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
F0689
D

Failure to Maintain Fall Prevention Interventions for Residents at Risk

Bridgeton, Missouri Survey Completed on 05-30-2025

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 two residents at risk for falls had appropriate fall prevention interventions in place, specifically the use of fall mats and maintaining beds in the lowest possible position when residents were in bed and unattended. For one resident with a history of falls, moderate cognitive impairment, and significant physical assistance needs, observations revealed that fall mats were not consistently placed on the floor as required, and the bed was not always kept in the lowest position. The resident confirmed experiencing two falls since admission, one from the bed, and noted that the fall mats were only sometimes in place. Staff interviews corroborated that the mats should have been on the floor and the bed in the lowest position whenever the resident was unattended, but this was not consistently done. Additionally, the care plan for this resident did not initially include specific interventions such as the use of fall mats and keeping the bed in the lowest position, despite the resident's documented fall risk and previous falls. Progress notes indicated that after the resident's fall, staff documented the use of fall mats and bed positioning, but these interventions were not reflected in the care plan until after the deficiency was identified. Observations on multiple occasions showed the fall mats leaning against the wall and the bed elevated above the lowest setting while the resident was unattended. A second resident, also at risk for falls due to severe cognitive impairment and requiring substantial assistance, was observed with fall mats in place but with the bed not consistently maintained in the lowest position when unattended. Staff interviews confirmed the expectation that the bed should be kept in the lowest position for residents with fall mats, but this was not always followed. The care plan for this resident did include the use of fall mats and low bed positioning, but observations showed lapses in maintaining the bed at the lowest height. These failures were contrary to the facility's fall management policy and federal regulations requiring the environment to be free from accident hazards and for residents to receive adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙