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
F0578
D

Inconsistent Documentation of Advance Directives for Emergency Treatment

Cokato, Minnesota Survey Completed on 04-25-2025

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 ensure that a resident's advance directives for emergency treatment were consistently and accurately reflected across all areas of the medical record. Specifically, for one resident who was cognitively intact and had diagnoses including hyperlipidemia and schizophrenia, there was a discrepancy between the documented code status in different parts of the medical record. The resident's signed code status form, which was also signed by a family member and physician, indicated a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order. However, the physician orders in the electronic medical record (EMR) listed the resident as FULL CODE. Interviews with facility staff, including a trained medical assistant, a registered nurse, and the director of nursing (DON), revealed that staff relied on various sources such as the hard chart, face sheet, and medication administration record (MAR) to determine code status. The DON confirmed that the resident's wishes were not consistently documented, as the physician orders did not match the signed DNR form. The facility's policy required that emergency care, including CPR, be provided according to physician orders and resident choice as indicated in advance directives, but this was not accurately implemented in this case.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙