Parkridge Specialty Care

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Parkridge Specialty Care, in the surveyor’s own words.

• Immediate jeopardy, patternF689Sep 8, 2022

  Based on observation, record review, policy review, staff interviews, and facility investigation review, the facility failed to account for all residents after they received a report of a resident outside alone and failed to provide an adequate door alarm system to mitigate a resident's risk for elopement (Resident #3). These conditions constituted an Immediate Jeopardy to resident health and safety. The State Agency identified Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 8/25/22, which began on 8/20/22 when Resident #3 eloped from the facility, the IJ was removed on 8/30/22. The facility reported a census of 85. Findings include: 1. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated dated dated [DATE], documented that Resident #3's diagnoses included dementia. […]

• Immediate jeopardy, isolatedF684Aug 11, 2022

  Based on observations, clinical record review, Resident, family and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete timely assessments and interventions for 3 out of 3 (Residents #18, #35 and #328) residents reviewed, which resulted in immediate jeopardy for Resident #328. The facility failed to get emergency care in a timely manner for Resident #328. Staff were directed by the provider to contact family with an update in change of condition to see if the family wanted a higher level of care. There was a delay of approximately 3 hours in contacting the family followed by a delay of approximately 1 ,d+[DATE] hours of contacting emergency services. Resident #328 was pronounced dead shortly after arriving to the emergency room . […]

• Actual harm, isolatedF686Jul 3, 2025

  Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, clinical record review and policy review the facility failed to provide interventions to prevent a deep tissue injury (a type of pressure injury that occurs when underlying soft tissue is damaged due to prolonged pressure, often over bony prominence.) from performing for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #8) and failed to apply treatment to a Moisture Associated Skin Damage (MASD) area on the coccyx (the final bone at the bottom of the spine) for which resulted in the area had gotten worse and the Advance Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP was notified 7 days later. (Resident #9). […]

• Actual harm, isolatedF684May 15, 2024

  Based on clinical record review, facility policy review, family, resident interviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to promptly identify and intervene for an acute change in a resident's condition, chest pain, shortness of breath, cough and urinary incontinence related to fluid volume overload. As a result the family transported the resident to the emergency department. Resident #1 was admitted to the hospital with acute hypoxic (lack of oxygen) respiratory failure due to pulmonary edema (excessive fluid in the lungs), sinus bradycardia (slowing of the heart), acute diastolic heart failure and swelling in the scrotum due to the edema. Concerns were identified for 1 or 3 residents reviewed for assessment and intervention. (Resident#1). […]

• Actual harm, isolatedF684Sep 7, 2023

  Based on clinical record review, family interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to promptly assess a resident with a change in condition and provide skin assessments in accordance with professional standards of practice for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #13, #1 and #11). The facility reported census was 82. Findings include: 1. According to an admit Progress Note dated 9/1/23 at 2:40 p.m. Resident #13 is an [AGE] year old male admitted following a hospital stay for pneumonia. Resident is alert and awake and oriented to person, place and time. Resident #13 is calm and cooperative and voices no concerns. Resident #13 was admitted for further recovery and physical and occupational therapy. […]