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 Rationale for Declining Pharmacy Recommendations for Psychotropic Medication Dose Reductions

South Boston, Virginia Survey Completed on 05-22-2025

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 licensed pharmacist's recommendations for gradual dose reductions (GDR) of psychotropic medications were properly addressed and documented for two residents. In the first case, a resident with significant cognitive impairment and multiple psychotropic medications had pharmacy recommendations for GDRs, but the attending physician declined these recommendations without providing a patient-specific rationale, as required by facility policy. The physician simply checked a box indicating that a GDR was clinically contraindicated but left the rationale section blank. Additionally, the facility was unable to provide documentation of a previous pharmacy recommendation for this resident, despite requests from surveyors. In the second case, another resident with dementia, major depression, and mood disorder was prescribed Seroquel for mood disorder. The pharmacy recommended GDRs on two occasions, but the physician declined these recommendations. On one occasion, the only rationale provided was a family request, and on the other, no rationale was documented at all. Facility policy and the State Operations Manual require that a specific explanation be provided when recommendations are rejected, but this was not done. Both cases demonstrate that the facility did not follow its own policies and procedures regarding medication regimen reviews and the documentation of physician decisions related to pharmacy recommendations. The lack of patient-specific rationales for declining GDRs and the absence of required documentation were directly observed and confirmed through staff interviews, clinical record reviews, and facility documentation.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙