Autumn Care of Suffolk

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Autumn Care of Suffolk, in the surveyor’s own words.

• Actual harm, isolatedF600Jun 21, 2021

  Based on observations, clinical record reviews, staff, resident and family interviews, the facility staff failed to ensure two residents were free from abuse; one resident (R#185) who was intentionally restricted from movement by a tucked in top bed sheet on each side with the two top corners tied at the junction of the side rail and bed frame, and the bottom two corners of the top sheet tied to the bedframe; and, a second resident (R#47) to be free of mental and verbal abuse as evidenced by threatening a 30 day notice of discharge. The treatment of [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] The findings included: 1. Resident #185 was admitted to the nursing facility on [DATE] for skilled services with a primary diagnosis [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF578Sep 18, 2024

  Facility staff failed to ensure that residents and/or resident representative had the opportunity to develop an Advanced Directive for 19 of 24 residents reviewed. These requirements include provisions to inform and provide written information to all adult residents concerning the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment and, at the resident's option, formulate an advance directive. This includes a written description of the facility's policies to implement advance directives. Facility policy does not meet requirement for advance planning, affecting all residents including a number of residents in the survey sample. During record review, surveyors noted difficulty locating documentation concerning advance care planning in resident records. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF657Sep 18, 2024

  Based on resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team, and/or failed to involve the resident and/or resident representative in planning care, for 5 of 35 sampled residents. Resident #28, Resident #61, Resident #83, Resident #40, and Resident #206. The findings included: 1. For Resident #28, the facility staff failed to review the plan of care after the resident's comprehensive assessment on 3/21/24 and the facility staff failed to ensure the resident and/or resident representative, was provided the opportunity to participate in planning care at the facility. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF684Sep 18, 2024

  Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review the facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for the administration of medications for 5 of 35 residents, Resident #33, Resident #207, Resident #100, Resident #357, and Resident #20. The findings included: 1. For Resident #33 the facility staff failed to administer the medication gabapentin per the physician's orders. Resident #33's face sheet listed diagnoses which included but not limited to hypertension and chronic pain syndrome. Resident #33's most recent minimum data set with an assessment reference date of 07/02/24 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status score of 11 out of 15 in section C, cognitive status. This indicates that the resident is moderately cognitively impaired. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF623Jun 21, 2021

  Based on record review and staff interviews the facility staff failed to provide one resident (Resident #85) in the survey sample of 35 residents with a notice of transfer to the office of the state Long-Term Care Ombudsman. The findings included: Resident #85 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . The facility staff failed to provide a notice of transfer to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman while being discharged to the hospital. A 3/3/21 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessed this resident in the area of Cognitive Patterns - Brief Interview for Mental Status as a (10). In the area of Daily Living this resident was coded as requiring minimum assist with supervision in the areas of dressing, toileting, and eating. […]