restrictions and her care plan should have included that. The Administrator stated that she would ensure the care plan was updated.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Menu Adequacy (Tag F0803)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide correct portions of pureed foods per the menu for 2 of 3 residents with a diet order for pureed foods (Resident...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide correct portions of pureed foods per the menu for 2 of 3 residents with a diet order for pureed foods (Resident #42 and #27). This failure had the potential to affect residents receiving pureed food. The findings included: A continuous observation of the lunch meal tray line occurred on 1/5/23 from 11:38 AM to 12:28 PM. On 1/5/23 at 12:23 PM, a 2-ounce serving utensil was observed used to plate pureed ham for Resident #42 and pureed beef for Resident #27. The plates for these residents were placed on the cart for delivery. Review of the lunch menu with the Dietary Manager (DM) revealed Residents with a diet order for pureed foods should receive a 4-ounce portion of pureed ham and a 5.33-ounce portion of pureed beef. During an interview on 1/5/23 at 12:25 PM, Dietary Aide #1 stated that the DM placed the serving utensils on the tray line, and she just picked up the utensils to plate the pureed foods for Residents #42 and #27. The DM stated in interview on 1/5/23 at 12:23 PM that she put the serving utensils on the tray line, but that Dietary Aide #1 picked up the wrong serving utensil for the pureed foods. The DM stated she checked the serving utensils on the line but did not notice that Dietary Aide #1 had the wrong size utensils to use when serving pureed meats. During an interview on 01/05/23 at 3:53 PM the Registered Dietitian stated that she expected residents with a diet order for pureed foods to receive foods in the portions according to the menu. The Administrator stated in interview on 01/05/23 at 6:00 PM that she expected dietary staff to serve foods per the menu at the correct portions.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), 2 harm violation(s), $193,993 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 12 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $193,993 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in North Carolina. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (11/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 11/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Belaire Health Care Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Belaire Health Care Center an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within North Carolina, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.

How is Belaire Health Care Center Staffed?

CMS rates Belaire Health Care Center's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 49%, compared to the North Carolina average of 46%. RN turnover specifically is 62%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Belaire Health Care Center?

State health inspectors documented 12 deficiencies at Belaire Health Care Center during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 2 that caused actual resident harm, and 8 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Belaire Health Care Center?

Belaire Health Care Center is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by LIFEWORKS REHAB, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 80 certified beds and approximately 74 residents (about 92% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Gastonia, North Carolina.

How Does Belaire Health Care Center Compare to Other North Carolina Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in North Carolina, Belaire Health Care Center's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (49%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Belaire Health Care Center?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Belaire Health Care Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Belaire Health Care Center has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in North Carolina. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Belaire Health Care Center Stick Around?

Belaire Health Care Center has a staff turnover rate of 49%, which is about average for North Carolina nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Belaire Health Care Center Ever Fined?

Belaire Health Care Center has been fined $193,993 across 2 penalty actions. This is 5.5x the North Carolina average of $35,019. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.

Is Belaire Health Care Center on Any Federal Watch List?

Belaire Health Care Center is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.