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 | [CONTINUED FROM LIC 9099]
At the time of the complaint allegation, R1 was being followed by a visiting nurse practitioner (NP), who operated as an extension of R1’s primary care physician (PCP), to help address R1’s health issues as they developed. Care records and interviews aligned to show that R1 was memory-impaired, wheelchair-bound, took blood-thinner medication, had very fragile skin, had a history of being prone to bruising and skin tears, wore incontinence briefs, and required staff assistance with mobility, transferring, and incontinence care, among other tasks. According to interviews of Licensees/managers, facility caregivers usually checked residents’ briefs at least once every two (2) hours, changing them if they are wet or soiled. However, one of these managers also acknowledged that the overnight staff (who are alone on duty) were also allowed to themselves nap in between their incontinence check rounds, and that there was typically a period from around “10:30 PM or 11:00 PM” to around “4:00 AM to 5:00 AM” daily when the overnight staff were allowed to sleep. Caregiver interviews varied slightly, but they generally corroborated that there was usually a window of between four (4) to six hours (6) during the overnight shift when R1 was not being visually checked on.
According to caregiver interviews: Around 7:00 AM on 07-26-2024, Caregiver Staff #1 (S1), who had just started their work shift, went to R1’s bedroom and first observed that R1 had a raised bump on their forehead and a skin tear on their neck that had bled. While R1 was still in bed, there was some dried blood on their pillow, and several other pillows were on the floor beside their bed. Caregiver Staff #2 (S2) was the lone staff on duty during the preceding overnight shift. Per interview of S2: They had last checked on R1 around 5:00 AM, finding nothing out of the ordinary. They denied R1 having fallen out of bed. They did not have a clear explanation for R1’s injuries. They mentioned R1 briefly screamed when S1 was in the room alone with R1. LPA asked, but S2 did not believe that S1 harmed R1 during the encounter. Per interview of S1: They denied harming S1 or causing any skin injuries during the incident. S1 had asked S2 what had occurred prior to their own arrival at work, but S2 did not have an explanation for R1’s injuries. S1 photographed R1’s injuries and bedroom, then notified R1’s responsible person. LPA tried to interview R1 about the incident, but they had no memory of it. S1 and S2 said: R1 was also unable to state to them what had happened to them.
[CONTINUED ON LIC 9099-C, 2 of 3] |