cms_ID: 4
Data source: Big Local News · About: big-local-datasette
rowid | facility_name | facility_id | address | city | state | zip | inspection_date | deficiency_tag | scope_severity | complaint | standard | eventid | inspection_text | filedate |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | ST LUKE'S ELMORE LONG TERM CARE | 135006 | 895 NORTH 6TH EAST | MOUNTAIN HOME | ID | 83647 | 2020-01-24 | 578 | E | 0 | 1 | JSJS11 | **NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' advance directive information was periodically reviewed with the residents and/or their representatives and was accurate. This was true for 3 of 3 residents (#3, #13, and #14) whose records were reviewed for advance directives. This failed practice created the potential for harm if residents' wishes regarding end of life or emergent care were not honored if they became incapacitated. Findings include: The State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, defines an Advance Directive as .a written instruction, such as a living will or durable power of attorney for health care, recognized under State law (whether statutory or as recognized by the courts of the State), relating to the provision of health care when the individual is incapacitated. The State Operations Manual also states a Physician order [REDACTED]. medical condition into consideration. A POLST [MEDICATION NAME] form is not an Advance Directive. The facility's Advance Directives policy, dated 8/31/19, documented the following: * Staff will inquire and document whether there is an existing Advanced Directive. If one is provided it will be scanned into the medical record. * Copies of the Advanced Directive should be documented in the medical record and communicated clearly to staff involved with cares. This policy was not followed. 1. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Resident #3's admission orders [REDACTED]. Resident #3's admission orders [REDACTED]. A care plan dated 1/10/20, documented Resident #3 did not want to prolong his life and requested comfort measures only. Resident #3's admission orders [REDACTED]. On 1/22/20 at 3:16 PM, the DNS stated there was a discrepancy in the documentation of Resident #3's code status and it should have been changed to reflect the residents wishes. 2. Resident #13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. A Durable Power of Health Care dated 4/7/09, documented Resident #13 did not want efforts to prolong her life, and did not want life sustaining treatments or cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resident #13's admission order, dated 11/30/18, documented her resuscitation status she was to be a full code. Resident #13's admission orders [REDACTED]. On 1/22/20 at 3:40 PM, the DNS stated Resident #13's code status was not documented to reflect her wishes and needed to be changed. 3. Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Resident #14's record did not include documentation of an Advance Directive, or that it was offered or discussed with him. On 1/24/20 at 11:05 AM, the Resident Services Advocate stated Resident #14's record did not have documentation Advance Directives were offered or discussed with him or his representative. | 2020-09-01 |