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
F0604
D

Failure to Prevent Use of Physical Restraint on Resident

Tazewell, Tennessee Survey Completed on 11-20-2025

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 ensure that a resident was free from physical restraints, as required by its policy and federal regulations. The policy defined a physical restraint as any device or material that restricts a resident's freedom of movement and cannot be easily removed by the resident. The incident involved a resident with reduced mobility, dementia, and anxiety, who was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and required substantial assistance with bed mobility and transfers. There was no documentation or physician order for the use of restraints for this resident. On the day of the incident, video surveillance showed a CNA wrapping a sheet around the resident's lower legs while she was seated in a geri-chair, then covering her legs with a blanket and tucking it under her legs. The CNA and other staff members later described this action as a way to prevent the resident from moving her legs, kicking off her blanket, or potentially falling. Multiple witness statements and interviews confirmed that the CNA had wrapped or tied the resident's legs to the chair, and that this was done to manage the resident's restlessness and prevent her from throwing her blanket on the floor. The CNA stated that this practice was common among staff, especially when they were short-staffed, and did not consider it a restraint because the resident could still move her legs to some extent. Despite the CNA's and some staff's belief that the resident was not fully restrained, the video and witness accounts indicated that the resident's ability to move her legs independently was restricted. The facility's own Human Resources Manager and Administrator acknowledged that the sheet was wrapped and tucked in a manner that limited the resident's movement, and the Quality and Regulation Manager stated that such wrapping would be considered a restraint if it prevented independent movement of the legs. There was no evidence that the use of the sheet as a restraint was medically necessary or properly documented, and the action was taken for staff convenience rather than to address a medical symptom.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙