Park Ridge Nursing Home

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Park Ridge Nursing Home, in the surveyor’s own words.

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Apr 29, 2024

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey, it was determined that for four of four resident cottages the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, potentially hazardous foods (raw shell eggs) were not being fully cooked. The findings are: Review of the facility policy titled 'Production Recipe Egg Bkfst' last revised 4/23/2024 included the following: Fresh Egg, cook to a minimum internal temperature of 145 F (71 degrees C) for 15 seconds. The policy also included that if shell eggs are used, follow instructions according to state safe handling specifications. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF759May 1, 2026

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five (5) percent for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed (Resident #23). Specifically, Resident #23's scheduled 9:00 AM doses of chlorhexidine (an antimicrobial oral rinse used to reduce oral bacteria and prevent infection), fluoride sodium 1.1 percent paste (a prescription-strength fluoride dental medication used to prevent tooth decay), and zinc oxide-white petrolatum paste (a topical skin protectant medication used to treat and prevent skin irritation) were not administered and documented within the facility's established medication administration timeframe. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF578Apr 29, 2024

  Based on interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey the facility did not ensure that all residents had the right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, and to formulate an advance directive (medical interventions in the event of a life-threatening episode) that would be honored for one (Residents #47) of one resident reviewed. Specifically, the facility did not ensure that Resident #47's advance directives (their preferred code status in the event of cardiac or pulmonary arrest) were accurately identified per their wishes. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF684Apr 29, 2024

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review conducted during a Recertification Survey, the facility did not ensure that the resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for one (Resident #22) of one resident reviewed for edema (swelling caused by excess fluid in body tissues). Specifically, the facility did not ensure that the recommendations provided by the physician consult for vascular services for a lymphedema compression pump were consistently administered per the recommendation and no documented evidence as to why not. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF686Apr 29, 2024

  Based on observations, interviews and record review conducted during the Recertification Survey, for one (Resident #40) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers, the facility did not ensure a resident received the necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing and prevent new ulcers from developing. Specifically, Resident #40 was found to have an open area to their right ankle on 12/20/23. The facility was unable to provide documented evidence that the wound was consistently monitored and treated to promote healing and/or prevent worsening. […]