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 | The following allegations were assigned to be investigated by the licensing agency's Investigation Bureau (IB) investigator, Heydi Bendana: 1.) Resident in care sustained pressure injury due to staff's neglect. 2.) Staff did not ensure resident's wound care needs were properly met.
Investigator Bendana's investigation consisted of the following: Interviews conducted with Administrator Alaina Hendrick (S1), Staff #2-3 (S2-S3), Witnesses #1-4 (W1-W4), which consists of Resident#1's (R1) responsible party (W1), hospice physician (W2), primary care physician (W3), and home health case worker (W4). Investigator Bendana also attempted to interview residents, but was unable to due to cognitive impairment. The following documents for R1 were also reviewed: facility file/documentation including hospice care plan and relevant documents, wound progress reports dated: 9/21/23, 9/28/23,10/12/23, and 10/19/23. The investigation revealed the following:
Regarding allegation: Resident in care sustained pressure injury due to staff's neglect.
It is alleged that due to staff neglect, R1 sustained a Stage 2 pressure wound, which quickly deteriorated and turned to a Stage 4 pressure wound, and R1's bone became visible. Per hospice and home health records obtained by Investigator Bendana, it was discovered that R1 was admitted to the facility on home health services due to pressure wounds, and was receiving services to provide wound care. Per Investigator Bendana's interviews conducted, (3) of (3) staff denied neglecting R1's care resulting in a pressure wound rapidly deteriorating. Staff stated that S1 sought better care for R1 when they noted R1's wounds were not healing properly due to the care provided from the initial home health agency that was providing care. Per witness interviews, (4) of (4) witnesses denied the facility neglecting the resident's care resulting in a pressure wound deteriorating. Per W2, due to the resident's current health condition, it was "almost impossible" to prevent R1 from to sustaining pressure wounds, regardless of how well the wounds were being cared for and how often R1 was being repositioned. Per W4, hospice staff reported to W4 that facility staff were providing "excellent care" to R1. Per R1's hospice care plan, R1 required frequent repositioning to assist in the healing of the pressure wounds and there is no indication that the pressure wounds ever deteriorated to a stage 4. Therefore, this allegation is Unsubstantiated.
Regarding allegation: Staff did not ensure resident's wound care needs were properly met.
It is alleged that facility staff did not meet R1's wound care needs, while R1 presented with stage 2 pressure wounds, which quickly deteriorated and resulted in stage 4 pressure wounds.
(Report continued on LIC9099-C...)
|