Pressure ulcer care, assessment, documentation, and wound treatment failures
Summary
The facility failed to ensure consistent pressure ulcer/pressure injury care for multiple residents by not promptly monitoring, evaluating, reporting, and documenting new or changing skin conditions, not developing relevant care plans with measurable goals and interventions, not using clean technique during wound dressing care, and not using a formal method to evaluate pressure ulcers/injuries in accordance with facility policy. Surveyors identified these issues for four residents whose records showed pressure-related skin problems, wound treatments, and gaps in assessment and documentation. One resident with severe cognitive impairment, mobility limitations, and incontinence had an open area to the sacrum noted in the record, but the chart did not contain a nursing progress note describing the wound, a formal skin assessment tool, or an incident report. Staff stated that if a CNA found a skin impairment, the nurse would measure it, document it, start treatment, and notify the wound team, resident representative, DON, and physician, but the record did not reflect that process. The resident’s transfer paperwork and other forms also conflicted about whether a wound was present, and the RN/IP confirmed that the wound should have been assessed and that the transfer form was completed incorrectly. Another resident with dementia, cancer history, and CHF had a facility-acquired left buttock pressure ulcer that was treated with Santyl, Silvadene, and later zinc oxide, but there was no care plan for the actual wound, no documented nursing note when the wound was first identified, and no formal skin risk assessment tool found in the record. The wound consult documented a stage 3 ulcer with slough and granulation tissue, and later improvement, but the nursing documentation did not show the initial discovery, measurements, or an investigation. During observed wound care, the nurse used the same gloves to clean the wound and apply zinc oxide, did not disinfect items before returning them to the cart, did not sanitize the bedside table, and left the room without hand hygiene or alcohol-based hand sanitizer despite the resident being on enhanced barrier precautions. A third resident with diabetes and gout had a stage 3 sacral pressure injury treated with Silvadene, but the record lacked a Braden Scale assessment on admission, lacked a nursing progress note describing when the wound was discovered and its measurements, and lacked an incident report or investigation. The care plan only addressed potential skin impairment and did not include the actual pressure injury. Nursing documentation after treatment began still stated that no skin issues were identified, even though wound consultant notes showed the resident had already been seen for the pressure injury. A fourth resident transferred from the hospital with a coccyx pressure ulcer and moisture-associated skin damage had conflicting documentation between transfer paperwork, nursing notes, and the MDS, including a coded stage 3 pressure ulcer on admission, but no formal assessment tool was found and no care plan was initiated for the coccyx ulcer or MASD.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 29, 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.