Lack of Clinical Indication and Documentation for Indwelling Catheters Leading to Recurrent UTIs
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure proper diagnosis or clinical indication to support the insertion and continued use of indwelling urinary catheters for three residents, as well as failures in documentation related to catheter necessity and associated UTIs. For one cognitively intact resident, an indwelling catheter was in place despite no documented diagnosis of urinary retention or other genitourinary condition in the diagnosis list. This resident had experienced multiple UTIs confirmed by laboratory results and had received several courses of antibiotics. During interview, the resident reported dissatisfaction with catheter-related care and stated that when she believed something was wrong with the catheter and wanted to go to the hospital, staff refused to call 911 and told her they needed physician permission for transfer; she reported that she had not seen the physician during her stay and felt her rights were violated. When questioned by surveyors, the DON initially acknowledged that urinary retention was not listed as a diagnosis, then left to review the record and shortly afterward had a new diagnosis of urinary retention entered into the electronic record on the same day as the survey, based on a prior urology consult. A second resident was observed with an indwelling catheter and had a history of UTI with multiple organisms, for which she had received antibiotic therapy. Her son, who was POA, reported that she had recently had a UTI from her catheter and was on antibiotics, and the resident expressed concern about delays in care and the risk of her wounds becoming infected if she remained soiled. Review of her clinical record showed no diagnosis supporting catheter placement, such as urinary retention, bladder obstruction, or neurologic bladder issues. The resident’s care plan documented an indwelling catheter and catheter care from admission, but there were no diagnoses of wounds or genitourinary conditions in the diagnosis list. The DON stated that the catheter was continued because of multiple wounds and that the resident was seen regularly by a wound consultant; however, the wound consult reviewed by surveyors listed multiple pressure ulcers and chronic foot ulcers and documented bowel and bladder incontinence, but did not mention an indwelling catheter as part of the wound treatment plan or as an intervention for wound prevention or healing. A third resident also had an indwelling catheter in place since admission, with no genitourinary diagnosis documented to support its use. This resident’s record showed a prior episode of flank pain and gross hematuria, with subsequent urinalysis and culture confirming a UTI with multiple organisms, followed by an order for antibiotic therapy. Despite this, there was no diagnosis in the record to justify the ongoing use of an indwelling catheter. During interview, the DON acknowledged that she could not justify the use of urinary catheters for these residents based on the face sheet and diagnosis pages and admitted that diagnoses for catheter use had been missed and were not previously entered. The facility’s own policy on indwelling urinary catheter care and management, which emphasizes that inappropriate or unnecessary catheter use can result in CAUTI and requires documentation of indications for continued catheter use, was not followed, as the records lacked documented indications for catheter placement and continuation for all three residents. Across all three residents, surveyors confirmed that each had experienced UTIs requiring antibiotic treatment while having indwelling catheters in place, yet their diagnosis lists did not contain conditions supporting catheter necessity. The DON later reported adding diagnoses for some residents based on prior consults and progress notes, but these were not present before the surveyor’s inquiry. The facility policy required review of the necessity of continued catheter use and documentation of indications, maintenance care, assessment findings, and teaching, but the survey findings showed that the indication for catheter use was either absent or only added retroactively, and that the residents’ records did not reflect a clear, clinically supported rationale for the presence of indwelling catheters.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
A resident with an indwelling catheter and severe cognitive impairment had catheter drainage care observed to be inconsistent with the care plan and facility policy. An RN placed the urine graduate on the floor while emptying the leg bag and did not cleanse the drainage outlet with an alcohol swab, and the resident’s drainage bag was later observed lying directly on the floor instead of being kept in a privacy bag or hung on the bed frame.
Failure to Monitor Catheter-Associated UTI Signs: A resident with dementia, muscle weakness, and protein-calorie malnutrition had a physician order to monitor and report signs of catheter-associated UTI, but staff did not complete the ordered monitoring. The resident was observed with white, milky urine in the catheter tubing and bag on multiple days, the MAR showed the monitoring order was not completed, and the CNO stated the cloudy urine was the resident’s baseline and that no physician notification was documented.
Failure to provide and document condom catheter care for a resident with stroke, contractures, cognitive communication deficit, kidney disease, and chronic sacral ulcers. The resident had a condom catheter placed to help with bladder incontinence and sacral ulcer healing, but the physician orders did not identify the catheter or required care, the care plan only addressed patency, urine output, and skin checks, and the chart lacked catheter care, catheter changes, and skin assessments for an extended period. An incident report showed the catheter became dislodged and caused a 7 cm penile laceration.
Inadequate catheter and perineal care was observed for multiple residents with urinary devices and incontinence needs. A resident with an indwelling catheter had cloudy urine, sediment, bleeding, pain, and an unsecured catheter after staff reportedly pulled on it during care. Other residents were found with urine- and stool-soiled clothing, bedding, and catheter dressings, leaking or dangling urinary tubes, delayed brief changes, and incomplete peri-care that did not include the full frontal perineum, labial folds, urethra, or catheter area.
A resident with a suprapubic indwelling catheter, bladder dysfunction, and a recent UTI was observed in the dining room with the catheter drainage bag hooked to the wheelchair and resting in direct contact with the floor on more than one occasion. Staff, including a CNA, an LPN, and the DON, acknowledged the bag should not have been on the floor, and the facility policy and CDC guidance cited in the report state the drainage bag should be kept below the bladder and not rested on the floor.
Improper Nephrostomy Drainage Positioning: A resident with MS, neurogenic bladder, and a left nephrostomy tube had the drainage bag hung from a wheelchair armrest with tubing positioned above the insertion site, preventing dependent urine drainage. A TMA said this was the usual setup, and the RNCM and DON confirmed the bag and tubing were incorrectly positioned and not allowing urine to drain appropriately.
Improper catheter drainage bag handling and emptying
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure urinary drainage bags were maintained in a manner that reduced the risk of contamination during catheter care for a resident with an indwelling catheter. The resident had severe cognitive impairment and diagnoses including ichthyosis vulgaris, major depressive disorder, mixed obsessional thoughts and acts, bipolar disorder, candidiasis of skin and nails, and anxiety. The care plan directed staff to ensure the catheter bag was hung on the bed frame and not placed directly on the floor, to use a privacy bag at all times, and to switch between a leg bag during the day and a night bag at night. During observation, an RN emptied the resident’s catheter leg bag by placing the urine graduate directly on the floor before draining the bag into it, and the drainage outlet was closed without being cleansed with an alcohol swab. On another observation, the resident’s catheter drainage bag was lying directly on the floor beside the bed while the resident was in bed with the leg bag secured to the left leg. A NA later changed the resident’s catheter bed bag to a leg bag. The DON stated staff were expected to place the catheter bag into a privacy bag to prevent it from lying on the floor, and the facility policy directed staff to cleanse the outlet with an alcohol swab after draining urine.
Failure to Monitor Catheter-Associated UTI Signs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper monitoring was conducted to identify potential catheter-associated urinary tract infections for Resident #32, who was admitted and later readmitted with diagnoses including dementia, muscle weakness, and protein-calorie malnutrition. A physician order dated 2/14/25 directed staff to monitor, record, and report signs and symptoms of catheter-associated urinary tract infection, including pain, burning, blood-tinged urine, cloudiness, no output, deepening urine color, increased pulse, increased temperature, urinary frequency, foul-smelling urine, fever, chills, altered mental status, changes in behavior, or changes in eating patterns. Resident #32 was observed with white, milky urine in the catheter tubing flowing into the catheter bag on 7/7/26, 7/8/26, and 7/9/26. The MAR for 7/1/26 through 7/10/26 documented "No" for completion of the physician order to monitor, record, and report signs and symptoms of catheter-associated urinary tract infection. On 7/10/26 at 10:29 AM, the CNO stated she would not document a change when the urine appeared milky white because this was the resident's baseline, said the monitoring order was not appropriate because cloudiness would be normal for him, and confirmed the record did not include documentation of physician notification regarding urine changes.
Failure to Provide and Document Condom Catheter Care
Penalty
Summary
Appropriate care was not provided for the use of a condom urinary catheter for one resident. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including stroke, contractures, cognitive communication deficit, kidney disease, and chronic sacral ulcers, and a condom catheter was placed on 2/6/26 to help assist in healing a sacral ulcer due to bladder incontinence. The resident's MDS dated 5/5/26 showed the diagnoses remained current. The facility's catheter care policy stated that nursing provides bathing and hygiene, male genitalia are to be cleansed with the foreskin retracted and the meatus wiped, rinsed, patted dry, and the foreskin replaced, and that staff are to document all care and services provided. The resident's current physician orders did not identify the condom catheter or the care required, and the care plan only directed staff to check patency, urinary output, and skin for breakdown. An incident report dated 6/2/26 showed the resident developed a 7 cm laceration of the penis when the condom catheter became dislodged. Clinical documentation did not include catheter care, catheter changes, or skin assessments from 3/28/26 through 5/31/26, when the catheter became dislodged. During interview, the Nursing Administrator confirmed that documentation did not include catheter care, catheter changes, or skin assessments during that period.
Inadequate catheter and perineal care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure indwelling urinary catheters and perineal care were provided in a manner intended to prevent urinary tract infection for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for catheter and perineum care. The report describes multiple observations of residents with urinary catheters that were unsecured, soiled, or not cleaned as part of incontinence care, along with delayed or incomplete perineal hygiene after bowel or bladder incontinence episodes. R11, who had diagnoses including rectal cancer, retroperitoneal abscess, colostomy status, diabetes, neuromuscular bladder dysfunction, muscle wasting, and obesity, was observed with cloudy urine, sediment in the catheter tubing, and later cloudy urine mixed with bright red blood after staff reportedly pulled on the catheter during care. The catheter was noted to be unsecured, and the resident reported sharp urethral pain and ongoing discomfort. The catheter remained unsecured over the following days. R10, who had quadriplegia, multiple sclerosis, neuromuscular bladder dysfunction, hydronephrosis, cystostomy status, and a history of UTI, was found with urine-saturated clothing, dressings, and bedding, leaking suprapubic and nephrostomy tubes that were dangling loosely, and fecal matter adhered to the buttocks and skin. R21, who had diabetes, chronic kidney disease, urinary retention, and morbid obesity, waited for incontinence care after a bowel movement, and when care was provided, only the back perineum was cleaned while the frontal perineum and urinary catheter were not cleaned. R15, who had diabetes and morbid obesity, was heavily saturated with urine and bowel movement, and staff cleaned only part of the perineal area, leaving the labial folds, urethra, and inner groin folds uncleaned.
Catheter Bag Resting on Floor
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure appropriate catheter care for a resident with a suprapubic indwelling catheter. The resident had diagnoses including neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, presence of urogenital implants, and retention of urine, and the physician ordered the suprapubic catheter to be changed every 4 weeks with urology evaluation every 6th catheter change. The resident’s care plan identified actual, at-risk, and potential complications related to suprapubic catheter use and included use of a dignity bag for the Foley when not in the room. The resident also had been treated for a UTI in 5/2026. Surveyors observed the resident eating lunch in the dining room with the catheter bag hooked on the bottom of the wheelchair and resting in direct contact with the floor. The same condition was observed again while the resident was eating breakfast in the dining room on a later date. Staff were notified each time, and a CNA, an LPN, and the DON acknowledged that the catheter bag should not have been touching the floor. The facility policy stated catheter drainage bags should be covered at all times while in use, and the CDC guidance cited in the report states the collecting bag should be kept below the bladder and not rested on the floor.
Improper Nephrostomy Drainage Positioning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure appropriate care for a resident with a left nephrostomy drainage system when the tubing and bag were positioned in a way that did not allow unobstructed dependent drainage of urine. R5’s quarterly MDS identified moderately impaired cognition, need for assistance with ADLs, and diagnoses including multiple sclerosis, neurogenic bladder, and septicemia. The care plan identified altered elimination related to MS, decreased mobility, a left nephrostomy tube related to kidney stones, and Foley catheter placement, and directed staff to monitor for UTI signs and symptoms, provide perineal care, and empty the left nephrostomy as ordered. During observation, R5 was seated in a Broda wheelchair with the nephrostomy drainage bag hanging from the left armrest and the tubing positioned off the side of the wheelchair and above the insertion site. This placement prevented dependent drainage of urine and created the potential for urine backflow. A TMA stated the bag was typically hung that way. The RNCM and DON later observed the system and confirmed the bag and tubing were positioned incorrectly, stating the bag needed to remain below the insertion site to allow urine to flow freely and reduce the risk of UTIs. The facility’s Indwelling Catheter Care Procedure directed staff to provide appropriate care of urinary drainage systems and to place drainage tubing over the resident’s leg and check the tubing for evidence of urine flow.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 26, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
In your survey window? See what surveyors are citing.
The Survey-Prep Report maps your facility's risk from 12 months of CMS and state citation data — what's being cited around you and what to check first. $129 one-time.