cms_WV: 31
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31 | PINE LODGE | 515001 | 405 STANAFORD ROAD | BECKLEY | WV | 25801 | 2019-06-10 | 684 | D | 0 | 1 | 8Y4111 | **NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, staff interview, resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure and provide needed care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice for two residents reviewed during the annual LTCSP (Long Term Care Survey Process). This was true for one (1) of one (1) sample residents reviewed for infections (not UTI or Respiratory) who was not provided education on wound care and infection control. This was true for one (1) of five (5) sample residents reviewed for falls that was not provided neuro checks appropriately after a fall. This practice had the potential to affect a limited number. Resident identifier: R#33 and R#60. Facility census: 111. Findings included: a) R#33 During the initial tour of the annual Long-Term Care Survey Process, on 06/03/19 at 11:15 AM, Surveyor# observed Resident (R#33) with dried crusted drainage around a small open circular wound site located on the resident's upper abdominal right side. This was identified as a concern for further investigation by Surveyor# due to the open wound draining and not being covered with a dressing. Review of records, on 06/10/19 at 11:01 AM, revealed R#33's brief interview for mental status (BIMs) score is fourteen (14) indicating the resident is cognitively intact. Some pertinent [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. The resident was admitted to the facility after having incision and drainage (I&D) of abscesses, which developed after having lower-back spinal surgery and after having a cholecystectomy. A cholecystectomy is the surgical procedure to remove a gallbladder. After gallbladder surgery the resident had a drainage tube at the surgical site, on his right upper abdomen, to prevent the build-up of bile, blood, and/or infection. The resident developed an abscess on his right side and another incision and drainage procedure was performed and a drainage tube was again placed to facilitate healing. On 04/04/19, after the drainage tube was removed a new order was given to clean surgical incision to right side with wound cleanser, pat dry, and apply dry dressing every day. Review of the treatment administration record (TAR) revealed daily wound care treatment including a dry dressing was ordered and started on 04/04/19 and on 06/05/19 the wound nurse obtained an order to discontinue treatment due to resident refusing treatment. From the time of the order until the order was discontinued there were sixty-two (62) opportunities to provide daily wound care treatment and it was documented treatment was provided randomly only in the month of April. R#33 received wound care treatment eighteen (18) days due to resident refusing care on the other days, and three (3) times out of the sixty-two (62) opportunities to provide daily wound care treatment there was no documentation either way as to refusal or provision. An interview with the wound nurse, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN#84), on 06/10/19 at 11:44 AM, revealed LPN#84 said she kept trying to get R#33 to allow her to provide the wound treatment but he always refused. LPN#84 said the resident would let her clean and measure the wound weekly but not provide treatment and place a dry dressing on it daily as it was ordered. This surveyor requested evidence or documentation showing the resident refused wound care treatment, the physician was notified about the refusals of treatment, and R#33 was provided education concerning the importance of wound care and infection control. LPN#84 asked the nurse unit manager (LPN#61), to help review R#33's medical records for any of the requested documentation, while she finished the interview with this surveyor. LPN#84 said she did not document notifying the physician about the refusal of treatment or any education concerning wound care or infection control. LPN#84 said she was aware there was still some occasional minimal drainage from the wound site. LPN#84 said she thought she contacted the physician sometime during the middle of (MONTH) and told the physician about the resident's refusal of treatment, however she said she did not document the conversation as she should have. When asked what instructions the physician gave her, LPN#84 said, I was to keep encouraging the resident to allow dressing changes. LPN#84 was asked by this surveyor if any other nursing staff tried to get the resident to comply with the ordered wound care treatment, such as the Center Nurse Executive (CNE), formerly known as the Director of Nursing or the Nurse Practitioner (NP). A Nurse Practitioner works in the facility three to four days a week and was available to see the resident. The wound nurse said she did not speak with the CNE or the NP or any other staff concerning R#33's refusals of wound care treatment. LPN#84 said she did not ask anyone else to see or speak to the resident to see if they might get R#33 to comply with the wound care treatment and/or to educate the resident on the importance of proper wound care and/or to ensure the resident understood. After review of the resident's medical records the nurse unit manager (LPN#61) stated she could find no documentation concerning refusal or non-compliance with the wound care treatment or any documentation or evidence that patient education was provided to the resident concerning wound care, disease processes, or infection control. On 06/10/19 at 01:10 PM, interview with the resident revealed the wound still has some occasional drainage, but not as much as it did. When asked if anyone had explained to him the importance of wound care and applying a dry dressing to cover and catch any drainage; the resident stated no one at the facility had talked to him about infections or the proper way to care for the wound. Review of Refusal of Treatment policy, on 06/10/19 at 03:55 PM, revealed if the patient refuses treatment staff will determine what the patient is refusing and why. Staff will try to address the patient's concerns and consult his/her supervisor. Staff will determine and document what the patient is refusing; assess the reasons for refusal; advise patient of consequences of refusal; and offer alternative treatments. Document discussions with the patient/health care decision maker, physician, and other involved persons. The wound nurse did not follow the facility's policy on Refusal of Treatment, particularly advising or educating the resident of consequences of refusal. An interview with the Center Nurse Executive (CNE), on 06/10/19 at 2:30 PM, confirmed the resident should have been provided education by staff regarding wound care, infection control, and disease processes that influence healing, and was not. b) Resident #60 On 06/10/19 at 09:55 AM, medical record review revealed Resident #60 had endured an un-witnessed fall on 05/22/19 at 3:00 PM while transferring from wheelchair to bed. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #110 documented that the Resident stated (typed as written), I hit head but not hurting. At that time, LPN #110 implemented neurological assessments (screening tool used post fall for monitoring and detection of head injury) with a start time of 3:00 PM. The neurological assessments were completed for the following dates and time: --05/22/19 at 3:00 PM --05/22/19 at 3:30 PM --05/22/19 at 4:00 PM --05/22/19 at 4:30 PM --05/22/19 at 5:30 PM --05/22/19 at 6:30 PM --05/22/19 at 7:30 PM --05/22/19 at 8:30 PM --05/23/19 at 12:30 AM --05/23/19 at 4:30 AM The neurological assessment flow sheet was found to be incomplete with no data in all the following categories: level of consciousness, pupil response, hand grasps, movement of extremities, and pain response for nine (9) of the ten (10) assessments completed. The first neurological assessment completed on 05/22/19 at 3:00 PM was the only neurological assessment found to be completed in its entirety. Review of the facility's Neurological policy on 06/10/19 at 11:20 AM revealed the following guidelines for completion of neuroglial assessments (after an unwitnessed fall) to be done at the following frequency: --Every 30 Minutes x 2 hours, then --Every 1 hour x four hours, then --Every four hours x 24 hours. Further review of the neurological assessment sheet revealed the neurological assessments were discontinued without completion for the frequency as indicated. The last neurological assessment was completed on 05/23/19 at 4:30 AM, for a total of ten (10) assessments. In order to complete the neurological assessments for the correct number of times as indicated in the facility's Neurological policy, fourteen (14) assessments should have been done with an end time and date of 05/23/19 at 8:30 PM. During an interview on 06/10/19 at 11:28 AM the Director of Nursing (DON) agreed that the neurological assessments for the Resident was not completed correctly. The DON stated the expectation is for nursing staff to complete all information on the Neurological Assessment Flow sheet, and nothing should ever be left blank. The DON also stated, Yes we stopped the neurological assessments too soon, we did not complete the 24-hour frequency. At 1:10 PM on 06/10/19 during an interview, LPN #110 verified the portion of the Neurological Assessment Flow Sheet that she completed, and agreed the assessments were not completed correctly and should not have been left blank for level of consciousness, pupil response, motor response, and pain response. LPN #110 stated, It just gets so busy around here, and it's hard to get everything done because it's so hectic, I should have done better. | 2020-09-01 |