Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the hospital failed to obtain patient signed consents for treatment in the Catheter Laboratory for 3 procedures of 5 total procedures reviewed. (Patient identifiers are #1 and #2) Findings include: Patient #1 Review on 12/11/18 at approximately 12:30 p.m. it was determined through patient record review of the electronic health record that Patient #1 had a medical procedure performed in the hospital's catheter laboratory on 11/7/18. There was no documentation of a signed consent for treatment for this patient. Interview on 12/11/18 at approximately 1:45 p.m. with Staff A (Registered Nurse/Risk Management), revealed that neither she/he nor the medical records department could locate a signed consent form for Patient #1 for the above referenced procedure. Patient #2 Review on 12/11/18 at approximately 12:32 p.m. it was determined through patient record review of the electronic health record that Patient #2 had a medical procedure performed in the hospital's catheter laboratory on 11/28/18 and a second procedure done in the hospital's catheter laboratory done on 12/1/18. There was no documentation of a signed consent for either treatment for this patient. Interview on 12/11/18 at approximately 1:46 p.m. with Staff A, revealed that neither she/he nor the medical records department could locate a signed consent form for Patient #2 for either of the above referenced procedures.
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on observation, interview and review of the hospital admission package it was determined that the hospital failed to inform patients of the correct Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) information in the hospital and in 11 out of 11 Hospital Physician Practices surveyed. Findings include: Review on 3/17/17 of the hospital's admission package policy and procedure form entitled PATIENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES dated 8/16 revealed that the form had the incorrect Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) information on the Patient Rights and Responsibilities form which read as follows : To question any aspect of your care, and to request a review and seek resolution to any complaint. Complaints regarding the quality of your care may be directed to the appropriate department manager or directly to: Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) [incorrect pronoun and address omitted] [incorrect phone number omitted] During tour of 11 of the 11 hospitals Physician Practices on 3/17/17, it was confirmed and revealed through interviews with the individual practice managers that the Patient Registration Form is signed by the patients upon initial registration and annually thereafter. The form was last updated 8/16. The Patient Registration Form states that the patient has received the PATIENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES. During tour of 11 of the 11 Hospitals Physician Practices and including the hospital on [DATE] revealed that the Patient Rights and Responsibilities are posted on the walls in the waiting rooms in all the hospitals Physician Practice's and in the Hospital itself. It was confirmed by Staff O, (Physician Practice Transform Specialist) that the Patient Rights and Responsibilities are on the walls in the waiting rooms in all the Hospitals Physician Practices and in the Hospital. The incorrect information for the QIO is contained in this document. Individuals filing a complaint would have incorrect information according this posted document.
Based on observations and interviews at the Hospitals Physicians Practices, it was determined the hospital failed to lock and secure the clinic's medical records from unauthorized access at 2 of the 11 Physician Practices. Findings include: Observation on 3/16/17 at approximately 2:00 p.m. of the medical records at the White Mountain Family Practice revealed that the family practice failed to have any means to secure the medical records that are located behind the reception area in a cabinet. Interview on 3/16/17 at approximately 2:15 p.m. with Staff J (Practice Manager) confirmed that the medical records are not locked when the office staff go home at night and the cleaning crew come in to clean. Staff J also stated that Staff J has put in a ticket to have the lock fixed in the filing cabinet months ago, but it has not been fixed yet.
Observation on 3/16/17 of the paper medical records and their storage container at the Sleep Center on 3/16/17 at 11:00 a.m. revealed patient medical records were not locked in the cabinet where they were stored. During interview on 3/16/17 at 11:00 a.m. with Staff E (Manager Sleep Lab), the above findings were reviewed and Staff E confirmed the cabinets that stored patient records were not locked. Staff E revealed that it was not the practice to lock the cabinets where the patient medical records were stored in the Sleep Center and that house keeping staff and staff from a connected neighboring practice could access these patient medical records.
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that outdated drugs and unusable biologicals were not available for patient use in Rheumatology and Endoscopy departments. Findings include: Observation on 3/16/17 at 1:15 P.M. during a tour of Rochester Rheumatology it was revealed that two boxes of Cimzia medication had the expiration date of December 2016 and were stored in the refrigerator with other non-expired medications that were available for use. Interview on 3/16/17 at 1:15 p.m. with Staff D (Practice Manager), reviewed the above findings and confirmed the outdated medications were stored in the refrigerator with other medications available for patient use. Staff D revealed that Rochester Rheumatology did not routinely check for outdated medications.
Observation on 3/16/17 at approximately 11:00 a.m. of the Endoscopy department in room #7, revealed the sharps container that is attached to the wall inside the entrance/exit door of room #7 had 2 used syringes sitting on the top of the white dumping tray of the sharps container that had not been flipped into the container. These used syringes were accessible to anyone who had access to this unlocked room. Interview on 3/16/17 at approximately 11:02 a.m. with Staff F (Registered Nurse), Staff F confirmed that these 2 syringes were on top of the sharps containers white tray. Observation on 3/16/17 at approximately 11:10 a.m. of the Endoscopy department revealed an unlocked Anesthesia cart in room #2 by the room #2's entrance/exit door. In the bottom drawer of this Anesthesia cart were 2 large trays, each labeled as Box A and 1 smaller tray labeled as Box B of medications that were each secured at the cover and the base of the trays by a plastic tag. Interview on 3/16/17 at approximately 11:12 a.m. with Staff F who stated that the Anesthesia cart in room #2 is always unlocked upon staff arrival in the morning and is then locked before staff leave the unit for the night. Interview on 3/16/17 at approximately 2 p.m. with Staff K (Pharmacist) reviewed the above finding and Staff K stated that all Anesthesia carts are to be locked when not being accessed by personnel and they are not to be left unlocked. Staff K provided a list of the contents of the anesthesia carts medication trays labeled as Box A and Box B. Both box A's contain the following medications: Cefazolin Dexamethasone Ephedrine Glycopyrrolate Ketorolac Labetalol Lacrilube NP Sterile Ointment Lidocaine 2% Metoclopramide Metoprolol Neostigmine Ondansetron Phenylephrine Rocuronium Sodium Chloride 0.9% Sterile Water Succinylcholine Propofol 1% Box B contains the following medications: Albuterol Diphenhydramine Epinephrine Esmolol Etomidate Hydralazine Metoprolol Naloxone Oxytocin Propranolol Terbutaline Scopolamine
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the hospital failed to periodically check all workers in the operating room (OR) who may be regularly exposed to radiation for amount of radiation exposure. Findings include: Interview on 3/12/17 at 10:40 a.m. with Staff F (Director Surgical Services) revealed that the surgeons in the OR did not wear dosimetry badges when they were in the OR when the C-arm for fluoroscopic imaging was in use during surgery. Interview further revealed the rest of the OR staff did wear dosimetry badges when they were in the OR when the C-arm was in use. Review on 3/12/17 of the Radiology Dosimetry Report (Period 10/1/16 to 12/31/16) and a list of surgeons provided by the hospital who performed procedures using the C-arm located in the OR during the above time period revealed that 1 of 19 surgeons had results for dosimetry badges for the fourth quarter of 2016.
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the hospital failed to ensure an acceptable level of quality for dialysis equipment for 2 of 2 portable reverse osmosis (RO) machines. Findings include: Professional Reference: Dialystate for hemodialysis, Developed by Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, Approved August 9, 2004 by the American National Standards Institute, Inc., Document Number ANSI/AAMI RD52:2004, page 9, Section 5.2.5 Carbon Absorption, revealed: The replacement bed should be placed in the second position, and the existing bed should be moved to the first position to replace the exhausted bed. If it is not possible to rotate the position of the beds, both beds should be replaced. Review of the Equipment Repair Record for the Portable RO machine (serial number 11) from 3/1/16 to 3/1/17 revealed the contracted service for dialysis replaced the carbon bed in the first position on 9/15/16 and 2/10/17. The carbon bed in the second position was replaced on 11/15/16. Review of the Equipment Repair Record for the Portable RO machine (serial number 96) from 3/1/16 to 3/1/17 revealed the contracted service for dialysis replaced the carbon tank in the first position on 9/22/16. The carbon bed in the second position was replaced on 10/14/16. Interview on 3/17/17 at 11:10 a.m. with Staff G (Director Critical Care Unit) revealed that Staff G contacted the company responsible for performing dialysis services for the hospital when asked about changing the carbon tanks and Staff G was unable to obtain a procedure for changing carbon beds on the portable RO machine.
Based on review of records and interview, it was determined that the hospital failed to maintain relative humidity (RH) levels within acceptable standards in anesthetizing locations Findings include: Review on 3/17/17 of the hospital procedure titled Environmental Monitoring in the Operating Room, Revision Date 4/15/16 revealed the following: The humidity in the operating room suites will be maintained between 30-60 relative percent. If the humidity is above or below the acceptable level, Facilities will be notified by the OR Clinical Coordinator. Review on 3/17/17 of the Operating Room (OR) Daily Temperature and Humidity Checks log for 3/1/17 to 3/15/17 revealed that the RH was less than 20% in at least one of the five operating rooms for 4 of the 10 days monitored. The Log indicated that the OR was using a humidity range of greater than 20% and less than 60%. The following are dates from the log when OR rooms had an RH less than 20%: On 3/6/17 OR Room 1 was 17% RH and OR Room 2 was 11% RH. On 3/9/17 OR Room 1 was 14% RH and OR Room 4 was 19% RH. On 3/10/17 OR Room 1 was 17% RH. On 3/13/17 OR Room 1 was 17% RH. Review on 3/17/17 of the OR schedules for 3/6/17 and 3/9/17 revealed that the OR performed 4 procedures in OR Room 1 and 6 procedures in OR Room 2 on 3/6/17. The OR performed 1 procedures in OR Room 1 and 4 procedures in OR Room 4 on 3/9/17. Review of Work Orders from Facilities for 3/1/17 to 3/15/17 revealed that facilities had been notified on the above dates when humidity was below 20% RH. Interview on 3/17/17 at 12:15 p.m. with Staff H (Senior Director, Quality Improvement) confirmed that the OR was using a RH range of 20-60% as per professional standards, not the 30-60% RH in their above mentioned procedure. Staff H also confirmed that the OR staff notify the surgeon when the humidity is out of range but do not document the notification or decision to proceed with surgery.
Based on interview and observation it was determined that the hospital failed to maintain a hospital wide surveillance program to monitor compliance with all infection control requirements in order to prevent and control a safe sanitary environment to avoid sources and transmission of infections and communicable disease. Findings include: During interview on 3/17/17 with Staff L (Infection Prevention Coordinator), Staff H (Senior Director of Quality Improvement) and Staff N (Registered Nurse) revealed that the hospital had no documented evidence of infection control hospital wide environmental surveillance to include all departments located in the hospital (e.g. kitchen, housekeeping, laundry department, maintenance, to include biohazard waste, supply storage) and off site locations (e.g. urgent care). Cross reference A 726.
Observation on 3/16/17 at 12:40 p.m. during a tour of Caring Partners Obstetrics & Gynecology revealed small tears in the front two corners of the exam table in exam room four. Interview on 3/16/17 at 12:40 p.m. with Staff A (Practice Manager) and Staff B (Clinical Coordinator), reviewed the above findings and Staff A and Staff B confirmed there were tears in the exam table. Staff B revealed that it was practice to inspect and clean exam tables after patient use and that a repair request for the tears observed on exam room four's exam table had not been performed. Observation on 3/16/17 at 12:50 p.m. during a tour of Stafford Cardiology Associates revealed small tears in the front two corners of the exam table in exam room one. During interview on 3/16/17 at 12:50 p.m. with Staff C (Practice Manager), Staff C confirmed there were tears in the exam table. Staff C revealed that it was practice to inspect and clean exam tables after patient use and a repair request for the tears observed in exam room one's exam table had not performed.
Observation on 3/16/17 at 9:30 a.m. in the recovery area of the operating room (OR) revealed a recovery chair in the hallway with two large round holes on the left side and one tear on the front foot rest. Interview on 3/16/17 at 9:30 a.m. with Staff F (Director Surgical Services) confirmed the above finding and revealed the chair was used for patients during recovery. Observation in the recovery area of the OR on 3/16/17 at 9:45 a.m. revealed a glucose meter with a blue substance consistent with control solution on front and back of the meter at the nursing station on the docking station. There was also a small dried red/brown substance on the back of the meter. Interview on 3/16/17 at 9:45 a.m. with Staff I (OR, Registered Nurse) confirmed the above findings and revealed it is the policy of the hospital to clean the glucose meter after each use. Interview also revealed that the glucose meter on the docking station would be ready for use.
Observation during tour of the OB (Obstetrical) surgical suite on 3/16/17 at approximately 11:40 a.m. revealed that some of the horizontal surfaces contained a heavy build up of dust. Interview on 3/16/17 at approximately 11:41 a.m. with Staff F (RN) confirmed that there was a build up of dust on some of the horizontal surfaces.
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the hospital failed to consistently evaluate a patient's self-care capacity in the environment from which the patient entered the hospital to help determine the likelihood of the patient returning to the same environment following discharge. Findings include: During interview and record review on 3/17/17 at approximately 9:45 a.m. with Staff M (Registered Nurse) revealed no documentation of the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) to determine self care capacity of the patient being cared for in the environment from which he or she entered the hospital for 2 of 5 discharged patient records.
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure that 2 sets of fire door separations could close to a latched position. Findings include: Observations during tour on 03/17/17 between 9:00 a.m. and 9:45 a.m. with Staff A (Director of Facilities Management) and Staff B (Regional Director of Operations) revealed two doors which failed to latch at the following 2 locations: 1 door leaf on the set of fire barrier doors outside of the CT (Computerized Axial Tomography) room failed to close to a latched position. 1 door leaf on the set of fire barrier doors outside of the main Pharmacy Suite failed to close to a latched position. Interview with Staff A and Staff B confirmed the findings and locations.
NFPA 110 STANDARD for EMERGENCY and STANDBY POWER SYSTEMS (2010 edition) 7.3 Lighting 7.3.1 The level 1 or level 2 EPS (Emergency Power Supply) equipment locations shall be provided with battery powered emergency lighting. This requirement shall not apply to units located outdoors in enclosures that do not include walk-in access. Based on observations and interview the facility failed to ensure that battery operated emergency lighting is located at the ATS (Automatic Transfer Switch) locations. Findings include: Observations during tour on 03/17/17 with Staff A (Director of Facilities Management) and Staff B (Regional Director of Operations) revealed that 1 of the main electrical rooms on the lower level contains ATS panel #4, #5, #6, and #7. This electrical room failed to be equipped with battery powered emergency lighting. Interview with Staff A and Staff B confirmed the above findings and locations.
Based on observations and interview the facility failed to ensure that 1 Mechanical/Boiler room has complete sprinkler coverage. Findings include: Observations during tour on 03/17/17 between 11:30 a.m. and 11:45 a.m. with Staff A (Director of Facilities Maintenance) and Staff B (Regional Director of Operations) revealed that the existing Mechanical/Boiler room, on the lower level, has an area approximately 30' x 40' in which sprinkler system coverage is not present. This area represents approximately 1/4 of the room. Additionally, in this Mechnical/Boiler room there is 1 section of HVAC (Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning) ductwork, approximately 6' wide x 25' long which is located underneath a sprinklered section of the Mechanical/Boiler room and is effectively blocking the sprinkler coverage of this area. Interview with Staff A and Staff B confirmed the findings and locations.
Based on observations and interview the facility failed to ensure that extension cords are not used as permanent wiring and non-hospital grade plug strips are in use. Findings include: Observations during tour on 03/17/17 between 9:55 a.m. and 10:10 a.m. with Staff A (Director of Facilities Management) and Staff B(Regional Director of Operations) revealed that 1 office in the Pathology suite has an extension cord (approximately 12' long) running from an outlet to the desk. Plugged into that extension cord is 1 non-hospital grade plug strip and additionally there is 1 non-hospital grade plug strip plugged into the non-hospital grade plug strip. Computers, monitors, lighting, and miscellaneous equipment is being powered from this electrical connection. Interview with Staff A and Staff B confirmed the findings and location.
Based on record review and interview the hospital failed to promote patient rights by the use of restraints without a physician order and not utilizing the least restrictive device on 6 patients in a standard survey of 20 patients. (Patient identifiers are #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6.) Findings include: Review of medical records for patient #4, #5, and #6 revealed the use of pelvic holder while in geri chair/recliner on the GPU (Geriatric Psychiatric Unit). The assessment of patient need for the use of two restraints was not documented in the patient record nor was there documentation of these restraints being the least restrictive. Further review of the medical record specifically the Restraint Flowsheet revealed that 6 patients, #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6, had 4 side rails up when placed in bed for the night. There is no documented evidence as to why the side rails were up and a physician order for the use of siderails was not documented. Interview on 5/19/14 with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Director of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero Psych) confirmed the documentation does not reveal why the double restraint was used on 3 patients or why 4 siderails were used on 6 patients without a physician order or documentation of the behaviors identified that support the need. Cross reference to 154, 159, 164, 165, 167, 168,174, and 186
Based on record review and interview it was determined that the Hospital failed to properly use physical restraints or assess and monitor restraint usage in their Quality Program on 6 out of 20 patients in a selected sample group. (Patient identifiers are #1,#2,#3,#4,#5,and #6) Findings include: Review of medical records revealed that the use of physical restraints occurred on two separate units of the hospital. These two units are the ICU (Intensive Care Unit) and GPU (Geriatric Psychiatric Unit). On review of the medical record for the 3 patients on the ICU, Patient #1, #2, and #3 all had full side rails at night with no physicians orders. On further review of the records 3 patients on the GPU, Patients #4, #5,and #6 also had physical restraints. These three patients had both pelvic holders while in a Geri chair /recliner and side rails. Patients #4, #5,and #6 had orders of the use of the pelvic holders but no orders for the use of side rails. These findings were shown to Staff A (Risk Manager) at the time of finding who agreed there were no orders for the use of full side rails at night causing all 6 residents to be restrained. Interview on 5/19/14 with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Director of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero psych) revealed that the Hospital leadership had established a policy and procedure for the use of restraints. The policy defined the use of restraints as related to patient rights. Assessment and monitoring of restraint usage was completed on the GPU (Gero Psychiatric Unit) however, staff was not able to articulate how the data was used, or if any hospital wide analysis was completed. Staff C reported that the hospital Quality Group did not review restraint usage. There was no indication that similar data was collected by the ICU. There was no documented evidence of hospital oversight of restraint usage.
Based on record review and interview it was determined that the Hospital failed to consider a mechanical device (Geri chair/recliner) as a restraint for 3 out of 20 patients in the survey selection. (Patient identifiers are #4, #5, and #6.) Findings include: Review of record revealed that 3 patients (#4, #5, and #6) on the GPU (Gero Psychiatric Unit) were placed in geri chairs/recliners with a pelvic holder. The geri chair/recliners become restraints if the patient cannot easily get out of the chair on his own. The patients in the geri chair/recliners with the use of pelvic holder constitutes a double restraint. Interview on 5/19/14 with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Director of Critical Care, and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero Psych) confirmed that the 3 patients on the GPU were placed in geri chairs/recliners with a pelvic holder. Staff A, Staff B and Staff C failed to recognize the usage of the geri chair/recliner and the pelvic holder as a double restraint. Cross refer tag: 164 and 165
Based on record review and interview it was found that the Hospital failed to have any documentation to show that other devices or interventions were ineffective prior to using the type of restraints on 6 patients in a standard survey of 20 patients. (Patients identifiers are #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6.) Findings include: During review of the 6 patient records on the GPU (Geriatric Psychiatric Unit) and the ICU (Intensive Care Unit) patients #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6, it was confirmed through interview with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Head of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero psych) that there was no documentation to show that other attempts were made with a lessor restraint to show that it was ineffective prior to using the more restrictive devices on the these 6 Patients.
Based on record review and interview it was found that the Hospital failed to have any documentation to show that the devices used was the most effective restraints to be used on 6 patients in a standard survey of 20 Patients (Patients are #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6.) Findings include: During review of the 6 patients records on the GPU (Geriatric Psychiatric Unit) and the ICU (Intensive Care Unit) patients #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6, it was confirmed through interview with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Head of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero psych) that there was no documentation to show that the restraint used was the most effective to protect the 6 patients or others from harm.
Based on policy review and interview the hospital failed to implement safe and appropriate restraint usage according to hospital policy. Finding include: Review of hospital Restraint policy with effective date of 9/89 and last revised date of 2/2014, revealed that the hospital considers ...Side-rails on beds that are up in a manner that prevents a patient from exiting the bed normally and freely are to be considered restraint and all the documentation that is required for restraints is needed. This is usually when all four half rails are up or both full rails are up. Use of siderails should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. If all side-rails are used this is considered a restraint.... A physician order was not obtained for the use of siderails on 6 patients, #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6, nor was there documentation of least restrictive devices being used. Documentation relating to assessment of Patient need and rationale for use was not documented. Interview on 5/19/14 with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Director of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero Psych) confirmed the lack of a physician order and lack of documentation determining that the least restrictive device was being used. Cross reference to 164 and 165
Based on record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to have a physicians order on 6 out of 20 sampled patients who had restraints and became secluded. (Patient identifiers are: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #6.) Findings include: During review of all 6 patients medical records, four side rails were being used when patients were in their beds, on two separate units of the hospital. These two units are the ICU (Intensive Care Unit) and GPU (Geriatric Psychiatric Unit). On review of the medical record for the 3 Patients on the ICU, patient #1, 2, and #3 all had four side rails at night secluding them to their beds. On review of the medical records for the 3 patients on the GPU, patient #4, #5, and #6 all had full side rails at night secluding them to their beds. This information was shown to Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Head of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero psych) at time of findings. On review of the physician orders sheet none of the 6 patients had an order written for the use of 4 side rails.
Based on record review and interview it was found that the hospital failed to have any documentation to show that the restraints were removed at the earliest possible time for 6 out of the 20 sampled patients. (Patients identifiers are: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5,and #6.) Findings include: During review of the 6 patients records on the GPU (Geriatric Psychiatric Unit) and the ICU (Intensive Care Unit) patients #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6, revealed that there was no documentation to show that the restraints used were discontinued at the earliest possible time. Interview on 5/19/2014 with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Head of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero Psych) confirmed that there was no documentation to show that the restraint used were discontinued at the earliest possible time.
Based on record review and interview the hospital failed to document that alternative or other less restrictive interventions were attempted on 6 of 20 patients in a survey sample of 20. (Patient identifiers are #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6.) Findings include: Review of medical record revealed that the documentation lacked an assessment that the restraints in place were the least restrictive or that less restrictive measures had been determined to be ineffective to protect the patient or others from harm. Interview on 5/19/14 with Staff A (Risk Manager), Staff B (Director of Critical Care) and Staff C (Clinical Leader Gero Psych) confirmed that there was a lack of documentation that would determine that an assessment of the restraints in place were the least restrictive or that less restrictive measures had been determined to be ineffective to protect the patient or others from harm. Cross reference to 164 and 165
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on observation and interview the hospital failed to secure drugs and biologicals to prevent access by unauthorized individuals in Surgical Services, Emergency Services, Obstetrics, Pharmacy, Endosocopy Unit and 2 off site satellite offices, failed to sufficiently lock areas to allow access by only authorized personnel and failed to remove expired medications from 1 off site location. Findings include: Observation on tour of the surgical suite on 3/26/13 at 1:30 p.m. revealed anesthesia carts in the 4 operating rooms in surgical services and the operating room on Obstetrics were unlocked. The drawers of the anesthesia carts contained multiple medications, and also contained needles and syringes. All the anesthesia carts have a metal box affixed to the outside. The metal box is referred to as the locked box by Staff G, (Director of Surgical Services). Observation revealed Succinylcholine and Propofol are stored in the locked box which was found to be unlocked on 4 of 5 anesthesia carts. Interview on 3/26/13 at 2:30 p.m. with Staff G, (Director of Surgical Services), confirmed the anesthesia carts in the 4 operating rooms in surgical services and the operating room in Obstetrics were unlocked. Staff G confirmed the locked box affixed to each anesthesia cart was unlocked on 4 of the 5 anesthesia carts. Staff G also confirmed unauthorized personnel does have unmonitored access to the surgical area and the anesthesia carts. Observation on tour of the Endoscopy unit on 3/27/13 at 2:00 p.m. revealed an unlocked refrigerator in Storage Room B with Succinylcholine stored in it. The storage room is accessible to personnel who are not authorized to have access to medication. Interview with Staff H, (Registered Nurse Endoscopy Team Leader), on 3/27/13 at 2:30 p.m. confirmed the refrigerator in Storage Room B is unlocked, contains the medication Succinylcholine and the room is accessible to personnel who are not authorized to have access to medication. Observation during tour of Pharmacy on 3/28/13 at 10 a.m. with Staff K, (Director of Pharmacy), revealed the delivery door of the pharmacy did not fully latch. Surveyor in the presence of Staff K, demonstrated direct access through the delivery door without the use of a key or staff assistance. Once through the delivery door of the pharmacy, there is access to all medications in the pharmacy with the exception of controlled substances. The delivery door would fully latch if pulled shut; however, not if left to close by door closer. During tour of the rehab offsite unit on 3/28/13 it was observed that in the medication cabinet the bottle of dexamethasone (Anti-inflammatory) that was for in-patient use had expired on ,d+[DATE]. Observation of the remaining boxes of the medication in the cabinet also had the expiration date of 10/12. Interview at time of tour with Staff P, (Director of Rehab) confirmed the above findings. Cross reference to A0502 and A0504
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on observation, and staff interview it was determined that the hospital failed to secure drugs and biologicals to prevent unmonitored access by unauthorized individuals. Findings include: Observation in the Oncology department on 3/27/13 at approximately 11:00 a.m. revealed that the intake room for oncology patients had an unsecured sharps container positioned freely in a wall mounted cabinet counter top holder which contained contaminated needles, syringes and used medication vials. During interview with Staff C (Registered Nurse) at the time of the above listed observation Staff C confirmed that the free standing sharps container with contaminated needles, syringes and used medication vials was unsecured on top of the intake room counter top which can be accessed by unauthorized individuals when the room is unoccupied or staff is busy. Observation in the emergency room on [DATE] with Staff E (Registered Nurse) at approximately 9:30 a.m. showed an unsecured mobile rapid sequence intubation (RSI) cart located in a emergency room hallway. The drawers in this cart could be opened freely. Observation of the top drawer of this cart revealed the following medications, 2% Lidocaine Viscous Oral Solution, 2% vial of Lidocaine injectable, 0.9% Sodium Chloride injectable and NeoSynephrine 0.5% spray bottle which could be accessed by unauthorized individuals.
During the tour of 1 of the 6 Specialty Practices visited on 3/26/13 at 3:30 p.m. with Staff L, (Practice Manager) it was observed that a refrigerator was unlocked and had several different type of vials of insulin inside. The refrigerator has no way to be locked and is located in an unlocked room. Interview during tour with Staff L and Staff F, (Vice President, Physician Practice Services), indicated that housekeeping from the hospital comes in after hours to clean the area when no one from the Specialty Practice staff is present.
Observation on tour of the surgical suite on 3/26/13 at 1:30 p.m. revealed anesthesia carts in the 4 operating rooms in surgical services and the operating room on Obstetrics were unlocked. The drawers of the anesthesia carts contained multiple medications, and also contained needles and syringes. All the anesthesia carts have a metal box affixed to the outside. The metal box is referred to as the locked box by Staff G, (Director of Surgical Services). Observation revealed Succinylcholine and Propofol are stored in the locked box which was found to be unlocked on 4 of 5 anesthesia carts. Interview on 3/26/13 at 2:30 p.m. with Staff G, (Director of Surgical Services), confirmed the anesthesia carts in the 4 operating rooms in surgical services and the operating room in Obstetrics were unlocked. Staff G confirmed the locked box affixed to each anesthesia cart wwas unlocked on 4 of the 5 anesthesia carts. Staff G also confirmed unauthorized personnel does have unmonitored access to the surgical area and the anesthesia carts. Observation on tour of the Endoscopy unit on 3/27/13 at 2:00 p.m. revealed an unlocked refrigerator in Storage Room B with Succinylcholine stored in it. The storage room is accessible to personnel who are not authorized to have access to medication. Interview with Staff H, (Registered Nurse Endoscopy Team Leader), on 3/27/13 at 2:30 p.m. confirmed the refrigerator in Storage Room B is unlocked, contains the medication Succinylcholine and the room is accessible to personnel who are not authorized to have access to medication. Observation during tour of Pharmacy on 3/28/13 at 10 a.m. with Staff K, (Director of Pharmacy), revealed the delivery door of the pharmacy did not fully latch. Surveyor in the presence of Staff K, demonstrated direct access through the delivery door without the use of a key or staff assistance. Once through the delivery door of the pharmacy, there is access to all medications in the pharmacy with the exception of controlled substances. The delivery door would fully latch if pulled shut; however, not if left to close by door closer. During tour of the rehab offsite unit on 3/28/13 it was observed that in the medication cabinet the bottle of dexamethasone (Anti-inflammatory) that was for in-patient use had expired on ,d+[DATE]. Observation of the remaining boxes of the medication in the cabinet also had the expiration date of 10/12. Interview at time of tour with Staff P, (Director of Rehab) confirmed the above findings.
Based on observation during tour of the Endoscopy and Pharmacy departments the hospital failed to sufficiently lock areas to allow access by only authorized personnel. Findings include: Observation on tour of the Endoscopy unit on 3/27/13 at 2:00 p.m. revealed an unlocked refrigerator in Storage Room B with Succinylcholine stored in it. Storage Room B is accessible to personnel who are not authorized to have access to medication. Interview with Staff H, (Registered Nurse Endoscopy Team Leader), on 3/27/13 at 2:30 p.m. confirmed the refrigerator in Storage Room B is unlocked, contains the medication Succinylcholine and the room is accessible to personnel who are not authorized to have access to medication. Observation during tour of Pharmacy on 3/28/13 at 10 a.m. with Staff K, (Director of Pharmacy), revealed the delivery door of the pharmacy did not fully latch. Surveyor in the presence of Staff K, demonstrated direct access through the delivery door without the use of a key or staff assistance. Once through the delivery door of the pharmacy, there is access to all medications in the pharmacy with the exception of controlled substances. The delivery door would fully latch if pulled shut; however, not if left to close by door closer.
Based on record review, staff interview, observation and review of the hospital policy and procedure it was determined that the hospital failed to inform emergency room patients and 7 out of 9 physician practices services patients in advance of furnishing services of their rights and responsibilities. Findings include: Review of the hospital PATIENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES policy and procedure dated 10/2011 revealed the following: I. PURPOSE: This policy is written to communicate to all parties the ... (hospital) philosophy and practice concerning patient rights and responsibilities... IV. PROCEDURE: 2. All patients will be provided a copy of their Patient Rights prior to or at the time of admission and advised of the hospital's policy on Patient Rights and Responsibilities. During interview with Staff B (Patient Registration, Emergency Department) on 3/27/13 at approximately 9:45 a.m., Staff B verbalized that when patients present to the emergency room registration desk they are told that the PATIENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES sheets are located on the front counter of the emergency room registration desk or they can read the posted PATIENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES displayed in the emergency room waiting area. During interview with Staff A (Director of Medical Records) on 3/27/13 at approximately 1:15 p.m., Staff A made a telephone call to the emergency room registration staff and following this conversation, Staff A relayed that patients who present to the emergency room do not sign the patient registration form that states in the section titled PATIENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES/PATIENT GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE the following: I acknowledge and understand the policy describing my rights and responsibilities, and the procedures governing my conduct have been explained to me and I have received a printed copy of the Patient Rights and Responsibilities & Patient Grievance Procedure. until they are admitted to the hospital for a length of stay. The hospital failed to ensure that patients presenting in the emergency room for treatment or services had their patient rights and responsibilities explained to them before treatment.
During tour of 7 of the 9 Physician Practice Services on 3/26/13 and 3/27/13 it was confirmed during interviews by the individual practice managers that the Patient Registration Form is signed by the patients upon initial registration and annually thereafter. The form was last updated 1-8-13. Under the section PATIENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES/PATIENT GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE which stated the following: I acknowledge and understand the policy describing my rights and responsibilities, and the procedures governing my conduct have been explained to me and I have received a printed copy of the Patient Rights and Responsibilities & Patient Grievance Procedure. It was also confirmed that the Patient Rights and Responsibilities form is not handed out to the patient at the time of check in, but the Patient Rights and Responsibilities are on the wall in the waiting room if they would like to read them.
Based on record review, interview and review of the hospital medical records policy and procedure it was determined that the hospital failed to ensure that the medical record entries for 4 of 4 emergency room transfer patients reviewed were complete, dated, timed and signed. (Patient identifiers are #58, #59, #60 and #61.) Findings include: Review of the hospital policy and procedure titled MEDICAL RECORD CONTENT AND MAINTENANCE revealed the following: I. PURPOSE: This policy addresses the process by which the Medical Records Department verifies that a medical record exists for every individual, both inpatient and outpatient evaluated or treated in the hospital. The term 'medical records' includes at least written documents, computerized electronic information ..., radiology reports, laboratory reports, pathology reports, and other forms of information regarding the condition of a patient. The staff of the Medical Records Department also ensure the records are accurately written, promptly completed, properly filed and retained, and accessible in accordance with the Conditions of Participation of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services, applicable state law and hospital policy... III. RESPONSIBILITY: C. The medical records department staff shall ensure the medical records are complete and conform to the documentation guidelines set forth in the Rules and Regulations of the Medical Staff, applicable state law, and CMS Conditions of Participation... Patient #58. Record review on 3/27/13 of the emergency room record for Patient #58 dated 1/1/13 revealed that the TRANSFER CERTIFICATION form showing that Patient #58 was transferred to another hospital was not completed in the following sections; possible RISKS, PHYSICIAN'S CERTIFICATE OF TRANSFER and not dated in the TRANSFER ACCEPTANCE section. Patient #59. Record review on 3/27/13 of the emergency room record for Patient #59 dated 3/26/13 revealed that the TRANSFER CERTIFICATION form showing that Patient #59 was transferred to another hospital was not completed in the section TRANSFER ACCEPTANCE with the Name of Receiving Physician. Patient #60. Record review on 3/27/13 of the emergency room record for Patient #60 dated 3/21/12 revealed that the TRANSFER CERTIFICATION form showing that Patient #60 was transferred to another hospital and the PHYSICIAN'S CERTIFICATE OF TRANSFER section were not completed. Patient #61. Record review on 3/27/13 of the emergency room record for Patient #61 dated 3/20/13 revealed that the TRANSFER CERTIFICATION form showing that Patient #61 was transferred to another hospital was not completed with the date and time in the PHYSICIAN'S CERTIFICATE OF TRANSFER section and the section for name of Ambulance Service, Attendant's Signature and date were not completed. During interview with Staff A (Director of Medical Records) on 3/27/13 at approximately 1:15 p.m. after Staff A reviewed the above listed findings, Staff A confirmed that the hospital emergency room transfer forms for Patients #58, #59, #60 and #61 were not complete.
Based on staff interview, observation and review of infection control information it was determined that the infection control nurse failed to effectively monitor infection control practices to prevent the spread of infections and failed to ensure that the required annual mandatory infection control education was completed for staff personnel. Findings include: Review of the Position Description for the Director of Infection Prevention Dated Evaluated: 03/2013 with the next Review Date 03/2013 revealed the following: Position Objective: Infection Prevention Infection Prevention functions in collaboration with the Infectious Disease Physician and Hospital Departments. To provide effective prevention and control practices by conducting active surveillance of prevention and control measures designed to meet the population served and patient continuum of care. Surveillance activities are directed toward prevention and control practices that apply to hospital practice settings for the population served and reflects an assessment of infection risks at ... (hospital) and our community. Essential Position Functions: To conduct annual education programs for health care providers on infection risks as well as their specific roles in the infection control program... To conduct surveillance activities to review, analyze reports of significant health care associated infections and implement necessary control measures... To maintain a systematic approach to surveillance in order to monitor the effectiveness of prevention and control strategies... Volunteer and employee participation in orientation and mandatory annual and ongoing education programs, including Bloodborne pathogens and tuberculosis. Integration with Employee Health Services regarding the reporting of any suspected or diagnosed infections, exposures to blood or body fluids, health care associated infections, tuberculosis and other communicable diseases... Infection Prevention and Control Committee: Approving the surveillance program and providing direction relative to outbreak occurrences... During interview with Staff M (Infection Control) on 3/27/13 at approximately 9:15 a.m. Staff M confirmed by interview and could show no documented evidence of infection control surveillance monitoring rounds for the hospital clinical areas, ancillary service areas as well as off site campus locations. Review of the annual mandatory infection control education reports titled Assignment Completion Report with a date range from 10/1/2011 through 3/28/2013 revealed that over 30 staff from in house and off site campus departments had not completed the mandatory education. During review of the above listed annual education report and interview with Staff S (Vice President Patient Care Services) on 3/28/13, Staff S confirmed that over 30 staff personnel from in house and off site campus departments had not completed the annual mandatory infection control education.
During tour of a Family Practice office on 3/27/13 at 8:00 a.m. with Staff D, (Practice Manager) it was observed that the pad on the exam table in Exam Room #8 had a tear in the corner showing the inside foam. Interview on 3/27/13 with Staff D and Staff F, (Vice President, Physician Practice Services), confirmed that Staff D and Staff F were unaware of the tear in exam table and Staff F was unaware that it could be an infection control issue when cleaning. During the tour of a Walk-In Practice on 3/27/13 at approximately 8:30 a.m. with Staff D, it was observed that the pad on the exam table in Exam Room #12 had a tear in the corner showing the inside foam. Interview on 3/27/13 with Staff D and Staff F confirmed that Staff D and Staff F were unaware of the tear in exam table and that it could be an infection control issue when cleaning. During tour of the 1 of the 6 Specialty Practices visited on 3/27/13 it was noted that in the triage room under the bench seat the laminated area was chipped and the board underneath was exposed. The board is porous and not cleanable. Interview with Staff N, (Practice Manager) during tour indicated it was hard to keep the area covered because the patients keep hitting and kicking it and chipping the laminated area.
Based on review of the infection control log and staff interview it was determined that the hospital failed to maintain a log related to infections and communicable diseases. Findings include: Review of the January through December infection control logs revealed incomplete logs with no documented evidence of employee health status and showed incomplete information to determine acquired conditions during treatments and data collected to enable analysis and evaluation of the infections documented on these logs. During interview with Staff M (Infection Control Nurse) on 3/28/13 after Staff M reviewed the provided infection control logs, Staff M relayed that the infection control logs do not capture the employee health status and data to enable the analysis and evaluation of the infections identified on these logs.
Based on observation and interview the facility has failed to maintain an environment in several departments that are safe from public access by using appropriate security mechanisms to be in place to protect patients. Findings include: During tour and observation of the hospital during survey from 3/26/13 through 3/28/13 it was found that multiple areas throughout the hospital could be accessed with no security in place. These areas are as follows: 1) The elevator that travels from the emergency room to medical surgical unit called the Spaulding Unit, also has direct access to the operating room. Any person from either area (emergency room or medical surgical unit) could enter the elevator, push the first floor button and end up at the double doors just outside the semi-restricted hallway which is not locked and has direct access to the operating rooms. 2) During tour of the radiology department it was found through observation that three doors have direct access to the department with no security. All three doors are located in the public corridor and have direct access into the radiology department. These three doors were observed and shown to Staff J (Director of Radiology). Staff I (Director of Facilities) was asked to define the doors which are as follows: (Doors 17, 35, 117) all failing to have locking mechanisms on them to prevent public access. 3) During tour of the wounds clinic there's a public access hallway that travels past the endoscopic procedure room where two double doors are located. These doors are unlocked and can be activated by a push pad having direct access into the procedure rooms of the endoscopic suite. The doors were shown to Staff J who defined the doors as the rear corridor entrance to the endoscopic suite. 4) During tour of the maternity unit it was found that there is an operating room utilized for C-Sections as confirmed by Staff G (Director Surgical Services) located within the unit. To enter this area there are two double doors that are unlocked and have direct access to the operating room with no security to prevent access from others.
During tour of the facility on 3/27/13 and 3/28/13 it was observed that the facility failed to maintain smoke/fire barriers as constructed, to ensure the safety of patients in several areas within the hospital. Also the facility failed to maintain proper ceiling tiles for semi-restricted areas within the operating rooms, along with maintaining monolithic flooring in the endoscopy surgical suites. The facility also failed to have differential-pressure-indicators in the operating rooms along with failing to maintain the proper cubic feet per minute air volumes from the as built design as evident by record review. Findings include: During tour of the facility with Staff I (Director of Facilities) and Staff R (Assistant Director of Facilities) it was found that several areas throughout the facility had failed smoke/fire barriers. The facility provided a facility floor plan that showed the smoke/fire barriers and their location. These areas were inspected by surveyor on 3/27/13 and 3/28/13 at which time all observations made were documented by Staff R and written as follows: 1) 3rd floor west Right hallway by fire door open chase 2) 3rd floor west Right hallway sidewall ventilation pipe by fire door gap 3) 3rd floor west Left hallway communication chase pushed out of wall and not sealed, also 2 holes in wall for electrical not patched and sealed 4) 3rd floor east oncology smoke walls Entrance to oncology wire chase not patched and sealed 5) 3rd east hallway bath oncology break room No sheet rock on walls not sealed and patched reconfigured fire and smoke partition 6) 3rd east hallway, bath, break room oncology side... 3 doors need to be rated for extend fire wall (bathroom hall) (break room inside door) (office manager) all need door closures, also office manager needs magnet 7) 3rd east oncology hallway Patch and seal holes over back door to oncology and in corner (wire chase) (electrical box) (corner gap) 8) Oncology Re-map wall for new smoke area 9) Spaulding/GPU hallway a. Over GPU doors several wire thru wall not sealed b. Bath by elevators wall outside door holes around ducts not sealed to ceiling c. Fire door 2E12 holes above frame and on side top right 10) Spaulding a. IT (communication closet) DF 20 holes above strobe b. Fire door 2E14 holes above frame in sheetrock c. Fire door 2E20 sheet rock missing fill gaps to top of wall 11) Spaulding work room a. Work room fill hole top of wall over printer b. Fire door 2E19 holes replace sheetrock right side of frame 12) Spaulding nurse mangers office Towel used in hole in ceiling 13) CCU left hallway Fill hole in corner of firewall above fire curtain 14) CCU right hallway Wrap stud that is exposed right side of fire curtain access from bathroom #252 15) Cardiac testing 1st floor west Hole above glass fire rated door 16) Lobby first floor west Door into lobby hoes above frame 17) Hallway main street Multiple holes system need to be re-evaluated at this point At this time the smoke/fire barrier inspection stopped as sufficient sampling of smoke/fire barriers had been established for non compliance. During interview Staff I stated there is a system to check these walls and place tags on them to show that they had been inspected and passed. It was observed that some of the walls had tags on them that were placed by facility staff from two days prior to the inspection performed by surveyor, and no findings were found by the facility as confirmed through interview with Staff I. Cross Refer to A0701 and A0726
Based on tour of multiple surgical areas on 3/26/13 and 3/28/13 it was observed that the facility failed to maintain an environment to meet surgical services. The facility failed to have proper ceiling tiles within the semi-restricted environment areas, and failed to have wall finishes that can be cleanable, along with failing to maintain horizontal surfaces free from dust in operating rooms, along with failing to maintain monolithic flooring in the endoscopy surgical suite. Findings include: Ceilings... AIA, (American Institute of Architecture) Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities 2.1 General Hospitals 8.2 General Standards for Details and Finishes 8.2.3.4 Ceilings... (3) Semirestricted areas (a) Ceiling finishes in semirestricted areas such as air borne infection isolation rooms, protective environment rooms, clean corridors, central sterile supply spaces, specialized radiographic rooms, and minor surgical procedure rooms shall be smooth, scrubbable, nonabsorptive, non perforated, capable of withstanding cleaning with chemicals, and without crevices that can harbor mold and bacterial growth. (b) If lay-in ceiling is provided, it shall be gasketed or clipped down to prevent the passage of particles from the cavity above the ceiling plane into the semirestricted environment. Perforated, tegular, serrated, or highly textured tiles shall not be used. During tour of the surgical suites it was observed and shown to Staff G (Director of Surgical Services) that all the ceiling tiles located within the semi-restricted corridors and sterile supply spaces were perforated ceiling tiles. These tiles were not scrubbable and capable of withstanding cleaning and/or disinfecting chemicals. Also these tiles failed to be clipped down or gasketed, this was told to Staff G at the time of finding on 3/26/13. During tour of the maternity unit on 3/26/13 it was observed and shown to Staff G that the semi-restricted corridors had perforated ceiling tiles. These tiles were not scrubbable and capable of withstanding cleaning and/or disinfecting chemicals. Wall finishes... 2010 Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities 3.7-7 Design and construction Requirements, 3.7-7.2 Architectural Details, Surfaces, and Furnishings. 3.7-7.2.3.3 Walls. Wall finishes shall be appropriate for the areas in which they are located and shall be as follows: (1) Wall finishes shall be cleanable. (2) Wall finishes in areas such as clean corridors, central sterile supply spaces, specialized radiographic rooms, and minor surgical procedure rooms shall be washable, smooth, and able to withstand chemical cleaning ... Operation rooms 1 and 2 were observed with Staff G and both operating rooms failed to maintain wall finishes to withstand chemical cleaning. During tour of the above areas it was observed with Staff G on 3/26/13 that two different walls had gouges/tears in the Sheetrock. Also the Sheetrock paper was ripped and torn in several areas throughout the surgical suites failing to be washable and capable of withstand chemical cleaning. These areas are as follows: 1) Operating room 1 had a metal access panel around 12 x 12 cut into the Sheetrock wall with exposed wires exiting the bottom of the panel. Staff G thought the wires were for the surgical boom. All the edges around the access panel had exposed Sheetrock and failed to be sealed. 2) Operating room 2 had a computer jack (pp/33-41) that was pulled from the wall exposing the Sheetrock where it had been attached. Dust in OR's... AORN(Association of periOperative Registered Nurses) 2009 Edition Page 439. Recommended Practices for Environmental Cleaning in the Perioperative Setting. Recommendation 1 The patient should be provided a clean, safe environment... 1.b All horizontal surfaces in the OR (eg, furniture, surgical lights, booms, equipment) should be damp dusted before the first scheduled surgical procedure of the day. Plasma and monitor screens should be cleaned according to manufacturers' instructions. Dust is known to contain human skin and hair, fabric fibers, pollens, mold, fungi, insect parts, glove powder, and paper fibers among other things. Airborne particles range in size from 0.001 microns to several hundred microns. Contamination for particles can come from an external source (eg, ventilation, doors) or an internal source... Facility Policy (Operating Room Sanitation) with an effective date of 8/2006 states Prior to the first scheduled procedure of the day, horizontal surfaces should be damp dusted. Damp dusting should be done with a clean cloth moistened with an appropriate agent... During tour of the surgical suites on 3/26/13 and tour of the endoscopy suite on 3/27/13 it was observed by surveyor and shown to Staff G and Staff H (Team Leader) that several horizontal surfaces in all 5 operating rooms and 4 endoscopy rooms had dust build up. Staff G observed these findings at the time when surveyor checked the horizontal surfaces. These same findings were found with Staff H during the inspection of the 4 endoscopy procedure rooms. Flooring... 2010 Guidelines for the Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities 3.9 Specific Requirements for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Facilities. 3.9-7.2.3.2 Flooring 1) Floor finishes. Floor finishes in the gastrointestinal endoscopy facility shall be appropriate for the areas in which they are located and shall be as follows: 2) Procedure room floors. Floor covering in the procedure suite shall be monolithic and joint free. During tour of the endoscopy surgical suite on 3/27/13 with Staff G and Staff H it was observed that the floor seams that created a monolithic membrane were split and cracked making open voids in the floor for procedure rooms 1, 2, and 3.
Based on observation,record review and interview the facility failed to monitor 4 surgical suites for positive pressure by using differential-pressure-indication devices. Also the facility failed to maintain the proper air changes from the original design for the surgical suites, along with maintaining cleaning of air ducts. Findings include: Pressure Differentials... ANSI [American National Standard Institute]/ASHRAE/ASHE [American Society for Healthcare Engineering] Standard 170-2008 Ventilation of Health Care Facilities. Page 11. 7.4 Surgery Rooms. 7.4.1 Class B and C Operating Rooms. Operating rooms shall be maintained at a positive pressure with respect to all adjoining spaces at all times. A pressure differential shall be maintained at a value of at least =0.01 in. wc (2.5Pa). ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers) Chapter 7 Health Care Facilities. Specific Design Criteria Surgery and Critical Care. 7.5 The following conditions are recommended for operating, catheterization, cystoscopic, and fracture rooms: Air pressure should be kept positive with respect to any adjoining rooms by supplying excess air. A differential-pressure-indication device should be installed to permit air pressure readings in the rooms. Thorough sealing of all wall, ceiling, and floor penetrations, and tight-fitting doors are essential to maintaining readable pressure. During tour on 3/27/13 of the hospitals surgical suites it was observed that 4 of the 5 operating rooms failed to have differential pressure indication devices on the walls to show that the rooms are in positive pressure to the adjoining spaces. All findings were shown to Staff G (Director of Surgical Services) at time of tour. Maintain Original Design... ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers) Standard 170-2008 Ventilation of Health Care Facilities Page 11 #8. Planning, construction, and system startup. 8.1 Overview. For HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Conditioning) systems serving surgery and critical care spaces, compliance with this standard requires preparation of an acceptance testing plan. 8.5 Documentation of New or Remodeled HVAC Systems. Owners shall retain an acceptance testing report for their files. In addition, the design shall include requirements for operations and maintenance staff training that is sufficient for the staff to keep all HVAC equipment in a condition that will maintain the original design intent for ventilation. Training of operating staff shall include an explanation of the design intent. The training materials shall include, at a minimum, the following: a. O&M procedures b. Temperature and pressure control operation in all modes c. Acceptable tolerances for system temperature and pressures d. Procedures for operations under emergency power or other abnormal conditions that have been considered in the facility design. During tour of the surgical suites on 3/26/13 it was observed and shown to Staff G (Director of Surgical Services) that the air returns in several of the operating rooms were very poor. A tissue/paper test was performed by holding a tissue/paper in front of the return, where the tissue/paper would be pulled in. When this was done the tissue/paper would not pull in as strong as the opposite return did. This was shown to Staff G who agreed that the returns were not of the same draw/strength. On review of the facility's airflow report dated 3/22/12, which is the most current air balance report as confirmed by Staff I, (Director of Facilities) it shows that the air returns for each operating room failed to meet the as built design. Operating rooms returns (each OR has two returns, R1 and R2) should be balanced equally, for proper air movement, or CFM (cubic feet per minute). Design/as built. Operating room 1 as built R1- 650 cfm, R2 not specified. tested R1- 277 cfm, R2-328 cfm Operating room 2 as built R1-500 cfm, R2 -500 cfm. tested R1-106 cfm, R2-139 cfm Operating room 3 as built R1-500 cfm, R2-500 cfm. tested R1-318 cfm, R2-342 cfm Operating room 4 as built R1- not specified, R2-700 cfm. tested R1-198 cfm, R2-211 cfm Operating room 5 as built R1-500 cfm, R2-500 cfm. tested R1-236 cfm, R2-80 cfm Cleaning of Ducts... NFPA 90A B-4 Inspection and Cleaning of Ducts. B-4.1. Inspections to determine the amount of dust and waste material in the ducts (both discharge and return) should be made quarterly. However, if, after several inspections, such frequent inspection is determined to be unnecessary, the interval between inspections can be permitted to be adjusted to suit the conditions. B-4.2 Cleaning should be undertaken whenever an inspection indicates the need. Findings include: During review of the facility's maintenance records it was found that on October 16-18, 2006, the hospital had their fire/smoke dampers tested by an outside vendor for proper operation. During the testing the vendor took pictures of the dampers. Many of the pictures showed large amounts of dust buildup within the plenum of the fire/smoke dampers. Staff I (Director of Facilities) was asked after showing the pictures to them, if the ventilation systems within the hospital had been cleaned by an outside vendor or not. Staff I stated the only thing that was done was to use a 2-3' duster since that is as far as they could reach but no outside vendor has cleaned the duct work.
Based on interview and review of the Medical Records program it was determined that the hospital failed to maintain a systematic approach to monitor the effectiveness of the completeness, and accurate and timely documentation. This Condition is not met as evidenced by: Cross reference A438, A450, A457 and A469. Findings include: During interview on 3/28/13 with Staff A (Director of Medical Records) Staff A provided a report titled List of Overdue Records (30 Days From Discharge) which is their evidence to show the overdue records. Staff A indicated that if for any reason the chart is taken out of the overdue record system it changes the date even if the record has numerous other entries that have to be signed from other physicians. Therefore, if there are multiple physicians that are overdue with signatures, once one physician signs his overdue signature it takes the record out of the delinquent queue.
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on record review, interview and review of the hospital medical records policy and procedure it was determined that the hospital failed to ensure that the medical record entries for 1 out of 3 closed patient records were complete, dated, timed and signed within thirty days. (Patient identifier is #41.) Findings include: Review of the hospital policy and procedure titled MEDICAL RECORD CONTENT AND MAINTENANCE revealed the following: I. PURPOSE: This policy addresses the process by which the Medical Records Department verifies that a medical record exists for every individual, both inpatient and outpatient evaluated or treated in the hospital. The term 'medical records'/ includes at least written documents, computerized electronic information ..., radiology reports, laboratory reports, pathology reports, and other forms of information regarding the condition of a patient. The staff of the Medical Records Department also ensure the records are accurately written, promptly completed, properly filed and retained, and accessible in accordance with the Conditions of Participation of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services, applicable state law and hospital policy... III. RESPONSIBILITY: C. The medical records department staff shall ensure the medical records are complete and conform to the documentation guidelines set forth in the Rules and Regulations of the Medical Staff, applicable state law, and CMS Conditions of Participation... Review of the policy No. Med Staff #22 with a review date of 6/2012 Medical Record Compliance Policy, revealed the following: IV. Procedures: Medical record delinquencies, as defined in Rule 4 in the Rules and Regulations of Medical Staff, shall be addressed as follows: Providers will receive notification from the medical records department when a patient chart has been delinquent for 30 days,.. A second notification from the Chairperson of the Credentials Committee will be sent by certified mail after 60 days delinquency, indicating that if charts are not completed within 30 days, the provider will be considered to have voluntarily withdrawn his/her clinical privileges and membership from the Medical Staff... The excerpts from Rules and Regulation of Medical Staff pages 45-47, revealed subsection g. All orders...All verbal/telephone orders shall be authenticated, signed, dated and timed within 48 hours, with the exception of orders for restraints. s. Each attending physician will be required to complete patient records, including dictation of a discharge summary, within 7 days after the Medical Records Department has finished assembly and analysis of these records... ii. Medical records, still incomplete after 30 days because of missing signatures, shall be considered delinquent. Patient #41 Review of Patient #41's closed medical record on 3/27/13 revealed that Patient #41 was discharged from the hospital 1/17/13. Review of Patient #41's physician orders revealed several unsigned verbal orders by different physicians. Interview with Staff A (Director of Medical Records), on 3/28/13 revealed that only emails had been sent out to the physicians for their delinquent signatures and that the department had not received any notification from the Medical Staff President that the provider would be considered to have voluntarily withdrawn his/her clinical privileges and membership for delinquency. Staff A indicated that Staff A talks with their office managers and sends emails and letters to get signatures. Review of the List of Overdue Records (30 Days from Discharge) Report, revealed that Patient #41 does not appear on this list, even though Patient #41 was discharged from the hospital on [DATE].
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on record review, interview and review of the hospital medical records policy and procedure it was determined that the hospital failed to ensure that the verbal orders for 1 of 3 of the closed patient records and 1 of 25 inpatient records were complete, dated, timed and signed within 48 hours per hospital policy. (Patient identifiers are #27 and #41.) Findings include: Review of the hospital policy and procedure titled MEDICAL RECORD CONTENT AND MAINTENANCE revealed the following: I. PURPOSE: This policy addresses the process by which the Medical Records Department verifies that a medical record exists for every individual, both inpatient and outpatient evaluated or treated in the hospital. The term 'medical records' includes at least written documents, computerized electronic information ..., radiology reports, laboratory reports, pathology reports, and other forms of information regarding the condition of a patient. The staff of the Medical Records Department also ensure the records are accurately written, promptly completed, properly filed and retained, and accessible in accordance with the Conditions of Participation of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services, applicable state law and hospital policy... III. RESPONSIBILITY: C. The medical records department staff shall ensure the medical records are complete and conform to the documentation guidelines set forth in the Rules and Regulations of the Medical Staff, applicable state law, and CMS Conditions of Participation... Review of the policy No. Med Staff #22 with a review date of 6/2012 Medical Record Compliance Policy, revealed the following: The excerpts from Rules and Regulation of Medical Staff pages 45-46, subsection g. All orders...All verbal/telephone orders shall be authenticated, signed, dated and timed within 48 hours, with the exception of orders for restraints. Patient #41 Review of Patient #41's closed medical record on 3/27/13 revealed that Patient #41 was discharged from the hospital 1/17/13. Review of Patient #41's physician orders revealed several unsigned verbal orders by different physicians. Interview with Staff A (Director of Medical Records), on 3/28/13 revealed that only emails had been sent out to the physicians regarding the delinquent signatures and that the department had not received any notification from the Medical Staff President that the provider would be considered to have voluntarily withdrawn his/her clinical privileges and membership for delinquency. Staff A indicated that Staff A talks with their office managers and sends emails and letters to get signatures. Interview with Staff A on 3/28/13, confirmed that Patient #41's medical record is more than 30 days overdue. Staff A confirmed that Resident #41 did not appear on the List of Overdue Records (30 Days from Discharge) Report, even though Patient #41 was discharged from the hospital on [DATE].
Patient #27 Review of the medical record for Patient #27 on 3/27/13 and 3/28/13 identified three telephone/verbal physician orders written on 3/21/13. The orders lack the physician signatures as per the facility's policy. On 3/24/13 another verbal/telephone order was also documented in the medical record that lacks the physician signature within the 48 hours. On 3/22/13 there was another telephone order written where an order was taken with no identifiable prescribing physician documented in the medical record.
Based on record review, interview and review of the hospital medical records policy and procedure it was determined that the hospital failed to ensure that the medical record entries for 1 of 3 closed patient records were complete, dated, timed and signed within thirty days. (Patient identifier is #41.) Findings include: Review of the hospital policy and procedure titled MEDICAL RECORD CONTENT AND MAINTENANCE revealed the following: I. PURPOSE: This policy addresses the process by which the Medical Records Department verifies that a medical record exists for every individual, both inpatient and outpatient evaluated or treated in the hospital. The term 'medical records' includes at least written documents, computerized electronic information ..., radiology reports, laboratory reports, pathology reports, and other forms of information regarding the condition of a patient. The staff of the Medical Records Department also ensure the records are accurately written, promptly completed, properly filed and retained, and accessible in accordance with the Conditions of Participation of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services, applicable state law and hospital policy... III. RESPONSIBILITY: C. The medical records department staff shall ensure the medical records are complete and conform to the documentation guidelines set forth in the Rules and Regulations of the Medical Staff, applicable state law, and CMS Conditions of Participation... Review of the policy No. Med Staff #22 with a review date of 6/2012 Medical Record Compliance Policy, revealed the following: IV. Procedures: Medical record delinquencies, as defined in Rule 4 in the Rules and Regulation of Medical Staff, shall be addressed as follows: Providers will receive notification from the medical records department when a patient chart has been delinquent for 30 days,.. A second notification from the Chairperson of the Credentials Committee will be sent by certified mail after 60 days delinquency, indicating that if charts are not completed within 30 days, the provider will be considered to have voluntarily withdrawn his/her clinical privileges and membership from the Medical Staff... The excerpts from Rules and Regulation of Medical Staff pages 45-47, subsection g. All orders...All verbal/telephone orders shall be authenticated, signed, dated and timed within 48 hours, with the exception of orders for restraints. s. Each attending physician will be required to complete patient records, including dictation of a discharge summary, within 7 days after the Medical Records Department has finished assembly and analysis of these records... ii. Medical records, still incomplete after 30 days because of missing signatures, shall be considered delinquent. Patient #41 Review of Patient #41's closed medical record on 3/27/13 revealed that Patient #41 was discharged from the hospital 1/17/13. Review of Patient #41's physician orders revealed several unsigned verbal orders by different physicians. Interview with Staff A (Director of Medical Records), on 3/28/13 revealed that only emails had been sent out to the physicians regarding the delinquent signatures and that the department had not received any notification from the Medical Staff President that the provider would be considered to have voluntarily withdrawn his/her clinical privileges and membership for delinquency. Staff A indicated that Staff A talks with their office managers and sends emails and letters to get signatures. Interview with Staff A on 3/28/13, confirmed that Patient #41's medical record is more than 30 days overdue. Review of the List of Overdue Records (30 Days from Discharge) report, revealed Patient #41 does not appear on the list. Staff A confirmed that Patient #41 was not on the Overdue list when Patient #41 should have been.
Based on interview and review of the Quality Performance Improvement program it was determined that the hospital failed to ensure an effective, house-wide, data driven program. Findings include: During interview on 3/28/13 with Staff O ( Director of Quality & Performance Improvement) Staff O was unable to provide documented evidence to show that the Employee Health department was reporting to and represented as part of the Quality Performance Improvement (QPI). Staff O confirmed by this interview that the Employee Health department was missed as part of the hospital quality assessment and performance improvement program.
Based on observation, record review and interview it was determined that the hospital failed to maintain an effective grievance process for one emergency room patient by failing to document in-servicing to the staff for all identified concerns during care. (Patient identifier is #1.) Findings include: Tour of the emergency room (ER) on 7/2/12, with Staff E (Director Emergency Nursing and EMS) at approximately 1:00 p.m. revealed the following observations, the emergency room ambulance entrance has a set of full glass automated doors which lead from the ambulance entrance and emergency room parking lot. This set of doors opens to an ER hallway directly to ER Room 4 which contains two bays for patient care. Each bay has curtains which can be pulled to allowed privacy during care. ER Room 4 has a set of full view sliding glass doors which open to this hallway directly from the ER ambulance entrance. Further observation revealed that an individual in the ER parking lot could see directly into the ER and into ER Room 4. Staff E confirmed this finding at the time of the emergency room observation tour and was aware that ER Room 4 was visible from the ER parking lot, ambulance entrance, unless the curtains was pulled during care. Record review on 7/2/12 of the emergency room notes for Patient #1 dated 04/23/2012 revealed the following, 1835 Daughter to desk, tearful she stepped out for a minute and on return found patient had removed his IV (intravenous), taken off monitor leads, urinated on floor and removed all clothing. Pt (patient) very confused, assisted back to bed... 1855 22g to left AC (antecubital), pt placed back on monitor and O2 (oxygen). Review of the hospital PATIENT RELATIONS WORKSHEET dated 5/1/2012, written by Staff B, (Risk Management), revealed the following; Just wanted to let you know I received a call from ... in regards to a patient complaint. Daughter of patient [Patient#1]... called upset about her father's care in the Emergency Department. He was brought in from the ... Home with a fever and agitation. ...(physician name) had informed her that he was going to be admitted and encouraged her to step out and get something to eat. The primary nurse was not aware that the daughter left as she had been at the bedside with him since his arrival. Upon arrival back to the ER she could see her father through the ambulance doors and he was unclothed and had pulled his IV out. She expresses this was poor care.... Review of another letter signed by Staff B addressed to the daughter of Patient #1 dated May 1, 2012 showed the following: I was recently made aware of an incident involving your father (Patient #1), which occurred while he was in our emergency room awaiting admission on April 23, 2012. It's my understanding that we failed to pass along information that you were leaving his bedside; and that this resulted in inadequate monitoring. While there was no untoward outcome or injury to your dad, we should have done better...I understand that following your meeting with Staff D, Clinical Coordinator of our Emergency Department, your experience was discussed at a departmental meeting; and all staff were reminded of the importance of hand-off communications, especially when patient safety is involved....I am very sorry for not monitoring ...(Patient #1) more closely once you left the Emergency Department... During interview with Staff D and Staff E (Director of Emergency Nursing and (EMS)) on 7/2/12 at approximately 1:50 p.m. Staff D and E confirmed that Patient #1 was left unattended, had urinated on the floor, was unclothed and had removed the IV himself on the April 23, 2012 visit to the emergency room . During interview with Staff F (V.P. Patient Care Services) and Staff G (Patient Safety/Risk Management) on 7/2/12 at approximately 2:10 p.m. it was confirmed that there is no documented evidence from the Emergency Department of a staff meeting or staff in-service regarding the incident listed above for Patient #1 on April 23, 2012. Cross reference #0143.
Based on observation, record review and interview it was determined that the hospital failed to ensure the personal privacy for one emergency room patient. (Patient identifier is #1.) Findings include: Tour of the emergency room (ER) on 7/2/12, with Staff E (Director Emergency Nursing and EMS) at approximately 1:00 p.m. revealed the following observations, the emergency room ambulance entrance has a set of full glass automated doors which lead from the ambulance entrance and emergency room parking lot. This set of doors opens to an ER hallway directly to ER Room 4 which contains two bays for patient care. Each bay has curtains which can be pulled to allowed privacy during care. ER Room 4 has a set of full view sliding glass doors which open to this hallway directly from the ER ambulance entrance. Further observation revealed that an individual in the ER parking lot could see directly into the ER and into ER Room 4. Staff E confirmed this finding at the time of the emergency room observation tour and was aware that ER Room 4 was visible from the ER parking lot, ambulance entrance, unless the curtains was pulled during care. Record review on 7/2/12 of the emergency room notes for Patient #1 dated 04/23/2012 revealed the following; 1835 Daughter to desk, tearful she stepped out for a minute and on return found patient had removed his IV (intravenous), taken off monitor leads, urinated on floor and removed all clothing. Pt (patient) very confused, assisted back to bed... 1855 22g to left AC (antecubital), pt placed back on monitor and O2 (oxygen). Review of the hospital PATIENT RELATIONS WORKSHEET dated 5/1/2012, written by Staff B, (Risk Management), revealed the following; Just wanted to let you know I received a call from ... in regards to a patient complaint. Daughter of patient [Patient#1]... called upset about her father's care in the Emergency Department. He was brought in from the ... Home with a fever and agitation. ...(physician name) had informed her that he was going to be admitted and encouraged her to step out and get something to eat. The primary nurse was not aware that the daughter left as she had been at the bedside with him since his arrival. Upon arrival back to the ER she could see her father through the ambulance doors and he was unclothed and had pulled his IV out. She expresses this was poor care.... Review of another letter signed by Staff B addressed to the daughter of Patient #1 dated May 1, 2012 showed the following; I was recently made aware of an incident involving your father (Patient #1), which occurred while he was in our emergency room awaiting admission on April 23, 2012. It's my understanding that we failed to pass along information that you were leaving his bedside; and that this resulted in inadequate monitoring. While there was no untoward outcome or injury to your dad, we should have done better... I understand that following your meeting with Staff D, Clinical Coordinator of our Emergency Department, your experience was discussed at a departmental meeting; and all staff were reminded of the importance of hand-off communications, especially when patient safety is involved....I am very sorry for not monitoring ...(Patient #1) more closely once you left the Emergency Department... During interview with Staff D and Staff E (Director of Emergency Nursing and (EMS)) on 7/2/12 at approximately 1:50 p.m. Staff D and E confirmed that Patient #1 was left unattended, had urinated on the floor, was unclothed and had removed the IV himself on the April 23, 2012 visit to the emergency room .
DISCLAIMER: The CMS violation information provided by HCA Vs. America on https://hcavsamerica.org/ is for general informational purposes only. The data and findings displayed on this page(s) originated from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and can be found at https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Provider-Enrollment-and-Certification/CertificationandComplianc/Hospitals HCA Vs. America makes no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, validly, availability of any information on this website and is simply reporting information that is publicly available by CMS.