1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | An interview with (R1's) primary care physician's witness #1 (W1) states that they will work with (R1) to reassess her medical condition to have home health come and assist with the insulin injections weekly. (W1) disputes (R1's) claim that she had been neglected in care by her primary care physician. (W1) states we have records of all the visits conducted with (R1). (W1) reports that (R1) is reluctant to follow the physician's orders and will not hold the facility in any way responsible for (R1)'s refusal for medical care. The Department review (R1's) Medication Administration Records and found them accurate and to be maintained in order. Interviews were conducted with residents #2-#4 (R2-R4) all conducted their insulin injections and states they have no issues with the staff. The staff does not assist with the actual injections of insulin. Interview with residents #5-#6 (R5-R6) both claims the staff is very responsive and in assisting with their medications and have never been denied of their medications. Based on the Department’s observation, interviews, and a review of service records that were conducted, the Department found there is no evidence to support the allegation mentioned above.
The Department’s investigation consisted of an inspection of the facility, observation, review of (R1’s) service records, and other pertinent documents relevant to this case, interviews conducted and found no evidence to corroborate the allegations mentioned above.
Based on the information gathered, there is no evidence to support the allegations: "Resident is not receiving prescribed diabetic medicine at the facility".
Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation, did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is Unsubstantiated.
An exit interview was conducted with Gwendolyn Craig and a copy of the report was provided by email. |