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 | Complaint also alleges a second medication for daily administration was not provided. Upon interviews with staff and a review of R1's medication records, LPA gathered information regarding medication delivery and orders. Facility staff (S2,S3,S4) statements were consistent, indicating that the medication was delivered but a physician order was not included. Staff stated they contacted R1's hospice agency multiple times by phone, requesting for the signed order. Lastly, the signed physician's order was eventually provided several days after the delivery for reconciliation, indicating potential delay in documentation being provided to the facility. R1 was provided the medication the following day of receiving the signed order. LPA determined that there is conflicting information and a lack of corroborating evidence towards the allegation.
Complaint alleges, staff did not refill resident’s medication prescription in a timely manner. Upon review of resident records it was found that R1 was prescribed a daily medication that assist with bowel movement. In addition, R1 is also prescribed a second medication that targets bowel movement, but only used as needed (PRN) when the primary daily medication is not effective after several days. Interview with Executive Director (S1) and review of R1's medication and hospice records indicated that the amount of PRN medication administered was within the total quantity of the PRN medication doses on supply. There is no other indication of R1's observed symptoms in either charting notes, hospice records or medication records that indicate R1's need for additional PRN nor indication of the facility not having sufficient supply on hand. LPA attempted to contact the hospice agency but was not able to gather statement.
A finding that the complaint allegations, staff did not ensure that resident was dispensed their medication as prescribed and staff did not refill resident’s medication prescription in a timely manner are unsubstantiated meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. |