Life Care Center of Auburn

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Life Care Center of Auburn, in the surveyor’s own words.

• Actual harm, isolatedF686Apr 10, 2024

  Based on observation, interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to provide care consistent with professional standards to prevent and treat a pressure ulcer (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to a medical or other device) and prevent further skin and pressure injury for one Resident (#85), out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to: -Assess the fit and use of an orthopedic surgical shoe (type of shoes that provides support and stability for the foot after an injury or surgery) for Resident #85 who had a high risk of developing pressure ulcers due to a history of Diabetes (condition that result in too much sugar [glucose] in the blood). […]

• Actual harm, isolatedF697Apr 10, 2024

  Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pain management that was consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#18) out of a total sample of 25 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to offer Resident #18 prescribed pain medication prior to an identified painful dressing change procedure. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Pain Assessment and Management dated 9/12/23, indicated the following: -The facility must ensure that pain management is provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF580Apr 10, 2024

  Based on interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to notify the Physician/Non Physician Practitioner (NPP: Nurse Practitioner) of a significant change in physical status for one Resident (#102) out of a total sample of 25 residents, resulting in a lack of medical evaluation of the Resident's status relative to weight loss. Specifically, the facility staff failed to notify Resident #102's NPP of the Resident's severe weight loss (greater than five percent (%) in one month and greater than seven point five % in three months) when: a. Staff identified the Resident had a severe weight loss. b. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF692Apr 10, 2024

  Based on observation, interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to provide nutrition care and services for one Resident (#102) out of a total sample of 25 residents, with a history of weight loss. Specifically, facility staff failed to do the following when Resident #102 experienced severe weight loss (greater than: five percent[%] in one month, 7.5% in three months, and 10% in six months): a. Obtain weekly weights as ordered by the Physician. b. Monitor weights weekly as recommended by the Registered Dietician (RD). c. Coordinate care among the facility's interdisciplinary team (IDT), to include Resident #102's Physician/Non Physician Practitioner (NPP). d. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF880Apr 10, 2024

  Based on observation, interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that staff adhered to infection control standards for four residents (#18, #95, #58, and #44) out of a total sample of 25 residents, on two out of three Units observed (Primrose and Magnolia). Specifically, the facility staff failed to: 1. Wear appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) while performing nephrostomy care (nephrostomy-an artificial opening between the kidney and the skin which allows for the drainage of urine) and wound care for Resident #18, who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP-an infection control intervention used to reduce transmission of multidrug-reisitant organisms [MDRO-an umbrella term for bacteria and other microorganisms that are resistant to antibiotics and… […]