F0580

D

Failure to Notify Physician of Change in Condition Related to Tube Feeding and Emesis

Stow, Ohio Survey Completed on 01-22-2026

Penalty

No penalty information released

Summary

The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to promptly notify the physician of a significant change in condition for Resident #78, who was dependent on tube feeding and had multiple serious comorbidities including hemiplegia, intracerebral hemorrhage, pneumonia, metabolic encephalopathy, dysphagia, chronic pulmonary disease, severe protein malnutrition, tracheostomy, and a gastrostomy tube. Physician orders required gastric residuals to be checked every shift and the physician to be called if residuals were ≥150 ml, and the resident’s care plan identified the need to monitor tube feeding and hydration. On the day in question, documentation showed tube feeding and water flushes were administered and residuals checked, but there was no evidence that the physician was notified when the resident experienced vomiting, increased residuals, and tube feeding was held.

During the early morning hours, video footage and CNA interview confirmed the resident vomited, with emesis visible around the mouth, and staff cleaned the resident and obtained vital signs. However, there was no nursing documentation of this emesis, no documented assessment, and no evidence the physician was notified. Later that morning, an LPN entered the room, stated the resident was “full,” administered medication via syringe, and turned off the tube feeding pump. The LPN later documented increased gastric residuals and two episodes of emesis with significant tube feeding output and that the tube feeding was placed on hold, but did not document the amount of residuals and confirmed in interview that the physician was not called about the high residuals, multiple vomiting episodes, or the decision to hold the tube feeding. A respiratory therapist reported that the resident had been vomiting and required more suctioning than usual and stated she informed the LPN and believed the resident needed escalation of care, yet there was still no evidence of physician notification.

Throughout the day, multiple practitioners were present in the facility and saw the resident, but were not informed of the change in condition or did not act on the information. A pulmonary NP examined the resident in the morning and documented no distress, with no mention of being told about emesis, increased residuals, or tube feeding being on hold. A physiatry PA visited the resident, was told by the LPN that the resident had an episode of vomiting, but did not assess the resident for this, did not notify the physician or family, and took no further action. Respiratory therapy notes later in the day documented that the resident had been “throwing up throughout the day,” again with no indication that a physician was notified. In the late afternoon, the resident’s family expressed concern that the resident was in distress, but the LPN reassured them, documented normal vital signs, and did not contact the physician. Only in the evening, when the resident was noted to be breathing harder than normal and emergency services were called, was the change in condition escalated, and subsequent provider documentation and interviews confirmed that the primary physician and other providers were not made aware earlier of the vomiting, high residuals, or tube feeding being held, contrary to the facility’s policy requiring prompt notification of changes in condition.

The facility’s policy titled “Change in a Resident’s Condition or Status” required prompt notification of the attending physician and resident representative of changes in medical status. Despite this, there was no evidence that the physician was notified at any point during the day about the resident’s repeated emesis, increased gastric residuals, interruption of tube feeding, increased need for suctioning, or the family’s concerns about distress. Interviews with nursing and respiratory staff, as well as review of documentation and video footage, confirmed that these events occurred and were recognized by staff but were not communicated to the physician as required. This failure to ensure timely physician notification of a change in condition for Resident #78 constituted the cited deficiency.