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
F0561
G

Resident's Right to Refuse Care Not Honored, Resulting in Injury

Eureka, Missouri Survey Completed on 11-19-2025

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

A deficiency occurred when a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), who was an agency staff member, failed to respect a resident's right to self-determination by transferring the resident out of bed for a shower despite the resident's explicit refusal. The resident, who had diagnoses including high blood pressure, arthritis, weakness, and chronic pain, was assessed as having moderate cognitive impairment but was able to make their needs known and communicate effectively. The resident verbally communicated to the CNA that they did not want to get out of bed, but the CNA proceeded with the transfer after being told by a nurse that the resident would be fine once up. During the transfer, the resident resisted, and the CNA used a bear hug technique to move the resident from the bed to the wheelchair. As a result of the transfer, the resident sustained a significant skin tear, approximately ten centimeters long, to the left lower leg, which required hospital treatment and sutures. The incident was witnessed by other staff who noted the CNA appeared verbally agitated, and the resident later described the transfer as rough and feeling like a tussle. The resident expressed being upset about being made to get up and reported pain and ongoing discomfort from the injury. The care plan and medical records confirmed the resident's ability to make choices and the expectation that staff would respect those choices, including the right to refuse care. The facility's investigation into the incident focused primarily on the mechanics of the transfer rather than the violation of the resident's rights. Interviews with staff revealed inconsistent understanding and application of resident rights, with some staff indicating they would follow a nurse's directive even if it contradicted a resident's expressed wishes. The facility's policies and resident handbook emphasized the importance of resident choice and self-determination, but these were not followed in this instance, leading to the resident's rights being disregarded during the event.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙