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
F0656
D

Failure to Address Pacemaker Care in Resident's Care Plan

Adelphi, Maryland Survey Completed on 10-20-2025

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 develop and implement a care plan that addressed the monitoring and care of a resident's pacemaker. Despite the resident having a documented medical history of atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and severe cognitive impairment, the care plan did not include any focus area or interventions related to the presence or management of a pacemaker. The resident's admission records and Minimum Data Set assessment confirmed these diagnoses and cognitive status, and the care plan only addressed risks for cardiac complications without specifying the pacemaker. Further review of the resident's order summary revealed an order indicating the presence of a pacemaker, with instructions for staff to be aware of this every shift. However, there were no corresponding interventions or guidance in the care plan for staff on how to monitor the pacemaker for proper functioning. Interviews with the resident and the Director of Nursing confirmed the existence of the pacemaker and the expectation that it should be addressed in the care plan, but this was not done.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙