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 F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility did not ensure residents received services in the facility with r...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility did not ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 2 (R13 and R48) 2 residents reviewed for accommodation of needs.
R13 reported he needed his incontinence brief changed. Facility staff did not respond to his request for a period of over 1 hour.
R48 reported he was uncomfortable and wanted to get out of bed. His call light was not answered for an extended period time.
Findings include:
The facility policy titled Call Lights: Accessibility and Timely Response implemented 6/1/22 documents (in part) .
Policy: The purpose of this policy is to assure the facility is adequately equipped with a call light at each resident's bedside, toilet, and bathing facility to allow residents to call for assistance. Call lights will directly relay to a staff member or centralized location to ensure appropriate response.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. All staff will be educated on the proper use of the resident call system, including how the system works and ensuring resident access to the call light.
2. All residents will be educated on how to call for help by using the resident call system.
3. Each resident will be evaluated for unique needs and preferences to determine any special accommodations that may be needed in order for the resident to utilize the call system.
4. Special accommodations will be identified on the resident's person-centered plan of care, and provided accordingly (examples include touch pads, larger buttons, bright colors, etc.)
5. Staff will ensure the call light is within reach of resident and secured, as needed.
6. The call system will be accessible to residents while in their bed or other sleeping accommodations within the resident's room.
10. All staff members who see or hear an activated call light are responsible for responding. If the staff member cannot provide what the resident desires, the appropriate personnel should be notified.
R13 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Emphysema, Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), hand contractures, Dementia and Peripheral Vascular Disease.
R13's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 12/7/23 documents: Urinary/bowel incontinence - always incontinent. R13 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating he is cognitively intact.
R13's Care plan focus area revised 2/29/20 documents:
At risk for falls related to weakness, artificial right and left hip joint, right artificial knee joint.
Interventions include: Make sure my call light/personal belongings are in reach.
I have a physical functioning deficit related to weakness, RA, fracture left leg.
Interventions include: Bed mobility assistance of (1).
Call bell within reach.
Personal Hygiene assistance of (1).
Toileting assistance of (1).
R13's current Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) care card, printed 2/20/24 documents:
1 assist with dressing, bathing, bed mobility, transferring. Uses bedpan for bowel movements and bladder. BRIEF - check and changes as needed and when requested.
On 2/19/24, at 9:53 AM, Surveyor observed R13 lying in bed on his back, wearing a gown, with a pillow under his head and between his knees. R13 was holding the bed control with both hands and was able to raise the head of the bed. Surveyor observed his right (closed) eye and left (open) eye were both crusted, and the resident was unshaven. R13 reported he needed help and was not able to reach his call light, stating it's under my elbow. Surveyor asked if he could reach his call light. R13 stated: No, I can't use my hands.
At this time Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-G entered R13's room. Surveyor advised CNA-G that R13 reported he needed help and could not reach his call light. Surveyor left the room and stood outside of the open door. Surveyor heard CNA-G ask R13 what he needed. R13 stated: I need a change. CNA-G stated: Here's your call light and left the room. Surveyor entered R13's room and observed the call light lying next to him, but was not on. R13 began calling out help me. Surveyor left the room.
On 2/19/24, at 9:58 AM, Surveyor observed CNA-G talking to another staff member (unknown name) who said: I can hear him yelling, I'll get in there. Surveyor remained in the hallway, no staff entered R13's room.
On 2/19/24, at 10:03 AM, Surveyor observed the call light on outside of R13's room. CNA-G entered the room and began clipping R13's roommates fingernails.
On 2/19/24, at 10:05 AM, Surveyor observed the call light outside of R13's room was turned off. Surveyor observed CNA-G standing next to R13's roommates bed while she continued to cut his nails. R13 was calling out: Hello, my pants are full.
On 2/19/24, at 10:09 AM, Surveyor observed while CNA-G was still cutting his roommates nails, R13 was calling out Help me. Surveyor noted no other staff had entered R13's room.
On 2/19/24, at 10:19 AM, Surveyor observed CNA-G standing next to R13's bed. Surveyor entered the room and observed R13 had shaving cream on his face and CNA-G reported she was getting ready to shave him. No other staff had been in R13's room.
On 2/19/24, at 10:28 AM, CNA-G left the room. Surveyor entered, noting R13 was clean shaven, but his eyes remained crusted. Surveyor asked R13 if his incontinence brief had been changed. R13 stated: No, not yet. Surveyor asked if his brief was dirty. R13 stated: It's full of pee.
On 2/19/24, at 11:00 AM, while Surveyor remained on the unit, Surveyor noted no other staff entered R13's room. Surveyor then left the area.
On 2/19/24, at 12:26 PM, Surveyor observed R13 lying in bed with the head of bed elevated. Surveyor observed his eyes were no longer crusted. Surveyor asked R13 if his incontinence brief had been changed. R13 reported someone did come in and change his brief earlier, but was unable to report what time.
Surveyor noted R13 reported to CNA-G that he needed help, could not reach his call light and needed to be changed. R13 continued to call out for help, and that his pants were full while CNA-G was in the room helping R13's roommate. Surveyor noted no other staff entered R13's room or changed his incontinence brief for at least 1 hour, 3 minutes before Surveyor left the unit.
On 2/21/24, at 10:16 AM, Surveyor spoke with CNA-G about R13. CNA-G reported she is on light duty from a back injury, and can assist with feeding and light duty tasks, but cannot help with toileting or changing residents. CNA-G stated: I remember that first day you were here. He (referring to R13) said he needed to be changed, I couldn't do it, so I told his aide. CNA-G stated: Between you and me, he waited a long time. Surveyor asked CNA-G if she knew what time someone did go in to change R13. CNA-G stated: No, no-one came to change him while I was there.
2) R48 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Congestive Heart Failure, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following Cerebral Infarction affecting left non-dominant side, Diabetes Mellitus Type 2, Dementia, Bell's Palsy, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and unilateral primary Osteoarthritis.
R48's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] documents: Frequently incontinent urine, always incontinent bowel. BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 13 indicating R48 is cognitively intact.
R48's Care plan focus area initiated 11/5/22 documents:
Resident has a self care deficit r/t (related to) Activity intolerance, falls, weakness, dementia, anxiety, depression, Bells' Palsy, CI (Cerebral Infarction), pain, OSA (Obstructive Sleep Apnea).
Interventions include:
Assist of 1/2 with bed mobility.
Transfers with walker and 1 assist.
Assist of 1 with toileting needs.
Resident has the potential for falls, accidents and incidents r/t Activity intolerance, falls, weakness, dementia, anxiety, depression, Bell's Palsy, pain.
Interventions include:
Provide a reacher in room as needed for resident to help get items off the floor if he does not use call light to ask for help - initiated 2/1/24.
Reminded to use his call light when he would like to transfer - initiated 12/3/23.
On 2/19/24, at 9:32 AM, Surveyor observed R48 lying in bed awake, with the head of bed elevated. Surveyor observed a touch pad call light on a small night stand table next to the bed, not within reach.
R48 appeared restless and was bending his right knee. R48 reported he was uncomfortable and stated: I want to get up. Surveyor asked R48 if he wanted Surveyor to put the call light on for him, R48 stated: Yes. Surveyor turned R48's call light on at 9:35 AM, left the room and remained on the unit.
On 2/19/24, at 10:01 AM, Surveyor observed a staff member entered R48's room and close the door. The call light was turned off.
Surveyor noted R48 reported he was uncomfortable and wanted to get out of bed. R48 could not reach his call light and Surveyor asked if R48 wanted Surveyor to turn the call light on for him. R48's call light remained on and unanswered for a period of 26 minuets.
On 2/19/24, at 10:07 AM, Surveyor noted R48's door remained closed. The unit nurse reported staff was getting the resident up.
On 2/19/24, at 10:21 AM, Surveyor observed R48 sitting up in his wheelchair in the room. R48 was dressed and well groomed. Surveyor observed the touch pad call light remained on the small nightstand table next to the bed. Surveyor asked R48 how he was feeling, to which he stated: Fine. Surveyor asked F48 if he was comfortable or having any pain. R48 stated: No, I'm OK now.
On 2/20/24, at 11:34 AM, Surveyor observed R48 sitting in the wheelchair in his room watching TV. The touch pad call light remained on the small nightstand table next to the bed.
On 2/22/24, at 8:30 AM, Surveyor advised Director of Nursing (DON)-B and Regional Consultant-C of the above observations and concerns regarding the call light wait times for R13 and R48. No additional information was provided.
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the Facility did not ensure adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 (R59) of 2 res...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the Facility did not ensure adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 (R59) of 2 residents reviewed for accidents.
R59 had an unwitnessed fall outside in the Facility courtyard on 11/23/23. The fall resulted in a hematoma to the left side of the face. The Facility did not complete a thorough investigation to identify the root cause of the fall and implement interventions to prevent future falls.
Findings include:
R59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Dementia, Malnutrition and Fracture of Unspecified parts of Lumbosacral Spine and Pelvis related to a fall.
R59's most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 1/12/24, assessed R59 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 2, indicating R59 had severe cognitive impairments and assessed R59 to need partial to moderate assistance with transfers and mobility using either a walker or a wheelchair.
R59's care plan, entitled Resident has the potential for falls, accidents, and incidents r/t (related to) Alzheimer's, dementia, cognitive impairment, noncompliance to safety interventions, unaware of safety needs, initiated on 10/10/23 had interventions including:
-2/5/2024: Body pillow (or two pillows together) to the side closest to the doorway: right side when looking at the bed from the foot of the bed.
-1/24/2023: bed in lowest position
-10/11/2023: encourage to be in common areas when up.
-10/11/2023: Resident in view of staff for increased monitoring
-10/9/2023: move room closer to nurse's station
Surveyor reviewed R59's Electronic Medical Record and noted the following documented in progress notes:
On 11/23/2023 at 2:50 PM, a nurse documented, Patient had an unwitnessed fall around 1100 (am). Family and DON (Director of Nursing) was called and On Call [sic]. MD (Medical Doctor) wanted patient to be sent out to be evaluated. Neuro check started at every 15 minutes vitals were taken 136/69, 18, 97%. Noted injury Hematoma to left side of face above eye and scar to the left check.
On 11/24/2023 at 10:37 AM, an Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) follow up note documented,
IDT post unwitnessed fall 11/23/22: Writer discussed with the IDT team in relation to resident's unwitnessed fall. Resident was found in the courtyard by staff. She presented at that time with blood to her lip and hematoma to the left eye. Vital signs stable. No incontinence noted. Resident stated was looking for her room. On call [name of medical provider] was notified and orders were given for resident to go out to [name of hospital]. Resident returned with no new orders and CT (computed tomography) scan was negative.
Intervention: All previous fall interventions are in place. Resident is now on 15-minute checks through Monday 11/27/23. All parties of the care team have been updated and family.
Surveyor reviewed R59's fall investigation which documented R59 fell in the courtyard after opening the door thinking it was R59's room. R59 was found with a bloody lip and R59 told staff I was going to my room. The post fall findings included R59 was found on the ground and beginning to get less responsive, and the MD wanted R59 to be sent out. Per the investigation, R59 was last seen in the hallway, however the initial fall investigation given to Surveyor did not include when R59 was last seen, how long R59 was outside, nor what R59 was doing when last seen, i.e. walking or using wheelchair for mobility. Surveyor noted the fall investigation documented R59 was ambulatory without assistance, however review of R59's care plan showed R59 was only to ambulate with staff assistance.
On 02/21/24 at 11:34 AM, Surveyor interviewed Unit Manager, Registered Nurse (RN)-F. RN-F stated she was not working the day R59 fell in the courtyard. Per RN-F it was Thanksgiving day. RN-F stated the door to the courtyard is in the activities room which is down the hallway from R59's room. RN-F stated the door to the courtyard is not alarmed because that is where residents go to smoke. RN-F stated, R59 was put on 15-minute checks after the fall and R59's family and DON-B were updated. RN-F did not have any additional information for Surveyor.
On 02/21/24 at 11:52 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON-B, Regional Consultant (RC)-C and RC-D. Surveyor asked if there was any additional information related to R59's fall in the courtyard in November 2023. Surveyor asked if staff were interviewed and if information was gathered such as when was R59 last seen and was R59 walking independently or using a wheelchair at the time of the fall? DON-B stated she would look and get back to Surveyor.
On 02/21/24 at noon, DON-B provided Surveyor with an additional information for R59's fall investigation which appeared to be part of the initial fall investigation. It was dated 11/23/23 1:22 PM, as was the rest of the fall investigation Surveyor previously reviewed. This document had a section entitled witnesses and had a typed statement from Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)-O which read: LPN-O stated resident was last seen in hallway walking with walker just 10 minutes prior to being outside, as she needs to be redirected [sic]. This document also included a statement from an unnamed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) which read: CNA stated resident was in hallway just prior to going outside.
On 02/21/24 at 12:47 PM, Surveyor interviewed LPN-O. LPN-O informed Surveyor she was working the day R59 fell in the courtyard, but she was not R59's nurse that day. Per LPN-O, R59's care was assigned to an agency nurse on 11/23/23. LPN-O informed Surveyor she did not see R59 until after staff brought R59 inside from the fall. LPN-O stated R59 had a bloody lip and she, LPN-O, told the agency nurse what needed to be done as far as taking staff statements, filling out the fall investigation paperwork, and updating the family/physician. Surveyor showed LPN-O the typed statement documenting LPN-O stating she saw R59 ten minutes prior to falling. Per LPN-O she did not write that statement or tell anyone that statement. LPN-O informed Surveyor she did not see R59 prior to the fall. Per LPN-O, R59 would not be walking in the hallway by self and if she, LPN-O, had seen R59 walking by self, she would have assisted R59 to wherever R59 wanted to go. Per LPN-O, she has only seen R59 walking with one of the Facility's restorative staff. LPN-O stated it was my understanding the staff found R59s' wheelchair by the exit door where they found R59. LPN-O did not have any additional information regarding R59's fall on 11/23/23.
On 02/21/24 at 2:12 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON-B, RC-C and RC-D. Surveyor asked how the statements from LPN-O and the unnamed CNA were obtained. Per DON-B, the author of the fall investigation (agency nurse) would have obtained the statements and then documented the statements in the fall investigation. DON-B stated we do not make our staff write statements. Surveyor explained the concern that LPN-O denied seeing R59 prior to R59's fall. Surveyor relayed the concern for a lack of a thorough investigation because the Facility did not determine who last saw R59, what was R59 doing prior to the fall, if R59 was walking independently or in a wheelchair, how long R59 was outside/on the ground and who found R59. DON-B stated LPN-O reported the fall to us (management) because we were not there due it being Thanksgiving. Per DON-B, LPN-O stated she saw R59 ten minutes prior to the fall walking in the hall. Surveyor explained LPN-O denied seeing R59 prior to the fall and LPN-O informed Surveyor R59 would not have been walking down the hall by self. Given that information, Surveyor explained, Surveyor still didn't know if R59 was in the wheelchair or walking at the time of the fall or how long R59 was on the ground outside. Surveyor questioned if staff saw R59 walking down the hall by self what should be done? Per RC-C, staff redirected R59 as written in the fall investigation. Surveyor explained, LPN-O denied that statement. DON-B stated maybe the nurse was confused to the staff names because she was an agency nurse. Surveyor relayed the concern of the lack of a thorough investigation and asked for any additional information.
On 02/21/24 at 2:36 PM, Surveyor interviewed DON-B and RC-C. DON-B informed Surveyor the agency nurse stated she found R59 at the door of the courtyard and in the Facility's IDT note it said R59 was seen ten minutes prior to the fall. DON-B stated the Facility did 15-minute checks throughout the weekend. Per DON-B the Facility knew how R59 was found, R59 was seen ten minutes prior to falling and then R59 was sent to the hospital for evaluation. Per DON-B, the agency nurse recorded LPN-O's statement and DON-B didn't question it because LPN-O was the one who called DON-B regarding the fall. Per DON-B, LPN-O did say a CNA saw R59 in the hallway prior to the fall. DON-B explained R59 gets up and walks impulsively all the time. Surveyor asked if R59 should be walking by self. DON-B stated no. Surveyor asked what should staff do if they see R59 walking by self. RC-C replied, the staff redirected R59 as stated in the fall investigation. Surveyor asked what redirection meant for R59. Did staff assist R59 back to R59's room or did staff provide verbal redirection? Surveyor explained the concern R59 went to the end of the hallway, through the activities room, opened the door and fell outside in the courtyard without staff supervision. Surveyor explained the Facility's investigation was not clear as to who last saw R59 and what R59 was doing. RC-C explained the Facility's investigation was thorough and DON-B didn't investigate the fall further because LPN-O was the one who informed them of the fall. Surveyor again explained LPN-O denied seeing R59 prior to the fall and LPN-O informed Surveyor if R59 was seen walking down the hall by self, staff should have physically assisted R59. Surveyor relayed the concern for the lack of a thorough investigation to determine the root cause of R59's fall that would allow staff to identify appropriate interventions to prevent future falls.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not comprehensively assess 1 (R43) of 1 resident reviewed for bowel and bladder. The facility did not ensure that a resident who is incontinent o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not comprehensively assess 1 (R43) of 1 resident reviewed for bowel and bladder. The facility did not ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bowel and bladder receives appropriate treatment, services and monitoring to restore as much normal bowel and bladder function as possible.
R43 was admitted to the facility 1/22/24 with orders for a bowel and bladder assessment that was not fully completed per order. The data collected was not comprehensively assessed and resident had continued loose stools while at the facility. During visits by Nurse Practitioners on 2/1/24, 2/9/24 and 2/16/24 instructions were to monitor bowel irregularities and patterns which was not completed. Resident ended up needing a stool sample sent out for C. Diff testing that was not followed up on.
Findings include:
R43 was admitted to the facility 1/22/24 with diagnoses that included End Stage Renal Disease, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Obesity, Difficulty in Walking and Unspecified Escherichia Coli (E. Coli) as the Cause of Diseases Classified Elsewhere.
Surveyor reviewed R43's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an assessment reference date of 1/29/24 documented R43 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated R43 was cognitively intact.
Surveyor reviewed R43's MD (Medical Doctor) orders. Documented with a start date of 1/22/24 was Monitor for s/s (signs and symptoms) of infection (ex: Fever, chills, cough, shortness of breath, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headache, new loss of taste or smell, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea every shift. Documented with a start date of 1/22/23 and an end date of 1/25/24 was Complete a 3 day bowel and bladder assessment upon admission, every shift for monitoring for 3 Days.
Surveyor reviewed the 3 Day Bowel and Bladder assessments for R43. Completed on chart were 1/23/24 night shift, 1/24/24 night shift and 1/25/24 day shift. Documentation was not completed for 1/23/24 day and PM shifts, 1/24/24 day and PM shifts and 1/25/24 PM and night shifts. There was no assessment of the data that was collected in R43's chart.
Surveyor reviewed Nurse Practitioner (NP)-P's visit note for R43 from 2/1/24. Documented was .Chief Complaint: Loose stools, type 2 diabetes . Subjective: Patient seen up in bathroom with therapist present noting that she has been having frequent loose stools. Medications reviewed, senna oral tablet once daily discontinued . Assessment and Plan: .*K59.00 - Constipation*: Scheduled senna discontinued. Monitor bowel pattern for irregularities .
Surveyor reviewed R43's chart and no bowel pattern irregularity charting was completed.
Surveyor reviewed NP-Q's visit note from 2/9/24. Documented was Subjective: The patient is seen today seated comfortably in chair. No reports of pain, shortness of breath or audible cough. Appetite is fair, does report that she has poor dentition which has affected her appetite. Patient reports intermittent diarrhea and constipation, declined need for medication changes at this time. No additional concerns when discussed with nursing staff . Assessment and Plan: . *K59.00 - Constipation*: Scheduled senna discontinued. Notes intermittent constipation and diarrhea, declined need for further medication adjustments at this time. Monitor for bowel irregularities.
Surveyor reviewed R43's chart and no bowel pattern irregularity charting was completed.
Surveyor reviewed R43's Medication Administration Record. Documented under Monitor for s/sx of infection (ex: Fever, chills, cough, shortness of breath, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headache, new loss of taste or smell, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea every shift was Y denoting yes on the following shifts:
2/8/24 PM
2/8/24 Night
2/9/24 Day
2/9/24 PM
2/9/24 NOC
2/10/24 Day
2/10/24 PM
2/10/24 NOC
2/11/24 Day
2/11/24 PM
2/11/24 NOC
2/11/24 Day
2/11/24 PM
Surveyor reviewed NP-P's visit note from 2/16/24. Documented was .Chief Complaint: Loose stool . Subjective: Patient states she has been having loose stool. She denies abdominal pain with this. Medications reviewed, patient not currently on any stool softeners though she is on allopurinol. Discussed with nephrology that we would hold the allopurinol to see if that resolves the loose stool. Order placed for stool for C. difficile .
Documented in R43's MD orders with a start date of 2/17/24 was Send stool sample for C diff, one time only for loose stool for 1 Day.
Surveyor reviewed R43's Progress Notes. Documented on 2/19/24 at 5:58 AM was Stool specimen collected to check for C-diff and placed in fridge for pick-up. Lab faxed and called to retrieve specimen. No GI upset, no nausea. Bowel sounds present to all quads .
On 2/20/24 at 2:57 PM, Surveyor interviewed R43. Surveyor asked if she had any bowel or bladder concerns. R43 reported having loose stools to Surveyor. Surveyor asked how long she has been having loose stools. R43 stated ever since she came here. Surveyor asked if she had told anyone. R43 stated yes, plus they know because they have to clean me up. Surveyor asked if she needs assistance with toileting. R43 stated yes, sometimes it comes too fast and I can't hold it. Surveyor asked how often she has loose stools. R43 stated several times a day up to all day. Surveyor asked if the facility has talked to her or done anything about her loose stools. R43 stated they took a sample yesterday, but I haven't heard anything.
On 2/22/24 at 1:52 PM, Surveyor interviewed Infection Preventionist (IP)-J. Surveyor reviewed the NP visit notes from 2/1, 2/9 and 2/16 for R43 in regards to loose stools and no documentation of bowel irregularity charting. IP-J stated that they discontinued Senna but she does not see where the bowel monitoring was done. Surveyor asked about the bowel and bladder assessment not being completed per order. IP-J stated Nope, it wasn't. Surveyor asked if any of the data that was collected was analyzed for bowel or bladder patterns or irregularity. IP-J stated not that she can see. Surveyor asked if the results of the C-Diff sample that was sent to the lab on 2/19 should be back. IP-J stated we need to follow up on that. Surveyor asked who is responsible for making sure the results are received. IP-J stated the nurses. I am. IP-J stated the results should be in and the lab should have been called on and results followed up on.
On 2/22/24 at 2:14 PM Surveyor expressed concerns about R43's bowel and bladder assessment not being completed as ordered every shift for 3 days on admission to Director of Nursing (DON)-B, Consultant-C and Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A. Surveyor also expressed concerns with bowel pattern irregularity charting not being completed. Surveyor asked for any additional completed documentation and any analysis of the data that was completed. No additional information was provided.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review the facility did not maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, s...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review the facility did not maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise for 1 of 5 (R59) residents reviewed for nutrition and weight loss.
*R59 was identified to have weight loss one month after admission and the Facility initiated interventions. R59 continued to have documented weight loss in the following three months and the Facility did not revise or implement new interventions.
Findings include:
The Facility policy entitled, Weight Monitoring, date revised on 10/2023, documented,
Policy:
Based on the resident's comprehensive assessment, the facility will ensure that all residents maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise.
Compliance Guidelines:
Weight can be a useful indicator of nutritional status. Significant unintended changes in weight (loss or gain) or insidious weight loss (gradual unintended loss over a period of time) may indicate a nutritional problem.
1. The facility will utilize a systemic approach to optimize a resident's nutritional status. This process includes:
a. Identifying and assessing each resident's nutritional status and risk factors.
b. Evaluating/analyzing the assessment information.
c. Developing and consistently implementing pertinent approaches.
d. Monitoring the effectiveness of interventions and revising them as necessary .
R59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Dementia, Malnutrition and Fracture of Unspecified parts of Lumbosacral Spine and Pelvis related to a fall.
R59's most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 1/12/24, documented R59 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 2, indicating R59 had severe cognitive impairments and R59 weighed 112 lbs (pounds) and R59 had a weight loss of 5% or more in one month or 10% or more in six months, not on a physician prescribed weight loss regime.
R59's care plan, initiated 10/10/23 and revised on 2/9/24 documented, Regular diet with regular textures and thin liquids, 10/10/23 wt (weight) 123.6# (pounds) and skin free of pressure wounds; 11/7/23 wt 120# and skin free of pressure wounds; 12/6/23 wt 116# - >7.5% loss in 6 months- skin intact; 1/5/23 wt 112# - 7.5% wt loss x 3 months -skin intact and 2/6/24 wt 110# - >7.5% loss x 3 months and >10% loss x 6 months - skin intact. This care plan had the following interventions:
Monitor meal intake % (percentage) of food and fluids
Date Initiated: 10/10/2023
Offer food preferences
Date Initiated: 10/10/2023
Offer snacks between meals
Date Initiated: 10/10/2023
Supplement: 120mL (mililiters) Med Pass BID (twice a day) (480kcal (kilocalories) and 20g (grams) protein)
Date Initiated: 10/10/2023
Revision on: 12/06/2023
Surveyor noted R59's care plan documented weight loss in November 2023, December 2023, January 2024 and February 2024; however, the only care planned intervention revised or added was in December 2023 which was changing R59's supplement from once a day to twice a day.
Surveyor reviewed R59's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and noted the following weights recorded:
2/6/2024
110.0 Lbs
1/16/2024
115.0 Lbs
12/20/2023
112.0 Lbs
12/5/2023
116.0 Lbs
11/7/2023
120.0 Lbs
10/24/2023
119.1 Lbs
10/23/2023
118.1 Lbs
10/10/2023
123.6 Lbs
Surveyor noted from admission weight in October 2023 to February 2024 R59 had a 10.57% weight loss.
Surveyor reviewed R59's EMR and noted the following active physician's order:
Med Pass 2.0, two times a day for supplement nutrition, Provide 120mL Med Pass. This order had an active date of 01/26/24. However, Surveyor noted R59's Med Pass supplement was originally changed from once a day to twice a day on 11/08/23. From 01/23/24 to 01/26/23 the Med Pass supplement was changed to Mighty Shake due to unavailability of Med Pass. On 01/26/23, when the facility could obtain Med Pass, R59's order was changed back to Med Pass BID.
Surveyor noted the following documented in R59's progress notes:
On 11/8/2023 a Dietary Note documented, Recommend increasing 120mL Med Pass 2.0 from once daily to BID (480kcal and 20g protein) to supplement nutrition. Recent high nutrition risk progress note approved by RD (Registered Dietician).
On 12/6/2023 a Dietary Note documented, High Risk Follow Up - wt loss
Resident triggers for >7.5% wt loss in 3 month. R59's CBW (Current Body Weight) is 116# as of 12/5/23 compared to 3 months ago when R59 was 130.8# as of 8/8/23 (8/8/23 weight was from a previous admission). Weight loss is not desirable at this time .Will continue to monitor and follow up monthly and as needed.
On 12/21/2023 a weight warning note documented, WEIGHT WARNING:
Value: 112.0 [lbs]
Vital Date: 2023-12-20 12:47:00.0
-7.5% change [ 9.4% , 11.6 ]
-10.0% change [ 14.4% , 18.8 ]
Re-weight confirms weight loss. Will continue to monitor and follow up monthly and as needed.
On 2/9/2024 a Dietary Note documented,
Late Entry: High Risk Follow Up - wt loss
Resident receives a regular diet with regular textures and thin liquids. R59 receives MedPass BID (480kcal and 20g protein) for wt maintenance. Resident was not available at time of assessment, so writer spoke with CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) on monthly progress. CNA reports that resident eats well but needs to be up in chair to eat better. CNA states R59 eats about 75% of meals but does not usually eat the whole meal. R59 currently triggers for significant wt loss of 8.3% in 3 months and16.2% in 6 months (2/6/24 110#, 1/16/24 115#, 11/7/23 120#, 8/15/23 131.2#) .BMI (Body Mass Index) is low for age so wt loss is not desirable at this time .Goals: PO (per oral) intake >/=75%, wt maintenance (wt gain of 5-10% is desirable). Will continue to monitor and follow up monthly and as needed.
Surveyor noted R59's Med Pass was increased on November 8th; however, after that increase R59 continued to have weight loss and there were no other documented interventions.
On 02/19/24 at 11:50 AM, Surveyor observed R59 sitting upright in wheelchair in the lounge area by R59's unit. R59 was brought lunch. Surveyor noted other residents were in the lounge area, but the other residents had come from the dining room and had already eaten.
On 02/19/24 at 11:56 AM, Surveyor observed R59 feed self lunch at one of the tables in the lounge area. There were six other residents in the lounge area and only one other resident was eating. Surveyor noted R59 and the other resident that was eating were sitting at different tables.
On 02/20/24 at 12:21 PM, Surveyor observed R59 eating lunch in the lounge area. Three other residents were at R59's table, but those residents had already eaten in the dining room and were talking amongst themselves while R59 ate. Surveyor noted R59 ate approximately 50%.
On 02/21/24 at 10:01 AM, Surveyor interviewed Registered Dietician (RD)-K. RD-K informed Surveyor she is made aware of weight changes either when she reviews a resident's chart, gets a notification from the charting system, or a nurse/CNA informs her of a weight change. Per RD-K, if there is a resident who is experiencing weight changes, RD-K will monitor that resident monthly. Surveyor asked what was being done for R59. Per RD-K, R59 is someone she (RD-K) follows monthly. RD-K informed Surveyor R59 receives Med Pass BID and the staff are encouraging snacks between meals. RD-K informed Surveyor the Med Pass was changed to BID in November and snacks were being offered since admission. Surveyor asked if any interventions had been added/revised recently? RD-K reviewed R59's nutrition notes and stated I think we are encouraging snacks and giving verbal cues. Surveyor explained the concern of a lack of revised/new interventions for R59 since November 2023 and R59 continued with weight loss, with R59's current weight being down ten pounds since the documented November weight. Surveyor asked why the care planned interventions had not been revised even though R59 continued to lose weight. RD-K was unsure. Surveyor asked if RD-K updated the physician in regards to residents with weight loss. RD-K stated nursing staff updates the physician. RD-K was uncertain if R59's physician was updated regarding R59's weight loss, but RD-K stated R59 was discussed at the weekly meetings and RD-K thought nursing updated the physician after those meetings. RD-K did not have any additional information for Surveyor.
On 02/21/24 at 11:07 AM, Surveyor interviewed Unit Manager, Registered Nurse (RN)-F. RN-F informed Surveyor the facility has Nutrition at Risk (NARs) meetings every week where the staff address weight changes with the dietician. Per RN-F, the Nurse Practitioner (NP) is not physically in the meetings, but nursing staff update her afterwards. RN-F informed Surveyor R59 is on a nutritional supplement BID and offered snacks. Surveyor asked if R59 was talked about at the NARs meeting on 2/8/23. Per RN-F we talked about her and at that point we decided to stay with the plan of care, and nothing changed. RN-F was reviewing R59's EMR and stated R59's last dietary note stated R59 eats well. RN-F stated R59's dietary note says goal would be to take in 75% of meals, which CNAs are charting R59 does. Surveyor asked if the NP was aware of R59's weight loss. Per RN-F, the NP did not have much to say about the weight loss. RN-F explained after the NARs meetings an email is usually sent to the NP addressing residents/concerns that were addressed. Surveyor asked RN-F if she spoke with the NP regarding R59's weight loss. RN-F informed Surveyor she could not recall if she spoke with the NP. Per RN-F, R59 does need cues and sometimes R59 eats fine and sometimes R59 does not. Surveyor asked for additional information including NP/physician notification of weight loss and revised/implemented interventions. RN-F stated she would investigate it.
Prior to the end of the day, RN-F provided Surveyor with a copy of an email she sent to the NP on 12/22/23 which documented a list of residents with weight concerns including R59 and stated all residents have been reweighed and we have addressed concerns and put plans in place during NARs meeting. This email did not include how much weight was lost or gained or what type of plans were in place for any specific resident.
On 02/22/24 at 9:12 AM, Surveyor interviewed Director of Nursing (DON)-B and Regional Consultant (RC)-C. DON-B informed Surveyor the facility has the NARs meetings and update the NP after those meetings. DON-B stated when the nurses enter the weights in the chart they (nurses) should reweigh the resident and update the physician/family if there are abnormal weights or weight changes outside of the parameters. Per DON-B, the dietician suggests interventions during the NARs meetings. Surveyor asked about interventions for R59. DON-B reviewed R59's EMR and stated there is a nutrition at risk note from 2/8/24 and the NP was aware and there were no new interventions. DON-B stated not knowing why there were no revised interventions, but according to DON-B, RD-K probably did not have any additional interventions. Surveyor relayed the concern of R59 having weight loss with no new/revised interventions. DON-B continued to read R59's nutrition at risk note and stated the note says continue to monitor monthly. Surveyor asked for any additional information on interventions for R59's weight loss. No additional information was provided.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility did not ensure that its medication error rate was not 5 percent or greater. During observation of medication administration, the facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility did not ensure that its medication error rate was not 5 percent or greater. During observation of medication administration, the facility staff made medication errors with 1 (R37) of 3 residents observed for medication administration for a total of 5 errors of 30 opportunities for an error rate of 16.67%.
R37 was administered a Sodium Bicarbonate 650 mg tablet that expired 12/2023.
R37 was administered a Simethicone 850 mg chewable tablet instead of the ordered Simethicone 125mg Oral Capsule.
R37 was not administered her Losartan Potassium Tablet 100 mg with her 8:00 AM medications because it was not available in the cart and was leaving for an MD (Medical Doctor) appointment. The medication was administered 2 hours later around 10:00 AM.
R37 was going to be administered Losartan with a blood pressure of 106/66 when MD orders document Hold if systolic blood pressure (SBP) < or = 120.
R37 was going to be administered Amlodipine Besylate with a blood pressure of 106/66 when MD orders document Hold if systolic blood pressure (SBP) < or = 120.
Findings include:
Surveyor reviewed facility's Medication Administration policy with a revised date of 10/2023. Documented was:
Policy:
Medications are administered by licensed nurses, or other staff who are legally authorized to do so in this state, as ordered by the physician and in accordance with professional standards of practice, in a manner to prevent contamination or infection.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. Keep medication cart clean, organized, and stocked with adequate supplies.
2. Cover and date fluids and food.
3. Identify resident by photo in the MAR (medication administration record).
4. Wash hands prior to administering medication per facility protocol and product.
5. Knock or announce presence.
6. Explain purpose of visit.
7. Provide privacy.
8. Obtain and record vital signs, when applicable or per physician orders. When applicable, hold medication for those vital signs outside the physician's prescribed parameters.
9. Position resident to accommodate administration of medication.
10. Review MAR to identify medication to be administered.
11. Compare medication source (bubble pack, vial, etc.) with MAR to verify resident name, medication name, form, dose, route, and time.
a. Refer to drug reference material if unfamiliar with the medication, including its mechanism of action or common side effects.
b. Administer within 60 minutes prior to or after scheduled time unless otherwise ordered by physician.
c. If other than PO (per oral) route, administer in accordance with facility policy for the relevant route of administration (i.e., injection, eye, ear, rectal, etc.).
12. Identify expiration date. If expired, notify nurse manager.
13. Remove medication from source, taking care not to touch medication with bare hand.
14. Administer medication as ordered in accordance with manufacturer specifications.
15. Observe resident consumption of medication.
16. Wash hands using facility protocol and product.
17. Sign MAR (Medication Administration Record) after administered. For those medications requiring vital signs, record the vital signs onto the MAR.
On 2/20/24 at 7:35 AM, Surveyor observed Medication Technician (MT)-H administer medications to R37 during AM medication pass.
MT-H took a stock bottle of Sodium Bicarbonate 650 mg tablets and poured 1 tablet into R37's med cup. Surveyor observed the bottle and noted the medication expiration date as 12/2023. MT-H administered the medication to R37.
MT-H took a stock bottle of Simethicone 850 mg chewable tablets and poured 1 tablet into R37's med cup. MT-H administered the medication to R37. Surveyor reviewed R37's MD orders that documented an order of Simethicone 125mg Oral Capsule.
R37 was in her wheelchair and leaving for an MD appointment. MT-H administered 15 pills in med cup to R37. MT-H stated to Surveyor that One of the pills I have to give her when she gets back because the van will leave without her. Surveyor asked what medication was not administered. MT-H stated Losartan because she did not have any left in the med cart. Surveyor asked what she does when there are missing medications. MT-H stated she had to get the medication from the contingency but she does not have time since the van that is taking R37 to her MD appointment will leave without her. Surveyor reviewed R37's MD Orders that documented an order of Losartan Potassium Tablet 100 mg with an administration time of 8:00 AM.
On 2/20/24 at 9:59 AM, MT-H told Surveyor that R37 was back from her MD appointment and she was going to administer her Losartan and 2 other 9:00 AM medications. MT-H told Surveyor she was going to the med room with another nurse to get the Losartan from the contingency. Surveyor noted the Losartan was an 8:00 AM medication and would need to be administered 60 minutes before or after and it was 2 hours after the administration time.
Surveyor observed MT-H pop one Losartan 100 mg tab into R37's med cup. MT-H popped one Amlodipine Besylate 5mg tablet into R37's med cup. MT-H also popped one Loratadine 10 mg pill to the cup. MT-H then takes R37's blood pressure and reports 90/45 to Surveyor. MT-H states I have to go get the nurse. MT-M entered R37's room and took a manual blood pressure and reports 106/66. Surveyor reviewed MD Orders for R37's Losartan that documents Hold if [systolic blood pressure (SBP)] < or = 120 and Amlodipine Besylate that documents Hold if [systolic blood pressure (SBP)] < or = 120.
On 2/20/24 at 10:18 AM, Surveyor asked MT-H about the contents of the med cup for R37. MT-H states there were 3 pills in the cup. Surveyor asked what were the names of the pills in the cup. MT-H stated Amlodipine, Losartan, and Loratadine. Surveyor asked if MT-M gave her (MT-H) any instructions after she took the manual blood pressure on R37. MT-H stated no, she (MT-M) just told her the blood pressure was 106/66. MT-H then added applesauce to the med cup and went to enter R37's room. Surveyor asked MT-H if she was going to administer the medications to R37. MT-H stated yes. Surveyor stated that R37 was out of the parameters for blood pressure and she should hold the medication. Surveyor notes MT-H would have administered the medication if Surveyor would not have stopped the medication pass.
On 2/20/24 at 10:23 AM, Surveyor explained to Director of Nursing (DON)-B the concerns related to the observations made during med pass conducted with MT-H. Surveyor informed DON-B that MT-H was going to administer R37's Losartan and Amlodipine medications with a blood pressure of 106/66. DON-B stated to MT-H that the blood pressure R37 had would not be in the parameters and the MD had ordered the medications to be held. DON-B explained You need to read and check the orders before all medications given.
On 2/20/24 at 1:38 PM, Surveyor asked DON-B if expired medications should be administered. DON-B stated no. Surveyor explained the concern with the observation with MT-H administering expired Sodium Bicarbonate to R37. DON-B stated she should not have given that. Surveyor also explained the concern with the observation MT-H administered chewable Simethicone 850 mg instead of the Simethicone 120 mg capsule as ordered. DON-B stated that is not even the correct dose. Surveyor explained the concerns of multiple observations of errors during the med pass observation with MT-H.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 (R37) of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration were free of significant medication errors.
R37 was going...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 (R37) of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration were free of significant medication errors.
R37 was going to be administered Losartan with a blood pressure of 106/66 when MD (Medical Doctor) orders document Hold if systolic blood pressure (SBP) < or = 120.
R37 was going to be administered Amlodipine Besylate with a blood pressure of 106/66 when MD orders document Hold if systolic blood pressure (SBP) < or = 120.
Findings include:
Surveyor reviewed facility's Medication Administration policy with a revised date of 10/2023. Documented was:
.Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
.8. Obtain and record vital signs, when applicable or per physician orders. When applicable, hold medication for those vital signs outside the physician's prescribed parameters.
On 2/20/24 at 9:59 AM, Surveyor observed Medication Technician (MT)-H administer medications to R37. MT-H popped one Losartan 100 mg tab into R37's med cup. MT-H popped one Amlodipine Besylate 5mg tablet into R37's med cup. MT-H also popped one Loratadine 10 mg pill to the cup with no concern. MT-H then takes R37's blood pressure with arm band cuff and reports 90/45 to Surveyor. MT-H states I have to go get the nurse. MT-H leaves the unit and returns with MT-M.
Surveyor reviewed MD Orders for R37's Losartan that documents Hold if systolic blood pressure (SBP) < or = 120 and Amlodipine Besylate that documents Hold if systolic blood pressure (SBP) < or = 120.
On 2/20/24 at 10:12 AM, MT-M entered R37's room and took a manual blood pressure and reports 106/66 to Surveyor. MT-M reports blood pressure to MT-H and left the unit.
On 2/20/24 at 10:18 AM, Surveyor asked MT-H about what was in the med cup for R37. MT-H states there were 3 pills in the cup. Surveyor asked what were the names of the pills in the cup. MT-H stated Amlodipine, Losartan, and Loratadine. Surveyor asked MT-H if MT-M gave her any instructions after she took the manual blood pressure on R37. MT-H stated no, she (MT-M) just told her (MT-H) the blood pressure was 106/66. MT-H then added applesauce to the med cup and went to enter R37's room. Surveyor asked MT-H if she was going to administer the medications to R37. MT-H stated yes. Surveyor told MT-H to stop and not administer the medications. MT-H asked Surveyor why. Surveyor explained that R37 had specific blood pressure parameters that stated to hold the medications if systolic blood pressure was less than 120. Surveyor told MT-H to wait at med cart, not to administer any medications and went to get Director of Nursing (DON)-B. Surveyor notes MT-H would have administered the medication if Surveyor would not have stopped the medication pass.
On 2/20/24 at 10:23 AM, Surveyor entered DON-B's office and asked her to come to med cart where Surveyor had stopped MT-H from administering R37's medications. Surveyor explained to DON-B that MT-H was going to administer R37's Losartan and Amlodipine medications with a blood pressure of 106/66. DON-B stated to MT-H that the blood pressure R37 had would not be in the parameters and the MD had ordered the medications to be held. DON-B explained You need to read and check the orders before all medications given. DON-B stated both medications should be held due to systolic blood pressure under 120. DON-B was made aware of the concerns for the significant medication errors observed with R37's medication administration.
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not assure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not assure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional practices and include the expiration date when applicable in 2 of 2 Medication Carts reviewed for compliance.
Surveyor observed undated, opened eye drops in both medication carts. Surveyor observed undated, unopened eyedrops that should have been stored in the refrigerator until use in the Rehab medication cart. Surveyor observed undated and unlabeled medications in both carts. Surveyor observed expired medications in both carts. Surveyor observed medications with illegible expiration dates in Rehab medication cart. Surveyor observed loose medications in both carts. Surveyor observed single dose contingency medications loose in both medication carts.
Findings include:
Surveyor reviewed facility's Medication Storage policy with a reviewed date of 10/2023. Documented was:
Policy:
It is the policy of this facility to ensure all medications housed on our premises will be stored in the pharmacy and/or medication rooms according to the manufacturer's recommendations and sufficient to ensure proper sanitation, temperature, light, ventilation, moisture control, segregation, and security.
8. Unused Medications: The pharmacy and all medication rooms are routinely inspected by the consultant pharmacist for discontinued, outdated, defective, or deteriorated medications with worn, illegible, or missing labels. These medications are destroyed in accordance with our Destruction of Unused Drugs Policy.
Surveyor reviewed the facility's Medication Administration policy with a revised date of 10/2023. Documented was:
Policy:
Medications are administered by licensed nurses, or other staff who are legally authorized to do so in this state, as ordered by the physician and in accordance with professional standards of practice, in a manner to prevent contamination or infection.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. Keep medication cart clean, organized, and stocked with adequate supplies.
On 2/20/24 at 9:42 AM, Surveyor observed the Medication Cart for the Spring Street Unit. Surveyor observed 2 of R23's artificial tears eye drops with no opened on date documented. Surveyor observed an opened box and tube of Ayr saline nasal gel with no date opened documented and no resident name. Surveyor observed R65's Latanoprost eye drops with no date opened documented. Surveyor observed R22's Fluticasone nose spray with no date opened documented. Surveyor observed R65's Dorzolamide eye drops with an opened on date of 10/26/23 which would have expired after 30 days or 11/25/23. Surveyor observed a small dirty box in drawer with no top. Inside the box was a single wrapped dose of nitrofurantoin with no date or name, a safety needle in package, 3 suppositories with no date or name, 2 small derma prep pads, a single wrapped dose of digoxin with no date or name. Surveyor opened the Diabetic Box on top of medication cart that contained all diabetic insulins and insulin pens. Surveyor observed R46's box of Humalog insulin with a bottle inside. Written on the outside of the box was expired 1/27/24 in black marker. Surveyor opened the top drawer where bottles of stock medications are kept. Surveyor observed multiple, uncountable loose pills of different shapes, sizes and colors on the bottom of the drawer.
On 2/20/24 12:53 PM, Surveyor observed the Medication Cart for Rehab Unit with Agency Registered Nurse (RN)-T. Surveyor observed R48's Latanoprost eye drops in cart not opened but not refrigerated per directions on package. Surveyor reviewed R48's Dorzolamide eye drops with no date opened documented. Surveyor observed R180's Latanoprost eye drops in the cart not opened but not refrigerated per directions on package. Surveyor observed R2's Brimonidine eye drops with no date opened. Surveyor observed R2's Travoprost eye drops with no date opened documented and a label that was illegible. Surveyor opened the Diabetic Box on top of medication cart that contained all diabetic insulins and insulin pens. Surveyor observed 5 of R178's insulin pens with no date opened. Surveyor observed a small Dermaplast box in drawer with no top. Inside the box was a single wrapped dose of Sevelamer with no date or name. Surveyor opened the top drawer where bottles of stock medications are kept. Surveyor observed multiple, uncountable loose pills of different shapes, sizes and colors on the bottom of the drawer. Surveyor observed a stock bottle of Oyster Calcium 250 mg + Vitamin D with an expiration date of 1/24. Surveyor observed a bottle of Sodium Bicarb where the expiration date was illegible. Surveyor observed a bottle of Nighttime Cold and Flu with an expiration date of 10/2022. Surveyor observed a tube of opened Diflucan Sodium with no date or name. Surveyor observed a tub of VapoRub belonging to R19 with an illegible expiration date.
On 2/20/24 at 1:04 PM, Surveyor asked Registered Nurse (RN)-T if she could read the expiration date on the Sodium Bicarb. RN-T stated 7 something?
Surveyor asked Unit Manager RN-F if she could read the expiration date on the Sodium Bicarb. RN-F stated I wear glasses, I cannot tell.
On 2/20/24 at 1:38 PM, Surveyor brought Director of Nursing (DON)-B to the Spring Street Medication Cart. Surveyor showed DON-B her concerns with the medication cart. Surveyor noted when she picked up the eye drops that were previously undated, they now had dates listed. Surveyor expressed her concerns with undated eyedrops. DON-B stated they should be dated when opened so they can be discarded when they expire. Surveyor showed DON-B the dirty box with the items in it including single dose medications. DON-B stated those were Contingency medications and they should not be in there. DON-B stated the suppositories are stock medications but still should be labeled correctly. Surveyor opened the Diabetic Box and the expired box of R46's Humalog was no longer in the box. DON-B stated expired medications should be disposed of. Surveyor showed DON-B the multiple, uncountable loose pills of different shapes, sizes and colors on the bottom of the drawer. DON-B stated she was not sure why no one would clean them up and discard of the medications. She began to clean the drawer of the loose medications and threw them in the sharps container. DON-B stated she would have Medication Technician (MT)-M who was on that cart continue cleaning out the loose medications. DON-B stated the med drawer should never have been like that.
At 2/20/24 at 1:50 PM, DON-B directed MT-M to continue cleaning out the medication cart. Surveyor asked MT-T if she had already started cleaning up that cart and labeling items. MT-T stated yes. Surveyor noted to MT-T that the cart was observed prior to her clean-up.
On 2/20/24 at 1:58 PM, Surveyor showed DON-B her concerns with the Rehab medication cart. Surveyor expressed her concerns with undated, unopened eyedrops that should still be refrigerated. DON-B stated they will reorder them. Surveyor showed DON-B the box with single dose Sevelamer. DON-B disposed of the medication in the sharps container. Surveyor opened the Diabetic Box and showed DON-B the 5 undated insulin pens. DON-B stated she will get call RN-T and have her start reordering medications. Surveyor showed DON-B the multiple, uncountable loose pills of different shapes, sizes and colors on the bottom of the drawer like the Spring Street cart. DON-B stated she will have RN-T work on cleaning up the stock medication drawer too. RN-T returned to the cart and DON-B instructed her on removing the unlabeled, undated medications and cleaning out the loose pills. Surveyor handed DON-B the expired Oyster Calcium 250 mg + Vitamin D who stated she will have the Unit Managers also check all the expiration dates. Surveyor went to take the Sodium Bicarb bottle out of the cart and it was no longer in the cart. RN-F was standing at the nurses' station behind Surveyor and stated I already took that out. Surveyor handed the bottle of Nighttime Cold and Flu with an expiration date of 10/2022 to DON-B. DON-B stated we do not even use this. Surveyor handed the tube of opened Diflucan Sodium to DON-B. Surveyor handed the VapoRub belonging to R19 to DON-B where the expiration date was illegible. DON-B stated she could not read it either. DON-B handed all three items to RN-F to be discarded. DON-B stated we will start working on all of this.
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the Facility did not ensure 1 (R46) of 5 Residents reviewed for unnecessary ...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the Facility did not ensure 1 (R46) of 5 Residents reviewed for unnecessary medications met the criteria for the use of antibitiotics. The facility uses the McGreers criteria to define wound/skin infections.
*R46 was given an antibiotic for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) without meeting the McGreer's criteria.
Findings include:
Facility policy entitled, Antibiotic Stewardship Program, last revised on 12/2023 documented,
It is the policy of this facility to implement a antibiotic stewardship program as part of the facility's overall infection prevention and control program. The purpose of the program is to optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the adverse events associated with antibiotic use.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
The Infection Preventionist, with oversight from the Director of Nursing, serves as the leader of the Antibiotic Stewardship Program and receives support from the Administrator and other governing officials of the facility.
a. Infection Preventionist - coordinates all antibiotic stewardship activities, maintains documentation and serves as a resource for all clinical staff.
b. Director of Nursing - serves as back up coordinator for antibiotic stewardship activities, provides support and oversight, and ensures adequate resources for carrying out the program .
4. The program includes antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use .
iii. The facility uses the (CDC's (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) NHSN (National Healthcare Safety Network) Surveillance Definitions, updated McGreer criteria, or other surveillance tool) to define infections.
iv. The Loeb Minimum Criteria may be used to determine whether to treat an infection with antibiotics .
b. Monitoring antibiotic use
i. Monitor response to antibiotics, and laboratory results when available, to determine if the antibiotic is still indicated or adjustments should be made (e.g., antibiotic time-out).
ii. Antibiotic orders obtained upon admission, whether new admission or readmission, to the facility shall be reviewed for appropriateness.
iii. Antibiotic orders obtained from consulting, specialty, or emergency providers shall be reviewed for appropriateness.
R46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic osteomyelitis and sacral wound.
R46's most recent Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS), dated [DATE] documented R46 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 15, indicating R46 was cognitively intact and R46 did not take antibiotics during the lookback period. Surveyor noted R46's MDS assessment documented R46 did not have a Multiple Drug Resistant Organism infection nor did R46 require isolation for an infection while a resident. However, Surveyor noted through review of R46's Electronic Medical Record, R46 had a facility acquired Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) infection in October of 2023.
R46's care plan, entitled resident has an infection/potential for an infection r/t (related to) history of MRSA; history of cdiff (Clostridioides Difficile), history of osteomyelitis, possible/history of cellulitis, Positive for MRSA: 2/12/24; date initiated: 09/07/2023 and revised on 02/12/2024 and had interventions including:
2/12/24: Shared room isolation due to active infection, highly transmissible via contact, Full PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) all services brought to room.
Date Initiated: 02/12/2024
-administer medications as ordered, Date Initiated: 01/11/2024
-administer treatments as ordered, Date Initiated: 01/11/2024
-complete hydration assessment, if at risk notify dietician, Date Initiated: 01/11/2024
-Enhanced barrier precautions per protocol, Date Initiated 01/11/2024 .
Surveyor reviewed R46's hospital discharge summary, from June 10, 2023 which documented:
.past medical history insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, peripheral arterial disease, COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease), factor 5 Leiden mutation on chronic anticoagulation with Coumadin, history pulmonary embolism and DVT (Deep Vein Thrombosis), hypothyroidism, obesity, chronic Foley catheter, history of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass 03/09/2023, chronic decubitus ulcer with underlying chronic osteomyelitis was admitted to outside hospital from [DATE] up until 06/16/2023 with sacral decubitus wound infection .Wound cultures from 05/27/2023 grew Morganella .debridement was done down to the bone. Cultures grew lactobacillus along with mixed enteric Gram-negative bacilli. Patient underwent repeat I&D (incision and drainage) 05/31/2023 and this time cultures grew Bacteroides. [R46] did have 1 positive blood culture for Bacteroides. Infectious disease team was consulted and they recommended treating with IV (Intravenous) Zosyn for total of 6 weeks, until 07/12/2023 .
Surveyor noted this hospital summary did not document the present of MRSA in R46's wound.
On 02/20/24 at 11:40 AM, Surveyor observed R46 lying in bed on back. R46 informed Surveyor R46 had a MRSA and Ecoli infection to their wound back in October 2023. R46 stated R46's thinks the MRSA is still in the wound because the facility was giving R46 a cream in the nose, but only for a few days. R46 was unsure if R46 was taking any antibiotics at that time.
Surveyor reviewed R46's EMR and noted the following active physician's order:
Doxycycline Hyclate 100 mg (milligrams), one tablet by mouth; start date of 2/13/24 and end date 02/23/24.
Surveyor reviewed R46's EMR and noted the following documented in progress notes:
On 10/13/2023 at 1:11 PM, A nurse documented, [name of wound physician] gave orders for a wound culture to the sacrum wound, a CBC (complete blood count) for 10/16, and to start Doxycycline 100mg BID (twice a day) x14 days. Case managers updated. Resident will update family.
On 11/2/2023 at 12:15 PM, a progress note documented, Wellness Note: Resident was on Doxycycline x 14 days/ Pressure ulcer to sacral wound and culture revealing positive MRSA .Wound showing no signs of infection at this time. Contact precautions will remain in place while wound remains open.
Surveyor noted the wound culture came back positive for MRSA on 10/17/23.
Surveyor noted R46 was hospitalized in December of 2023 and started consulting with an outside wound clinic after that hospitalization. According to documentation in R46's EMR, the wound clinic contacted the Facility on 2/12/24 with notification of a positive wound culture for MRSA and a new order for Doxycycline. Surveyor reviewed a McGreer's criteria form completed by the facility after the antibiotic was started which documented positive wound culture. This form did not document any signs or symptoms of an infectious process in R46's wound. There is a section to document if the infection meets McGreer's criteria; this section was left blank. Surveyor reviewed the Facility's assessments of R46's wound the weeks before 2/12/24 and noted no documented signs/symptoms of a wound infection.
On 02/21/24 at 11:23, Surveyor interviewed Unit Manager, RN-F. RN-F informed Surveyor R46's wound is getting much better. RN-F thought R46 was on antibiotics a while back but wasn't sure of the date. Per RN-F, R46 came back after a hospital stay and began consulting with an outside wound clinic. RN-F stated the wound clinic ran a culture which came back positive for MRSA. Surveyor asked if RN-F had assessed R46's wound during the time R46 was being seen by the wound clinic. RN-F stated yes and it did not appear to be infected. RN-F stated the facility would not have re-cultured the wound after R46's previous MRSA infection in October 2023 unless the wound appeared infected. Per RN-F the wound clinic called on 2/12/24 and informed the facility they had run a wound culture on 2/8/24 and it was positive for MRSA. RN-F was uncertain why the Facility ran the wound culture. RN-F informed Surveyor R46 had been to the wound clinic maybe three or four times, but according to RN-F, R46's wound appeared healthy looking.
On 02/22/24 at 12:55 PM, Surveyor interviewed Registered Nurse, Infection Control (IC)-J. IC-J stated she uses the PCC (Point Click Care) Program for identifying infections. Per IC-J, whenever someone has signs/symptoms of an infection, fill out the form in PCC, monitor for 72 hours if not sure what infection, but if an obvious infection then PCC will give the McGeer's criteria. Surveyor asked for the McGreer's form for R46's current antibiotic order. IC-J reviewed R46's EMR and stated the antibiotic was prescribed by an outside wound clinic. Surveyor asked how the Facility follows up when an outside physician prescribes an antibiotic. Per IC-F, the Facility would follow up with the resident's primary care provider, the Nurse Practitioner, or the Facility's Medical Director. Surveyor asked IC-J if she had followed up on R46's antibiotic prescription for MRSA wound infection in February 2024. IC-J reviewed R46's EMR and stated I think one of the Facility's physicians was consulted. Surveyor asked what the physician said. IC-J stated she was uncertain. Surveyor asked if a resident already had an infection with MRSA, would they be considered colonized? Surveyor and IC-J reviewed the McGreer's Criteria form for R46. Surveyor stated to IC-J the form does not appear to be filled out completely: the form did not document signs/symptoms of infection nor did it state whether McGreer's criteria was present. IC-J stated R46 did not meet McGreer's criteria.
On 02/22/24 2:14 PM, Surveyor interviewed Director of Nursing (DON)-B, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A, and Regional Consultant (RC)-C. Surveyor relayed the above concerns relating to R46's antibiotic prescription and lack of meeting McGreer's criteria. RC-C stated there should have been a McGreer's form filled out. Surveyor stated it was not filled out completely and there was a lack of documentation R46's primary care physician was consulted. At that time RC-C and DON-B reviewed R46's McGreer's criteria form and agreed it was not filled out correctly. Surveyor asked for any additional information. No additional information was provided.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure residents at risk for pressure injuries or those...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure residents at risk for pressure injuries or those admitted with pressure injuries received care consistent with professional standards of practice for 4 (R20, R29, R5, and R72) of 10 residents reviewed for pressure injuries.
*R20 developed a Stage 4 pressure injury to the left lateral ankle. The wound was not comprehensively assessed weekly.
*R29 was admitted to the facility with a chronic right heel Unstageable pressure injury that was not comprehensively assessed on admission and readmission, a wound treatment was not ordered for three days after readmission, and the wound was not comprehensively assessed weekly.
*R5 was admitted to the facility with a right buttock Stage 3 pressure injury that was not comprehensively assessed on admission, a wound treatment was not ordered for three days after admission, and the wound was not comprehensively assessed weekly.
*R72 was observed not wearing heel boots as per care plan.
Findings include:
The facility policy and procedure entitled Pressure Injury Prevention and Management dated 10/2023 states: Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: . 2. The facility shall establish and utilize a systematic approach for pressure injury prevention and management, including prompt assessment and treatment; intervening to stabilize, reduce or remove underlying risk factors; monitoring the impact of the interventions; and modifying the interventions as appropriate. 3. c. Licensed nurses will conduct a full body skin assessment on all residents upon admission/re-admission, weekly, and after any newly identified pressure injury. Findings will be documented in the medical record. d. Assessment of pressure injuries will be performed by a licensed nurse. The staging of pressure injuries will be clearly identified to ensure correct coding on the MDS (Minimum Date Set) . 4. c. Evidence-based interventions for prevention will be implemented for all residents who are assessed at risk or who have a pressure injury present. Basic or routine care interventions could include, but are not limited to: i. Redistribute pressure (such as repositioning, protecting and/or offloading heels, etc.) . 4. d. Evidence-based treatments in accordance with current standards of practice will be provided for all residents who have a pressure injury present. ii. Treatment decisions will be based on the characteristics of the wound, including the stage, size, exudate (if present), presence of pain, signs of infection, wound bed, wound edge and surrounding tissue characteristics.
In an interview on 2/22/2024, at 10:39 AM, Surveyor asked Registered Nurse (RN) Unit Manager (UM)-F what the facility process and expectation was for newly admitted residents and skin assessments. RN UM-F stated from RN UM-F's understanding they do not have a strict policy who does or does not do the admission skin assessment. RN UM-F stated the RN should assess any wound, IV sites, and that sort of thing and if there is no RN in the building when a new admission comes in, then the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) will do the assessment in their scope of practice which is to collect data and then the RN will delegate and guide the LPN as to what to do. Surveyor asked RN UM-F what an assessment of a wound would entail. RN UM-F stated the wound would be measured getting the length, width, and depth if possible. RN UM-F stated if the wound is open, there may be no depth to that wound. RN UM-F stated the description of depth depends on the individual nurse. RN UM-F stated the LPN cannot stage a wound. RN UM-F stated the new admission wound description gets followed up with an admission audit to stage the wound and if the facility nurses do not know what the stage of the wound is, they ask Wound Physician-L. Surveyor asked RN UM-F if any nurses on staff were wound care certified. RN UM-F did not think so. Surveyor asked RN UM-F what staff members do weekly wound rounds. RN UM-F stated RN UM-F, RN UM-E, and Director of Nursing (DON)-B go with Wound Physician-L to do wound rounds. Surveyor asked RN UM-F who assesses a resident's wounds if they are not available when Wound Physician-L is doing wound rounds. RN UM-F stated the UM will assess the wound or they will delegate it to the nurse that is doing the treatment to get the measurements and assessment and document it in the Progress Notes. RN UM-F stated RN UM-F is not in the building on Fridays, so RN UM-F does not assess a resident until the following Monday if they came in on Friday or over the weekend. RN UM-F stated when the nurse gets a report from the hospital, they should be getting wound treatment notes and if there are not any, they should be calling the physician to get a treatment.
1) R20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of dementia, osteoarthritis, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, autoimmune hepatitis, atherosclerosis to bilateral legs, depression, spinal stenosis, and a history of methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
R20's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated R20 had severe cognitive impairment with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5 and the facility assessed R20 as being dependent for repositioning, transfers, hygiene, and dressing. R20 was admitted to Hospice on 1/18/2023 due to dementia and declining health. R20 had an activated Health Care Power of Attorney.
R20's Skin Integrity Care Plan was initiated on 2/19/2020. R20 had a history of pressure injuries to the right and left shin, right lateral distal foot, and right buttock. R20 had the following interventions in place on 1/11/2023:
-R20 will be encouraged to offload and reposition more frequently; on 10/18/2023 the wound doctor discontinued the heel boots based on the risk vs benefits of the heel boots.
-Alternating pressure mattress; check function every shift.
-Encourage R20 to offload heels.
On 11/1/2023, R20 was assessed by Wound Physician-L for an Unstageable pressure injury to the right medial foot, a Deep Tissue Injury to the right medial distal foot, an Unstageable pressure injury to the left buttock, and an Unstageable pressure injury to the right shin. During that visit, Wound Physician-L discovered an Unstageable pressure injury to the left lateral ankle that measured 0.3 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.1 cm with 100% necrotic tissue to the wound bed. A treatment of xeroform gauze to the wound three times per week was ordered. Wound Physician-L documented the pressure injury was unavoidable secondary to general decline and contraction.
R20's Skin Integrity Care Plan was revised on 11/7/2023 with the intervention to offload left lateral ankle with pillows and encourage frequent offloading that started on 11/1/2023.
On 11/8/2023, R20's left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed by Wound Physician-L.
R20's Skin Integrity Care Plan was revised on 11/9/2023 with the intervention to put a sign in R20's room to not place heel boots that started on 11/8/2023.
On 11/15/2023 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, RN UM-F documented the left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury measured 0.3 cm x 0.4 cm with no depth documented with eschar to the wound bed. No percentage of tissue type was documented.
On 11/22/2023 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, nursing documented the left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury measured 2.3 cm x 2.2 cm with no depth documented with 10% slough to the wound bed. 90% of the wound did not have a tissue type documented.
On 11/29/2023 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, nursing documented the left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury measured 2 cm x 2.2 cm with no depth documented with 90% eschar. 10% of the wound did not have a tissue type defined.
On 12/6/2023, R20's left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed by Wound Physician-L. The wound measured 0.3 cm x 0.3 cm x 0.1 cm with 100% slough.
On 12/13/2023, R20's left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed by Wound Physician-L.
On 12/20/2023 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, RN UM-F documented the left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury measured 0.3 cm x 0.2 cm with no depth documented with 100% slough.
R20's Skin Integrity Care Plan was revised on 12/26/2023 with the intervention to use bilateral body pillows for offloading that started on 12/23/2023.
On 12/27/2023 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, RN UM-F documented the left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury measured 0.2 cm x 0.2 cm with no depth documented. No documentation was found describing the wound bed.
No documentation was found of a wound assessment of the left lateral ankle from 12/27/2023 until 1/10/2024.
On 1/10/2024, R20's left lateral ankle Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed by Wound Physician-L and the pressure injury was staged at a Stage 4. The wound measured 1.5 cm x 1.5 cm x 0.1 cm with 100% slough. Wound Physician-L documented the post-debridement assessment of this previously unstageable necrotic wound has revealed the underlying deep tissue at the muscle/fascia level, which had been obscured by necrosis prior to this point. This wound has now revealed itself to be a Stage 4 pressure injury. This is not a wound deterioration.
Wound Physician-L comprehensively assessed the left lateral ankle Stage 4 pressure injury weekly on 1/17/2024 and 1/24/2024.
On 1/31/2024 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, RN UM-F documented the left lateral ankle Stage 4 pressure injury measured 1 cm x 1.3 cm with no depth documented with granulation and slough. No documentation was found describing the percentages of tissue type in the wound bed.
On 2/7/2024, R20's left lateral ankle Stage 4 pressure injury was comprehensively assessed by Wound Physician-L. The wound measured 2 cm x 2.5 cm x 0.1 cm with 50% slough and 50% granulation tissue. Wound Physician-L documented the wound had exacerbated due to generalized decline of R20.
On 2/14/2024 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, RN UM-F documented the left lateral ankle Stage 4 pressure injury measured 1.8 cm x 2.2 cm with no depth documented. No documentation was found describing the wound bed.
On 2/21/2024 at 2:12 PM, Surveyor observed R20 sitting in a Broda chair with socks on and no heel boots on. A sign was observed on the wall to read no heel boots. Wound Physician-L, RN UM-F, and RN UM-E came into the room to do R20's weekly comprehensive assessment of the left lateral ankle Stage 4 pressure injury. The ankle wound was on the bony prominence where there was no subcutaneous tissue leading to a quickly developing Stage 4 pressure injury. The dressing was removed from the outer ankle with serous drainage on the dressing. The wound bed was 90% healthy pink tissue and 10% slough. Wound Physician-L stated R20 was a hospice patient and was declining with poor nutritional intake. Wound Physician-L stated R20's left foot was contracted inwards with the bone pushing out thinning out the tissue in that area and R20's circulation was not great either leading to even more compromise of the area.
On 2/22/2024 at 10:39 AM, Surveyor asked RN UM-F why no depth was documented on R20's wound assessments by RN UM-F. RN UM-F stated R20's wound was very superficial, and RN UM-F does not put in a depth because if RN UM-F would take a sterile swab to measure the depth, RN UM-F would not get the right depth. Surveyor reviewed with RN UM-F the documentation RN UM-F wrote when describing the tissue to the wound bed. Surveyor asked RN UM-F why percentages of tissue type were not documented in order to see either a progression or decline of the wound. RN UM-F stated RN UM-F can tell if a wound is scabbed or has eschar, but slough, granulation, or epithelial tissue RN UM-F is unclear about describing. RN UM-F stated RN UM-F asks Wound Physician-L about the Staging and tissue type and RN UM-F stated RN UM-F does not want to chart the wrong thing if RN UM-F does not know what they are looking at.
On 2/22/2024 at 12:40 PM, Surveyor shared with DON-B the concern R20's left lateral ankle Stage 4 pressure injury was not comprehensively assessed weekly. No further information was provided at that time.
2) R29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of congestive heart failure, morbid obesity, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, anxiety, depression, peripheral vascular disease, and fibromyalgia.
R29's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated R29 was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13.
R20's Self Care Deficit Care Plan initiated on 4/13/2023 assessed R29 as needing assist of one with bed mobility, dressing, and toileting needs. R29 did not have an activated Power of Attorney.
On 4/11/2023 on the Head to Toe Skin Check, nursing charted R29 was admitted with an Unstageable pressure injury to the right heel and an Unstageable pressure injury to the coccyx. No measurements or wound descriptors were documented on this form.
On 4/11/2023 on the Admit/Readmit Assessment form, Director of Nursing (DON)-B documented the following:
-left heel Deep Tissue Injury measuring 5 cm x 5 cm
-coccyx Stage 2 pressure injury measuring 7 cm x 5 cm x 0.1 cm
-coccyx Stage 2 pressure injury measuring 2 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.1 cm
-coccyx Stage 2 pressure injury measuring 2 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.1 cm
-coccyx Stage 2 pressure injury measuring 1 cm x 1 cm x 0.1 cm
Surveyor noted no descriptors of the wound bed were documented. Surveyor noted DON-B documented the skin assessment on 5/9/2023, four weeks after R29 was admitted .
A treatment was obtained on 4/11/2023 for the left heel and coccyx pressure injuries.
On 4/12/2023, R29's wounds were assessed by Wound Physician-L. R29's Unstageable coccyx wound measured 5 cm x 4 cm x 0.1 cm with 50% slough, 20% granulation, and 30% skin. R29's Unstageable right heel wound measured 4 cm x 3 cm x 0.1 cm with 60% slough and 40% granulation. Wound treatments were changed by Wound Physician-L at that time.
R29's Skin Integrity Care Plan was initiated on 4/13/2023 with the following interventions:
-Administer treatments as ordered and monitor effectiveness.
-Apply an alternating pressure mattress to the bed, check function every shift for proper inflation.
-Assess pain level and administer pain medication as ordered.
-Braden assessment on admission and per policy.
-Encourage adequate hydration.
-Encourage to float heels when in bed.
-Encourage to turn and reposition every 2-3 hours.
-Monitor/document/report to physician as needed for changes in skin status: appearance, color, wound healing, signs/symptoms of infection, wound size, stage.
-Notify physician for new orders, administer treatments as ordered, inform family.
-Observe for redness, open areas, scratches, cuts, bruises, and report changes to the nurse.
-Skin inspection weekly and with cares.
R29's pressure injuries were comprehensively assessed weekly. R29's coccyx pressure injury healed on 4/26/2023 and R29's right heel wound healed on 6/7/2023.
On 6/14/2023, R29 was admitted to the hospital and returned to the facility on 6/16/2023.
On 6/16/2023 on the Admit/Readmit Assessment form, Registered Nurse (RN) Unit Manager (UM)-F documented the following: right heel Unstageable pressure injury measuring 1 cm x 1.7 cm. Surveyor noted a thorough assessment of the pressure injury was documented, no depth was documented and no wound characteristics were documented. Surveyor noted RN UM-F documented the skin assessment on 6/19/2023, three days after R29 was readmitted to the facility.
A treatment was ordered for the right heel Unstageable pressure injury on 6/19/2023. Surveyor noted no treatment was ordered or administered to the wound for three days.
On 6/21/2023, R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed by Wound Physician-L. The pressure injury measured 3 cm x 2 cm x 0.1 cm with 30% slough and 70% granulation. Wound Physician-L changed the treatment at that time.
R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed weekly from 6/21/2023 until 8/9/2023. No documentation was found on 8/9/23 of a comprehensive assessment of R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury.
R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed weekly until 9/27/2023 when the wound healed. Surveyor noted the treatment continued to the right heel until 10/9/2023.
On 10/13/2023 on the Head to Toe Skin form, RN UM-F documented R29's right heel opened up and is an Unstageable pressure injury measuring 3 cm x 1.2 cm with no depth documented. Surveyor noted no wound descriptors were documented. A treatment was obtained at that time.
On 10/14/2023, R29 was sent to the hospital after a fall from bed. The hospital documentation referred to the right heel wound as a diabetic ulcer. R29 reported to the hospital staff the right heel had increased drainage over the past few weeks. The clinical exam showed the right heel ulcer to have minimal serosanguineous drainage with erythema to the peri ulcer and minimal tenderness. R29 did not have an elevated blood count indicating an infective process was not present, and x-ray results showed no osteomyelitis. The ulcer measured 3 cm x 3 cm x 0.1 cm with a granular base and eschar to the edges of the wound. No warmth, drainage, or malodor was present. R29 was ordered antibiotic for cellulitis with no indications of an infection while hospitalized .
On 10/18/2023, R29 was readmitted to the facility.
On 10/18/2023, R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed by Wound Physician-L. The pressure injury measured 3 cm x 2 cm x 0.1 cm with 10% slough and 90% granulation. A treatment order was obtained at that time.
R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed weekly from 10/18/2023 until 11/22/2023 when R29 was at an appointment and could not be seen by Wound Physician-L.
On 11/22/2023 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, DON-B documented R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury measured 2 cm x 2 cm with no depth documented with 100% slough.
R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury was comprehensively assessed weekly by Wound Physician-L.
Wound Physician-L ordered a wound culture on 1/17/2024 that came back positive for Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) and an antibiotic was ordered for 14 days.
On 2/21/2024, at 2:25 PM, Surveyor observed R29 in bed with heels floated on pillows. Wound Physician-L, RN UM-F, and RN UM-E came into the room to do the weekly comprehensive assessment of the right heel Unstageable pressure injury. Wound Physician-L stated R29's right heel has a chronic wound that they have tried many different approaches to heal such as and MRI and CT of the heel which all came back negative for an infective process. Wound Physician-L stated a wound culture was obtained because the wound was not healing when they discovered MRSA in the wound and started an antibiotic to promote healing. Wound Physician-L stated R29 was wearing heel boots and the location of the wound could possibly have been affected by the boots, so they tried to float the heels on pillows instead. Wound Physician-L stated R29 was good about offloading the heels, but the wound just keeps returning after it has been healed. RN UM-F stated R29's heel wound has healed twice and then a couple of week later it would open up again. Wound Physician-L stated the skin on the heel is fragile with the opening and closing of the wound, so it is more susceptible to opening up again. The wound measured 2.5 cm x 2.5 cm with a superficial depth and healthy pink tissue to the wound bed with dark tissue to the peri wound.
In an interview on 2/22/2024 at 10:39 AM, Surveyor asked RN UM-F what the etiology of R29's right heel wound was. RN UM-F stated R29 had told them R29 had stepped on a piece of glass many years ago and has had problems with that heel ever since, but the daughter said that never happened. RN UM-F stated at one time Wound Physician-L thought the wound was a diabetic ulcer, but after the area reopened, Wound Physician-L categorized it as a pressure injury. Surveyor asked RN UM-F when the wound healed on 9/27/2023, why the treatment was not discontinued. RN UM-F stated R29 had such high anxiety, that R29 wanted the treatment to continue, hoping that would keep the wound from reopening. RN UM-F stated they decided not to put heel boots on because of R29's anxiety and they thought maybe the boot was causing the wound to reopen. RN UM-F stated they tried many different things to heal the wound like taking the boot off when up in a chair, and then trying with no boots at all. Surveyor asked RN UM-F why comprehensive assessments were not completed when R29 was readmitted to the facility. RN UM-F stated RN UM-F was not in the building when R29 came back. RN UM-F stated they are trying to teach staff to do complete assessments on residents, but that has not always happened.
On 2/22/2024 at 12:40 PM, Surveyor shared with DON-B the concerns R29's right heel Unstageable pressure injury that was not comprehensively assessed on admission and readmission, a wound treatment was not ordered for three days after readmission on [DATE], and the wound was not comprehensively assessed weekly. No further information was provided at that time.
3) R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of fractures to the lumbar vertebra, ribs, and thorax, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and chronic respiratory failure.
R5's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated R5 had moderate cognitive impairment with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 and the facility assessed R5 as needing assist with all activities of daily living including eating and is dependent on staff for bathing and dressing. R5 had an activated Power of Attorney.
On 1/26/2024 on the Admit/Readmit Assessment form, Registered Nurse (RN) Unit Manager (UM)-F documented R5 had a Stage 3 pressure injury to the right buttock that measured 4 cm x 4 cm with no depth documented. The open area was red in color at the base of the wound.
R5's Skin Integrity Care Plan was initiated on 1/26/2024 with interventions to encourage/assist R5 with repositioning as needed and skin will be assessed weekly with findings documented.
A treatment order was obtained on 1/29/2024 for the right buttock Stage 3 pressure injury, three days after admission.
On 1/31/2024, R5's right buttock Stage 3 pressure injury was assessed by Wound Physician-L. R5's pressure injury measured 4 cm x 3 cm x 0.1 cm with 20% granulation and 80% skin.
On 2/7/2024 on the Skin and Wound Evaluation form, RN UM-F documented the right buttock Stage 3 pressure injury measured 4 cm x 3.1 cm with no depth documented. Surveyor noted no wound descriptors were documented.
On 2/14/2024, Wound Physician-L documented the right buttock pressure injury had healed.
On 2/21/2024 at 2:18 PM, Surveyor observed R5 in bed. R5 had an air mattress on the bed and the heels were floated.
In an interview on 2/22/2024 at 12:32 PM, RN UM-F stated RN UM-F did not complete the skin section of the Admit/Readmit Assessment form on 1/26/2024 because when RN UM-F did an audit of the new admission paperwork on 1/29/2024, RN UM-F saw that it had not been completed so RN UM-F used the measurements from the nurse that had done the admission. RN UM-F stated the right buttock pressure injury was a Stage 2 and there was a treatment for barrier cream and that was appropriate for a Stage 2 pressure injury. RN UM-F stated when Wound Physician-L saw R5, Wound Physician-L said the pressure injury was a Stage 3, so RN UM-F changed the staging at that time to reflect the Stage 3. Surveyor reviewed R5's orders and R5 did not have an order for barrier cream.
On 2/22/2024 at 12:40 PM, Surveyor shared with DON-B the concerns R5's right buttock Stage 3 pressure injury that was not comprehensively assessed on admission, a wound treatment was not ordered for three days, the wound was not comprehensively assessed until seen by Wound Physician-L, 5 days after admission, and the wound was not comprehensively assessed weekly. No further information was provided at that time.
4) R72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of traumatic brain injury, dysphagia, epilepsy and asthma.
R72 was admitted to the facility with right buttock unstageable pressure injury that is healing.
The alteration in skin integrity care plan dated 1/16/22 indicate encourage to float heels when in bed.
On 2/19/24 at 9:12 am, Surveyor observed R72 in bed laying on the left side with no offloading of heels and R72 contracted knees did not have any offloading between the bony prominence
On 2/20/24 at 8:04 a.m., Surveyor observed R72 in bed laying on the left side with no offloading of heels and R72 contracted knees did not have any offloading between the bony prominence.
On 2/20/24 at 12:13 p.m., Surveyor observed R72 in bed laying on the left side with boots on the heels but there still wasn't any offloading between the knees
Surveyor was unable to observed treatment on R72 right buttock unstageable pressure injury due to R72 being sent to the hospital for a change in condition.
On 2/22/24 at 10:29 a.m., Surveyor interviewed DON (Director of Nursing)-B. Surveyor explained the observations made on R72 without any offloading for the heels and between the knees. DON-B stated she understood the concern and would look into therapy for R72 regarding positioning and help with offloading areas when R72 returned to the facility.
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program de...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility did not maintain a system of surveillance, tracking and trending of infections and identifying possible communicable diseases or infections before they can spread to other persons in the facility potentially affecting 75 of 75 residents.
~ The facility had an Infection Control Program that did not accurately track, trend or analyze the infection rate and data to help decrease the rates, numbers and spread of infections in the facility. No maps were completed to identify monthly infections on units. Graphs that were created grouped all infections together as Healthcare Associated Infections (HAI's) and was not being analyzed.
~ The facility had 3 outbreaks of Covid 19 in 2023. There were no summaries, timelines, contact tracing or documentation of the outbreaks explaining the course of the outbreak and the steps the facility took to mitigate the outbreak.
~ R29, R24 and R43 had signs and symptoms of infections and Transmission Based Precautions were not put in place immediately to potentially prevent further spread of the potential infections to other residents.
~Maintenance Technician-S was observed entering and exiting R12 and R46's shared room without washing their hands or donning a gown and gloves. The shared room had singe on the door for Enhanced Barrier Precautions and Contact Precaution were necessary.
~R46 is an immunocompromised resident and was placed in a room with R12 who had a history of MRSA (Methicillin-Resistant Staphyloccous Aures) in August 2023 against CDC (Centers for Disease Control) guidance and facility policy. In October 2023 R46 tested positive for MRSA.
~ On R46 and R12's sink there were bins of unlabeled wound care products that were being used on both residents possibly cross contaminating and spreading infection.
~ During Medication Pass, observations of staff not performing hand hygiene before preparing medications, before administering medications, before administering eye drops and after touching resident to take vital signs was observed. Staff did not don gloves to administer eye drops and touched residents' bare skin on face.
~Staff used multi-use equipment to take blood pressures and did not clean the equipment in between residents. Staff used a glucometer that is used for multiple residents on a resident and then did not clean it with an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) registered healthcare disinfectant. Staff used an alcohol wipe that does not prevent the transmission of bloodborne pathogens.
~Surveyor had observations of R177's Foley catheter on floor during survey.
Findings included:
Surveyor reviewed facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program policy with a revision date of 05/2023. Documented was:
Policy:
This facility has established and maintains an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections as per accepted national standards and guidelines.
Definitions:
Staff includes all facility staff (direct and indirect care functions), contracted staff, consultants, volunteers, others who provide care and services to residents on behalf of the facility, and students in the facility's nurse aide training programs or from affiliated academic institutions.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. The designated Infection Preventionist is responsible for oversight of the program and serves as a consultant to our staff on infectious diseases, resident room placement, implementing isolation precautions, staff and resident exposures, surveillance, and epidemiological investigations of exposures of infectious diseases.
2. All staff are responsible for following all policies and procedures related to the program.
3. Surveillance:
a. A system of surveillance is utilized for prevention, identifying, reporting, investigating, and controlling infections and communicable diseases for all residents, staff, volunteers, visitors, and other individuals providing services under a contractual arrangement based upon a facility assessment and accepted national standards.
b. The Infection Preventionist serves as the leader in surveillance activities, maintains documentation of incidents, findings, and any corrective actions made by the facility and reports surveillance findings to the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee.
The Registered Nurses (RNs) and Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) participate in surveillance through assessment of residents and reporting changes in condition to the residents' physicians and management staff, per protocol for notification of changes and in-house reporting of communicable diseases and infections.
a. All staff shall assume that all residents are potentially infected or colonized with an that could be transmitted during the course of providing resident care services.
b. Hand hygiene shall be performed in accordance with our facility's established hand hygiene procedures.
c. All staff shall use personal protective equipment (PPE) according to established facility governing the use of PPE.
d. Licensed staff shall adhere to safe injection and medication administration practices, a described in relevant facility policies.
e. Environmental cleaning and disinfection shall be performed according to facility policy. All staff have responsibilities related to the cleanliness of the facility, and are to report problem: outside of their scope to the appropriate department.
5. Isolation Protocol (Transmission-Based Precautions):
a. A resident with an infection or communicable disease shall be placed on transmission-based precautions as recommended by current CDC guidelines.
b. Residents on transmission-based precautions should be placed into a private/single room if available/appropriate, or are cohorted with residents with the same pathogen, or share a room with a roommate with limited risk factors, in accordance with national standards.
c. Residents will be placed on the least restrictive transmission-based precaution for the shortest duration possible under the circumstances.
d. When a resident on transmission-based precautions must leave the resident care unit/area, the charge nurse on that unit/area shall communicate to all involved departments the nature of the isolation and shall prepare the resident for transport in accordance with current transmission-based precaution guidelines.
e. Residents with tuberculosis are placed on airborne precautions and placed in a special room that is equipped with special air handling and ventilation capacity. If no such room is available, the residents will be discharged to a facility with such capabilities.
f. Immunocompromised and myelosuppressed residents shall be placed in a private room if possible and shall not be placed with any resident having an infection or communicable disease .
10. Equipment Protocol:
a. All reusable items and equipment requiring special cleaning, disinfection, or sterilization shall be cleaned in accordance with our current procedures governing the cleaning and sterilization of soiled or contaminated equipment.
b. Single-use disposable equipment is an alternative to sterilizing reusable medical instruments. Single-use devices must be discarded after use and are never used for more than one resident.
c. Reusable items potentially contaminated with infectious materials shall be placed in an impervious clear plastic bag. Label bag as CONTAMINATED and place in the soiled utility room for pickup and processing.
d. The central supply clerk will decontaminate equipment with a germicidal detergent prior to storing for reuse .
Surveyor reviewed facility's Glucometer Disinfection policy with an implementation date of 10/23. Documented was:
Policy:
The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the disinfection of capillary-blood glucose sampling devices to prevent transmission of blood borne diseases to residents and employees.
Definitions:
Cleaning is the removal of visible soil from objects and surfaces normally accomplished manually or mechanically using water with detergents or enzymatic products.
Disinfection is a process that eliminates many or all pathogenic microorganisms, except bacterial spores, on inanimate objects.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines
1. The facility will ensure blood glucometers will be cleaned and disinfected after each use and according to manufacturer's instructions for multi-resident use.
2. If the manufacturers are unable to provide information specifying how the glucometer should be cleaned and disinfected then the meter will not be used for multiple residents.
3. The glucometers will be disinfected with a wipe pre-saturated with an EPA A registered healthcare disinfectant that is effective against HIV, Hepatitis C and Hepatitis B virus.
4. Glucometers will be cleaned and disinfected after each use and according to manufacturer's instructions regardless of whether they are intended for single resident or multiple resident use.
5. Procedure:
a. Obtain needed equipment and supplies: Gloves, glucometer, alcohol pads, gauze pads, sin lancet, blood glucose testing strips, disinfecting wipes.
b. Wash hands.
c. Explain the procedure to the resident.
d. Provide privacy.
e. Put on gloves.
f. Obtain capillary blood glucose sampling according to facility policy.
g. Remove and discard gloves, perform hand hygiene prior to exiting room.
h. Reapply gloves if there is visible contamination of the device or if the resident is HIV or Hepatitis B or C positive.
i. Retrieve (2) disinfectant wipes from container.
j. Using first wipe, clean first to remove heavy soil, blood and/or other contaminants left on the surface of the glucometer.
k. After cleaning, use second wipe to disinfect the glucometer thoroughly with the disinfectant wipe, following the manufacturer's instructions. Allow the glucometer to air dry.
l. Discard disinfectant wipes in waste receptacle.
m. Perform hand hygiene.
A. Infection Surveillance
Surveyor reviewed Facility's Infection Surveillance policy with a revision date of 1/24. Documented was:
Policy:
A system of infection surveillance serves as a core activity of the facility's infection prevention and control program. Its purpose is to identify infections and to monitor adherence to recommended infection prevention and control practices in order to reduce infections and prevent the spread of infections.
Definitions:
Infection surveillance refers to an ongoing systematic collection, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination of infection-related data.
Outcome measure is a mechanism for evaluating outcomes or results, such as tracking specific infection events.
Process measure is a mechanism for evaluating specific steps in a process that lead, either positive negatively, to a particular outcome metric. Also known as performance monitoring, a process measure is used to evaluate whether infection prevention and control practices are being followed.
Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. The Infection Preventionist serves as the leader in surveillance activities, maintains documentation incidents, findings, and any corrective actions made by the facility and reports surveillance finding, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee, and public health authorities when required
2. The RNs and LPNs participate in surveillance through assessment of residents and reporting changes in condition to the resident's physicians and management staff, per protocol for notification of change and in-house reporting of communicable diseases and infections. Examples of notification trigger include, but are not limited to:
a. Resident develops signs and symptoms of infection.
b. A resident is started on an antibiotic.
c. A microbiology test is ordered.
d. A resident is placed on isolation precautions, whether empirically or by physician order.
e. Microbiology test results show drug resistance.
3. An annual infection control risk assessment will be used to prioritize surveillance efforts, as documented in the facility's Infection Surveillance Action Plan. In turn, surveillance data will provide information for subsequent infection control risk assessments.
4. The CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Long Term Care Criteria, updated McGeer criteria or other nationally-recognized surveillance criteria will be used to define infections. For MDS purposes, specific guidance in the RAI manual will be followed when coding for infections (i.e. UTI).
5. Surveillance activities will be monitored facility-wide, and may be broken down by department or unit, depending on the measure being observed. A combination of process and outcome measures will be utilized.
6. The facility will collect data to properly identify possible communicable diseases or infections among residents and staff before they spread by identifying:
a. Data to be collected, including how often and the type of data to be documented, including:
i. The infection site, pathogen (if available), signs and symptoms, and resident location, including summary and analysis of the number of residents (and staff, if applicable) who developed infections:
ii. Observations of staff including the identification of ineffective practices, if any; and
iii. The identification of unusual or unexpected outcomes, infection trends and patterns.
b. How the data will be used and shared and with appropriate individuals (e.g, staff, medical director, director of nursing, QAA committee) when applicable, to ensure that staff minimize spread of the infection or disease.
7. The facility will communicate via (specify how, e.g., written reports, staff meetings, etc.) to staff and/or prescribing practitioners information related to infection rates and outcomes in order to revise interventions/approaches and/or re-evaluate medical interventions as indicated.
8. Monthly time periods will be used for capturing and reporting data. Line charts will be used to show data comparisons over time and will be monitored for trends.
9. All resident and infections will be tracked. Separate, site-specific measures may be tracked as prioritized from the infection control risk assessment. Outbreaks will be investigated.
10. Employee, volunteer, and contract employee infections will be tracked, as appropriate, such as influenza or gastrointestinal infection outbreaks.
11. The facility will conduct testing of staff and residents for communicable diseases (e.g., COVID-19) in accordance with national standards.
12. The facility will conduct specimen collection and testing in a manner consistent with standards of practice.
a. 24 hour shift reports
b. Lab reports
c. Antibiograms obtained from lab
d. Antibiotic use reports from pharmacy
e. Medication regimen review reports
f. Skills validations for hand hygiene, PPE, and/or high risk procedures
g. Rounding observation data
h. Resident and employee immunization data
i. Documentation of signs and symptoms in clinical record
j. Transfer/discharge summaries for new or readmitted residents for infections
k. Staff reports of signs and symptoms and other relevant documentation, if indicated.
14. Formulas used in calculating infection rates will remain constant for a minimum of one calendar year, and will require discussion in QAA meetings before changes in the formulas are made.
1. On 2/22/24 Surveyor requested Facility Infection Surveillance tracking and trending from July 2023 through December 2023. Surveyor was provided with Infection Surveillance Monthly Reports from July 2023 through December 2023. The Report documented:
Total Infections, Community Acquired Infections, Healthcare Acquired Infections, Healthcare Acquired Infections Rate, Multi Drug Resistant Organisms.
Healthcare Acquired Infections 12-Month Trend (Graph over 12 months)
Summary By Infection Category (Broke down into: Infection Category, Total, Healthcare Acquired Infections, Healthcare Acquired Infections Rate)
On 2/22/24 at 1:00 PM Surveyor interviewed Infection Preventionist (IP)-J.
Surveyor asked how IP-J knows the trends of the HAI (Healthcare Acquired Infections) for each infection if it is not broken down into individual infections. IP-J stated she can look at the daily log of infections. IP-J provided Infection By Unit for August 1-31, 2023, which broke down infections by resident. Surveyor asked how the data is analyzed, tracked, and trended to determine infections increasing and decreasing. IP-J stated when I see that data then I can kinda look at maybe if they have the same aide. Surveyor asked if there was a summary or other data analysis of what she determined are the trends in infections for the facility. Surveyor stated as an example, based on the unit list there were thirteen yeast infections in the month of August. Surveyor asked did she analyze that infection or any of the others as a trend. IP-J stated no, I do not do that. Surveyor asked for mapping of infections. IP-J handed Surveyor a blank map and explained she would indicate infections on each unit and location of each different infection designated in assorted colors. Surveyor asked for the Facility maps for July 2023 through December 2023. IP-J stated she has not been doing them. IP-J stated she is doing Infection Prevention part-time, 2 days a week and cannot get everything done since it is not a full time position anymore.
2. On 2/19/24 Surveyor requested a list of outbreaks in the facility that occurred in 2023 or 2024. Surveyor received a list that documented Outbreaks [DATE] to current: Covid 2/10/23, Covid 6/29/23, Covid 9/24/23. Surveyor received line lists for each outbreak.
On 2/22/24 at 2:02 PM, Surveyor interviewed IP-J. Surveyor asked if there was a summary of the Covid outbreaks and what happened or a timeline. IP-J stated she had emails to the health department updating them on the progress of the outbreak but nothing else. Surveyor asked if they did mapping or contract tracing for the outbreak. IP-J stated they had done broad base Covid testing. Surveyor asked about the analysis of finding the source of the outbreak. IP-J stated no. IP-J stated there is no way to contract trace on the dementia unit.
B. Transmission Based Precautions
Surveyor reviewed facility's Transmission-Based (Isolation) Precautions policy with a revision date of 2/24. Documented was:
. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. Facility staff will apply Transmission-Based Precautions, in addition to standard precautions, to residents who are known or suspected to be infected or colonized with certain infectious agents requiring additional controls to prevent transmission.
The facility will use standard approaches, as defined by the CDC, for transmission-based precautions: airborne, contact, and droplet precautions. The category of transmission-based precautions will determine the type of personal protective equipment (PPE) to be used. (A table that depicts the types of PPE to use is attached to this policy.) When implementing transmission-based precautions, the facility will consider the following:
a. The identification of resident risk factors that increase the likelihood of transmission (such as uncontained secretions or excretions, non-compliance, cognition deficits, incontinence, etc.); b. The provision of a private room as available/appropriate; c. Cohorting residents with the same pathogen; and d. Sharing a room with a roommate with limited risk factors (e.g., without indwelling or invasive devices, without open wounds, and not immunocompromised) as appropriate based on the pathogen and method of transmission .
Surveyor reviewed facility's (Multi Drug Resistant Organism) MDRO Infection policy with a revision date of 2/24. Documented was:
.Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. Infection, as opposed to colonization, with an MDRO will be determined by a physician in accordance with current CDC diagnostic and testing guidelines for the specific organism.
2. Information related to a resident who is known to be infected with an MDRO will be communicated as follows:
a. Staff will use contact precautions in addition to standard precautions when caring for a resident with MDRO infection.
b. Signage at entry of the resident's room shall indicate Contact Precautions, and the type of personal protective equipment is required upon entry into the room.
i. Instructions for visitors shall be identified.
ii. The specific indications for precautions or personal health information shall not be included in the sign.
c. Contact precautions will be modified for a resident with MDRO infection on a case-by-case basis.
d. The precautions shall be the least restrictive possible for the resident under the circumstances, for the least amount of time.
e. Increased measures may be employed in certain situations, including, but not limited to:
i. Evidence of ongoing transmission of the organism in the facility.
ii. Challenges with containing sites of infection (i.e. infected secretions, body fluids, or drainage cannot be contained).
iii. Resident requires more intensive care (i.e. totally dependent, ventilator).
iv. Presence of a rare, highly resistant organism.
f. Contact precautions will be discontinued when the physician and Infection Preventionist review the situation and determine the resident is no longer infectious, or is colonized, and is at low risk of transmitting the organism to others .
5. Resident placement:
a. When private rooms are available, assign priority for these rooms to residents with known MDRO infection or colonization.
b. Give highest priority to those residents who have conditions that may facilitate transmission, e.g., uncontained secretions or excretions.
c. When private rooms are not available, cohort residents with the same MDRO in the same room.
d. When cohorting residents with the same MDRO is not possible, place MDRO residents who are at low risk for acquisitions of MDRO's and associated adverse outcomes (residents without open wounds, invasive devices, or who are not immunocompromised) from infection and/or are likely to have short lengths of stay.
e. Minimize transmission in shared rooms by maintaining 3 feet separation between residents, pulling privacy curtains, dedicating equipment to the resident with MDRO infection, and increase
7. One or more intensified MDRO control efforts may be implemented at a time. Additional efforts may be implemented as needed, after additional surveillance. Examples include:
a. Obtaining expert consultation from persons experienced in infection control and epidemiology of MDROS.
b. Evaluating facility systems, such as staffing, training, available resources, and performance monitoring, that may be contributing to the problem.
c. Providing additional individual or departmental education.
d. Reviewing susceptibility patterns and antibiotic prescribing practices.
e. Obtaining active surveillance cultures from roommates, residents who have significant contact with MDRO-infected residents or staff (if staff are suspected to be a source of transmission).
f. Increasing the frequency or intensity of surveillance activities.
g. Implementing contact precautions routinely for all residents colonized or infected with a target MDRO.
h. Suspend admissions to units with a high prevalence of MDRO infections.
i. Assign dedicated staff to residents with the target MDRO infection.
j. Obtain environmental cultures. Vacate rooms for intensive cleaning when the environment is implicated in transmission.
k. Consulting with experts on the appropriate use of decolonization therapy for residents or staff .
11. Care considerations related to Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA):
a. MRSA is a drug-resistant strain of a bacterium found on people's skin.
b. It is usually spread by contact with infected wounds or from direct contact with contaminated objects.
c. Implement strategies to reduce device and procedure related healthcare associated infections (i.e. central lines, urinary catheter, surgical sites, hemodialysis, and ventilator).
d. Follow local, state, regional, or national recommendations for treatment and precautions .
Surveyor reviewed facility's Infection Outbreak and Response policy with a revision date of 12/23. Documented was:
.Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:
1. Prompt recognition of outbreak:
a. Changes in condition and/or signs and symptoms of infection will be reported according to procedures for infection reporting.
b. The following triggers shall prompt an investigation as to whether an outbreak exists:
i. An increase over baseline infection rate (i.e. ten percent or more increase).
ii. A sudden cluster of infections on a unit or during a short period of time (i.e. three or more cases).
iii. A single case of a rare or serious infection i.e. invasive group A Strep, foodborne pathogens, active TB, acute hepatitis, Legionella, chicken pox, measles, COVID-19).
c. An outbreak will be defined according to the characteristics of a given organism. Current definitions used by local and state health departments will help guide the determination.
d. An outbreak will be reported to the local and/or state health department in accordance with the state's reportable diseases website.
2. Implementation of the infection control measures:
a. Symptomatic residents will be considered potentially infected, assessed for immediate needs, and placed on empiric precautions while awaiting physician orders.
b. Symptomatic employees will be screened by the Infection Preventionist, or designee, and referred to appropriate medical provider.
c. Standard precautions will be emphasized. Transmission-based precautions will be implemented as indicated for the particular organism.
d. Staff will be educated on the mode of transmission of the organism, symptoms of infection, and isolation or other special procedures. This includes special environmental infection control measures that are warranted based on the organism and current CDC guidelines.
e. Surveillance activities will increase to daily for the duration of the outbreak.
3. Outbreak Investigation:
a. When the existence of an outbreak has been established, an investigation will begin.
b. The Infection Preventionist will be responsible for coordinating all investigation activities.
(Note: the health department may assume decision making and coordination activities. In this case, the Infection Preventionist will be the liaison between the health department and the facility.)
c. A case definition will be developed in order to identify other staff and residents who may be affected. Criteria for developing a case definition include:
i. Person - key characteristics the patients share in common
ii. Place - the location associated with the outbreak
iii. Time - period of time associated with illness onset for the cases under investigation
iv. Clinical features - objective signs and symptoms, such as sudden onset of fever and cough
d. A line list about each person affected by the outbreak will be maintained.
e. The incubation period, period of contagiousness, and date of most recent case will be making the determination that the outbreak is resolved.
f. A summary of the investigation will be documented and reported to QAA committee health department, if indicated.
3.) R29 was admitted to the facility 8/31/21 with diagnoses that included Heart Failure, Diabetes Mellitus 2 and Chronic Kidney Disease. R29 had an Unstageable Pressure Ulcer to the Right Heel identified 6/16/23.
Surveyor reviewed R29's MD orders. Documented with a start date of 12/15/23 was Monitor skin alteration to R (right) heel, right great toe for any s/sx signs/symptoms of infection (warmth to wound site or surrounding area, increased pain, odor, bleeding, edema, change in the amount or the color of the wound drainage. Notify MD if any s/sx (signs/symptoms) of infection are noted; every shift for Wound monitoring Notify MD of any s/sx of infection are noted.
Surveyor reviewed Progress Notes for R29. Documented on 1/17/24 at 2:47 PM was [Wound MD-L] gave orders for a wound culture to the right heel in relation to increased drainage and pain. Results pending. Case manager updated. Resident denied family update at this time.
Documented in R29's MD orders with a start date of 1/17/24 was Wound culture to the right heel one time only for Wound culture to the right heel.
Documented in R29's Progress Notes on 1/19/24 at 12:20 AM was Wound culture still pending. Dressing to right foot changed, previous dressing was saturated with yellow drainage. Odor also noted. C/O (complaint of) pain, 9/10 in right foot .
Documented in R29's Progress Notes on 1/22/24 at 4:25 PM was Resident has MRSA to wound and would not like to move rooms, and roommate does not want to move. Risks vs benefits discussed with resident and it is explained she will need to be in enhanced barrier precautions after the MRSA is resolved, resident understands.
Documented in R29's MD orders with a start date of 1/21/24 and end date of 1/22/24 was Single room isolation due to active infection, highly transmissible via contact, Full PPE all services brought to room; every shift for right heel.
Surveyor noted R29 was not on any precautions prior to 1/21/24. Surveyor noted the wound was identified 6/16/23 and TBP (Transmission Based Precautions) were in place and the wound infection was suspected 1/17/24 and no TBP were put in place until 1/21/24.
On 2/22/24 at 1:45 PM, Surveyor interviewed Infection Preventionist (IP)-J. Surveyor asked when residents are put on Transmission Based Precautions. IP-J stated when they have an airborne or contact infection. Surveyor asked if a resident has signs and symptoms of an infection are they placed on precautions. IP-J stated yes, we put them on precautions when we are monitoring their symptoms such as coughing when we think it is pneumonia. Surveyor asked would a resident be put in precautions if a wound infection was suspected. IP-J stated yes, we would put them in contact isolation. Surveyor asked about R29. Surveyor noted the culture was ordered due to signs and symptoms on 1/17 and there was an increase in symptoms on 1/19 including odor and drainage. Surveyor asked why was R29 not in precautions. IP-J stated She would be just be under universal precautions because [the wound] was covered. Surveyor noted that was not what the facility policy noted as basis for precautions. Surveyor asked if she should have been in Enhanced Barrier due to the wound and then Contact Precautions on 1/17 due to the suspected infection. IP-J stated yes.
4.) R24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Disease, Epilepsy, Muscle Weakness, Difficulty in Walking, and Cutaneous Abscess of Buttocks.
Documented in R24's MD orders with a start date of 1/31/24 was Wound culture and send to lab; No directions specified for order.
Documented with a start date of 2/1/24 was Monitor skin alteration to L (left) buttock abscess for any s/sx of infection (warmth to wound site or surrounding area, increased pain, odor, bleeding, edema, change in the amount or the color of the wound drainage. Notify MD if any s/sx of infection are noted; every shift for Wound monitoring Notify MD of any s/sx of infection are noted.
Documented in R24's Progress Notes on 2/2/24 at 10:34 AM, was Residents wound culture came back
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure it completed accurate mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data in a uniform electronic format to the C...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure it completed accurate mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data in a uniform electronic format to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). This had the potential to affect all 75 residents residing in the facility.
Staffing information for Quarter 4 (July 1-September 30) of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) was not accurately submitted to CMS.
Findings include:
The CMS Electronic Staffing Data Submission Payroll-Based Journal, Long-term Care Facility Policy Manual, dated June 2022, indicates: Chapter 1: Overview, 1.1 introduction .(U) mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data in a uniform format. Long-term care facilities must electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including information for agency and contract staff, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data in a uniform format according to specifications established by CMS .1.2 Submission Timelines and Accuracy. Direct care staffing and census data will be collected quarterly and is required to be timely and accurate .Report Quarter: staffing and census data will be collected for each fiscal quarter. Staffing data includes the number of hours paid to work by each staff member each day within a quarter. Census data includes the facility's census on the last day of each of the three months in a quarter. The fiscal quarters are as follows: Fiscal Quarter, Date range: (quarter) 1 October 1-December 31, (quarter) 2 January 1-March 31, (quarter) 3 April 1-June 30, (quarter) 4 July 1-September 30 .
On 2/19/24, Surveyor reviewed the PBJ Staffing Data Report, CASPER Report 1705D for Fiscal year 2023 (run on 2/13/24) which indicated the Facility had excessively low weekend staffing for the 4th Quarter (July 1-September 30).
On 2/19/24, Surveyor reviewed the Facility's weekend schedules from July 2023 to September 2023. Surveyor noted these schedules included call ins, agency staff and staff who picked up shifts. Surveyor noted there did not appear to be excessive call-ins.
On 02/22/24 at 8:30 AM, Surveyor interviewed the Facility's Scheduler (FS)-N. FS-N informed Surveyor she staffs the Facility according to census. FS-N stated the minimum staff needed to run the Facility were four nurses on days and pm shift, two nurses on night shift and 4-5 certified nursing assistants (CNA) on days and pm shift and two CNAs on night shift. Per FS-N, the Facility usually has enough staff. Surveyor asked if there were any concerns with weekend staff. FS-N state no. FS-N felt they usually had enough staff for the weekends. Surveyor explained the data from the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) stating the Facility had excessively low weekend staffing. Per FS-N, all staff punch in including agency staff and that data is somehow submitted for the PBJ. FS-N informed Surveyor she does not have anything to do with the data submitted to the PBJ. Per FS-N, corporate personnel are responsible for the PBJ data. Surveyor reviewed the weekend schedules for the 4th quarter of 2023 with FS-N and noted there were no days when the Facility had less staff than their minimum staff according to the Facility's staffing policy. FS-N was unsure why the Facility triggered for excessively low weekend staffing in the 4th quarter of 2023.
On 02/22/24 at 8:45 AM, Surveyor interviewed Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A. NHA-A explained the staff hours are uploaded from a direct import using data submitted to the Facility's payroll. Per NHA-A, the payroll data includes agency staff. NHA-A stated salaried staff do not punch in so their hours might not be counted in the PBJ data. NHA-A informed Surveyor she was unsure how to change that. Per NHA-A, she felt as though the Facility has enough staff on the weekends and she could not remember anything specific about the 4th quarter from 2023 relating to excessively low weekend staffing. NHA-A was unsure why the PBJ triggered for excessively low weekend staffing.
On 02/22/24 at 2:30 PM, Surveyor interviewed NHA-A. NHA-A stated she had spoken with corporate personnel and determined the low weekend staffing might have resulted from using salaried staff for direct care staff. Per NHA-A, the salaried staff would not be counted in the PBJ hours. NHA-A stated she was going to work with corporate to find a way to ensure all direct care staff are included in the submitted hours. No additional information was provided.