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
F0688
D

Failure to Provide Physician-Ordered Anti-Contracture Devices for Residents with Limited ROM

Michigan City, Indiana Survey Completed on 06-03-2025

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 residents with limited range of motion (ROM) had physician-ordered anti-contracture devices in place as required. For one resident with a contracture of the left hand and wrist due to hemiplegia following a stroke, observations on multiple occasions revealed the resident's left hand was closed in a fist without a palm protector or rolled wash cloth in use, despite a physician's order for a palm protector as tolerated. The care plan indicated the resident sometimes refused the splint but would accept a rolled wash cloth, yet neither device was observed in use. Documentation on the treatment administration record indicated the palm protector was applied, but this was not consistent with direct observations. The Director of Nursing confirmed that staff should not have documented the device as applied if it was not in use. For another resident with a history of dementia, osteoarthritis, and stroke, repeated observations showed the resident's left hand was tightly closed without an anti-contracture device in place. Although there was a physician's order for a hand guard as tolerated, there was no care plan addressing the contracted hand, and no documentation on the administration records of the device being applied or refused. Staff interviews confirmed the resident often refused the device, but there was no system in place to document refusals or alternative interventions. The Director of Nursing acknowledged attempts to use alternative devices in the past, but there was no documentation of their use.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙