F0684

G

Failure to Follow Up Abnormal Urine Testing and Urology Consult Leading to Urosepsis

Syracuse, New York Survey Completed on 03-11-2026

Penalty

No penalty information released

Summary

The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards, physician/NP orders, and facility policies related to lab follow-up and outside consults. The resident had chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and a history of UTIs, and was cognitively intact and normally continent. On 12/15, nursing and the NP identified acute dysuria, new/increased incontinence, urgency, and frequency, and an order was obtained for a urinalysis and urine culture. The NP documented a plan to send urine to evaluate for a possible UTI. However, the 12/17 urine specimen was reported on 12/19 as unsuitable, with instructions to resubmit using the correct transport tube. There was no documentation that nursing obtained a new specimen or that the NP or physician were aware the urinalysis was not performed. During this same period, the resident developed fever, lethargy, diaphoresis, abdominal and back pain, and decreased appetite, and the physician documented a recent fever with a “negative work up” without evidence of reviewing or addressing the unperformed urinalysis.

Over the following weeks, the resident repeatedly reported not feeling well, with ongoing nausea, vomiting, poor intake, lethargy, and new urinary incontinence. Blood work on 12/26 showed elevated WBCs and other indicators of infection, and multiple viral respiratory panels and chest x‑rays were negative. Despite this, there was no documented evidence that the NP reordered a urinalysis after the initial unsuitable specimen, and when a urinalysis and culture were finally obtained on 12/30, the 01/01 report showed trace blood and protein, 2+ leukocyte esterase, 40–60 WBCs, and squamous epithelial cells suggesting an unclean specimen, with a recommendation for recollection and culture. The culture showed <10,000 CFU/mL of a single gram‑negative organism and recommended recollection using a method to minimize contamination. There is no documentation that this urinalysis and culture report was reviewed by the NP or physician on or after 01/01, despite multiple subsequent NP visits for abdominal pain, nausea, cough, congestion, and abnormal labs, and repeated nursing notes describing fever, lethargy, poor appetite, vomiting, and continued complaints of not feeling well.

During this same timeframe, the resident was repeatedly treated empirically with Rocephin (a cephalosporin antibiotic) without obtaining a definitive urine culture and sensitivity to guide therapy. Orders were given for one‑time and multi‑day Rocephin courses in response to fevers and systemic symptoms, even though the 01/01 urinalysis suggested infection and recommended recollection and further culture, and no culture and sensitivity was obtained to determine organism susceptibility. On 01/20, the resident underwent a urology consult and cystoscopy for gross hematuria and urge incontinence; the urologist recommended nightly vaginal estrogen for atrophy and concerns for recurrent UTIs. Nursing documented review of the consult and the recommendation to start vaginal estrogen, but there was no documentation that a physician or NP reviewed the consult details, discussed them, or implemented the vaginal estrogen order. The attending physician’s 01/21 visit note did not reference the 01/01 urinalysis or the urology consult, and subsequent NP notes continued to omit genitourinary assessments and did not address the abnormal urinalysis or consult recommendations. The resident continued to be ill, with persistent systemic symptoms, multiple Rocephin doses, and no documented provider follow‑up on the abnormal urinalysis, lack of adequate urine culture and sensitivity, or urology recommendations, until the resident became unresponsive and was sent to the hospital, where they were diagnosed with severe sepsis due to UTI, metabolic acidosis, and acute kidney injury, and the urine culture showed resistance to cephalosporins. The survey determined this resulted in actual harm that was not Immediate Jeopardy.