Stay Ahead of Compliance with Monthly Citation Updates


In your State Survey window and need a snapshot of your risks?

Survey Preparedness Report

One Time Fee
$79
  • Last 12 months of citation data in one tailored report
  • Pinpoint the tags driving penalties in facilities like yours
  • Jump to regulations and pathways used by surveyors
  • Access to your report within 2 hours of purchase
  • Easily share it with your team - no registration needed
Get Your Report Now →

Monthly citation updates straight to your inbox for ongoing preparation?

Monthly Citation Reports

$18.90 per month
  • Latest citation updates delivered monthly to your email
  • Citations organized by compliance areas
  • Shared automatically with your team, by area
  • Customizable for your state(s) of interest
  • Direct links to CMS documentation relevant parts
Learn more →

Save Hours of Work with AI-Powered Plan of Correction Writer


One-Time Fee

$49 per Plan of Correction
Volume discounts available – save up to 20%
  • Quickly search for approved POC from other facilities
  • Instant access
  • Intuitive interface
  • No recurring fees
  • Save hours of work
F0756
D

Failure to Document Clinical Rationale for Not Following Pharmacist Medication Recommendations

Oceanside, California Survey Completed on 04-17-2025

Penalty

No penalty information released
tooltip icon
The penalty, as released by CMS, applies to the entire inspection this citation is part of, covering all citations and f-tags issued, not just this specific f-tag. For the complete original report, please refer to the 'Details' section.

Summary

The facility failed to follow its own policy regarding the documentation and response to pharmacist recommendations for medication regimen reviews. According to facility policy, the consultant pharmacist is required to review each resident's medication regimen monthly and provide a written report to the attending physician for any identified medication irregularities. The attending physician is then required to document in the medical record that the irregularity has been reviewed and what, if any, action was taken. In the case reviewed, the pharmacist made recommendations regarding the use and dosage of Depakote for a resident with multiple psychiatric diagnoses, including obsessive-compulsive disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. The pharmacist's reviews noted that the indication for Depakote needed clarification, specifically whether it was being used for seizure control or for behavioral health purposes. The pharmacist also recommended an adjustment to the dosage, as the resident's levels were sub-therapeutic for seizures. In both instances, the provider's only written response was "no," without providing a clinical rationale or further explanation, as required by facility policy. The lack of documentation and rationale for not following the pharmacist's recommendations was confirmed during interviews with facility staff, including the DON, Case Manager, and the nurse practitioner responsible for the resident's care. The nurse practitioner acknowledged that while she had documented the indication for Depakote in her own notes, she had not provided this information on the medication regimen review forms, which would have made it accessible to the pharmacist. The facility's process for handling pharmacist recommendations involved the DON and Case Manager distributing recommendations to providers, but there was no further documentation if the provider chose not to implement the recommendation. This failure to document the clinical rationale for not following the pharmacist's recommendations resulted in noncompliance with facility policy and regulatory requirements.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙