Failure to Promptly Report and Document Critical Lab Results and RN Assessments
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that abnormal and critical laboratory results were promptly reported to providers and followed by an RN supervisor assessment, as required by facility policy. For one resident with end stage renal disease, dependence on hemodialysis, and type II diabetes mellitus, lab work showed a critically high creatinine level of 4.24, reported to the facility in the evening and later reviewed by an RN the following morning. Nursing notes from the date of the lab and the following day did not document that the critical creatinine value was reported to a provider or that an RN supervisor assessed the resident. A provider note from that day did not reference the critical value or any notification, and the provider did not document review of the critical result until two days later. For another resident with heart failure, acute kidney failure, and type II diabetes mellitus, multiple critically high BUN levels were reported over several dates, but there was no documentation that these critical values were promptly communicated to a provider or that an RN supervisor assessment occurred at the time of each result. A critically high BUN of 73 was reported to an RN, but there were no nursing notes for that day and no documentation of provider notification when the result was received or when later reviewed by another RN; the provider did not document review of this lab until two days later. Subsequent critical BUN values of 70, 80, and 75 were each reported to nursing staff and later reviewed by the same RN, yet nursing notes over the corresponding periods did not show timely provider notification or RN supervisor assessment, and provider documentation of these critical values occurred one day later in each instance. Interviews further clarified the actions and inactions contributing to the deficiency. The RN who reviewed many of the critical results stated she was aware of the critical values and believed she had reported them but could not recall to whom, at what time, or whether new orders were obtained, and she was unaware that policy required an RN supervisor assessment to accompany abnormal lab reporting. She also reported that she had been signing off lab results as reviewed in the electronic record to clear them from her homepage, not realizing that only providers should sign off results under the results tab. The Medical Director stated that RNs receiving critical values should immediately notify a provider and document the provider’s name, time of notification, and any new orders, and that only providers should sign off lab work as reviewed. The DON stated that the RNs involved should have ensured immediate provider notification and complete documentation of the notification details for the critical lab results, and acknowledged uncertainty about who should sign off lab work as reviewed and about the specifics of the abnormal lab and physician notification policies.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Failure to notify the physician of an elevated PSA result and document follow-up. A resident with schizophrenia and depressive disorder had a PSA of 18.2 ng/mL, but the chart showed no documentation that the MD was notified of the abnormal lab. Notes later referenced urology referral and appointment scheduling, but the DON/ADON could not identify documented notification or timely follow-up in the EMR.
A resident with COPD, DM2, and infection risk developed nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, and an NP ordered stat CBC/CMP and stool testing for C. difficile. The lab reported the stool result as detected, but the facility did not review and notify the NP until about 17 hours later. Nursing notes and interviews showed the result was not checked promptly despite expectations that lab results be reviewed each shift and reported immediately.
A resident with G-tube status, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and a subdural hematoma had a sputum culture showing heavy growth of ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, but the record did not show that the attending MD or pulmonologist was notified. The nursing notes lacked documentation of notification or follow-up orders, and the SBAR COC addressed only G-tube dislodgement, not the critical lab result.
Failure to obtain ordered TSH monitoring for a resident receiving levothyroxine. A physician ordered repeat TSH testing for low thyroid hormone, but the lab was not completed and the resident continued on therapy without the ordered monitoring. The consultant pharmacist later recommended a TSH recheck, yet the record showed no documentation that the lab had been obtained. The ADON, DON, and physician all stated the TSH order should have been placed or completed.
A resident with an abdominal wound, ileostomy, and history of sepsis had a wound culture that grew E. coli, but the result was not promptly reported to the ordering practitioner. Staff documented the culture result, discussed the resident’s pain and redness, and noted the resident asked about antibiotics, yet the NP was not notified until several days after the lab finalized. Interviews with the wound care nurse, LPN, NP, DON, ADON, and Administrator confirmed the delay in communication and treatment.
A resident with ASHD and HF was receiving Atorvastatin, Furosemide, and KCl ER, with ordered routine CMP and lipid panel monitoring. The record showed the required labs were not obtained when due, and RN and DON/ADON interviews confirmed the CMP and lipid panel were missed for the month without surveyor intervention.
Failure to Notify Physician of Elevated PSA Result
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician of an elevated PSA laboratory result for one resident and failed to document physician notification or timely follow-up after the abnormal result was identified. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including schizophrenia and depressive disorder, and later assessments showed the resident required supervision or touching assistance for toileting hygiene and oral hygiene. The resident’s record showed a PSA result of 18.2 ng/mL from a laboratory test dated 1/28/2026. Subsequent progress notes and physician notes repeatedly referenced the PSA as outside the reference range and documented a referral to urology. The resident’s care plan also identified the PSA level as elevated and included a urology consult for evaluation and treatment. Appointment notes later showed scheduling and rescheduling of a urology appointment, and one appointment was canceled because the resident was unable to sign consent forms and was under conservatorship. During concurrent interview and record review, an LVN stated the physician should have been notified of the abnormal PSA result and that notification should have been documented in the progress notes. The record review revealed no documentation that the physician had been notified of the elevated PSA level. The ADON stated nursing staff were responsible for reviewing lab results, notifying the physician, and documenting the notification, but she could not identify who notified the physician or when because there was no documentation in the electronic record. She also stated there was no documentation that the conservator had been contacted after the urology appointment was canceled, and that no repeat PSA or follow-up laboratory tests were ordered.
Delayed Notification of Positive C. difficile Lab Result
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to promptly notify the ordering practitioner of abnormal laboratory results for one resident who had been admitted with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure, COPD, legal blindness, anxiety, and type 2 diabetes. The resident was also identified as being at risk for infection or recurrent/chronic infection related to a compromised medical condition. Her care plan directed staff to report changes in condition to the MD as clinically indicated. The resident developed nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, and an NP approved stat CBC/CMP and a stool specimen for C. difficile testing. Nursing documentation shows the stool specimen was collected and sent to the lab, and the NP was later told the stool culture was still pending. The lab received the specimen and reported the result to the facility at 9:47 p.m., with the result showing C. difficile detected. However, the facility did not review the result until 2:50 p.m. the next day, approximately 17 hours after the result was sent to the facility. When the result was finally reviewed, nursing documented that the NP was notified and a new order for vancomycin and contact precautions was received. Interviews with nursing leadership and staff indicated that lab results were expected to be checked each shift, but the positive C. difficile result was not acted on in a timely manner. The facility’s own education on critical laboratory value reporting stated that critical lab values must be received by a licensed nurse, verified, reported immediately to the provider, documented completely, and acted upon without delay.
Failure to Notify Physician of Critical Sputum Culture Result
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the physician was notified of an abnormal laboratory result for one resident. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including gastrostomy status, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and nontraumatic subdural hematoma. A sputum culture collected from the resident showed heavy growth of ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, and the final result was approved and called to a nurse as a critical sputum culture result. However, the nursing progress notes did not show documentation that the attending physician or pulmonologist was notified of this critical result, and there was no documented evidence of follow-up instructions or treatment orders in response to the finding. The resident’s SBAR change of condition report documented a separate issue of G-tube dislodgement and transfer to the hospital, but it did not identify or address the critical sputum culture result. During interviews, the Operations Manager and DON stated that critical infection-related laboratory results should be reported to the physician, documented in the nursing progress notes, and communicated through a change of condition report. The DON reviewed the sputum culture and confirmed that the pulmonologist should have been notified and that a COC should have been completed, but the record review did not show that this occurred.
Failure to Obtain Ordered TSH Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure physician-ordered laboratory services were provided for Resident #13, who was receiving levothyroxine for low thyroid hormone. A physician order dated 06/26/2025 directed that TSH be repeated in three weeks, but review of the medical record showed the ordered TSH laboratory test was not obtained. The resident continued levothyroxine therapy without the ordered thyroid monitoring, and review of the consultant pharmacist’s monthly medication regimen review dated April 2026 recommended a TSH recheck in six months to one year, with no documentation that the laboratory monitoring had been completed. Physician progress notes from January 2026 through July 2026 did not show that the original TSH order had been discontinued or modified. During interviews, the ADON stated the resident’s last TSH was obtained in 2024 and was unsure why follow-up testing had not been completed, the DON stated she would have expected the TSH order to have been entered, and Physician #1 stated the TSH order should have been placed.
Delayed Reporting of Positive Wound Culture
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that abnormal lab results were promptly reported to the ordering practitioner for one resident. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including surgical aftercare following digestive system surgery, diverticulitis, sepsis, and an open abdominal wound. Her care plan identified risk for skin breakdown related to a new ileostomy, indwelling catheter, and impaired mobility, with instructions to observe for signs of infection or delayed healing and report them to the physician as needed. The resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. On 6/22/26, the wound care nurse observed excessive drainage from the abdominal wound during dressing care, noted the ileostomy site was soiled, and notified the MD, who ordered a wound culture. The specimen was collected on 6/22/26, received by the lab on 6/23/26, and resulted positive for Escherichia coli on 6/25/26 at 12:14 p.m. Nursing documentation showed the resident later complained of pain and redness at the site, and on 6/27/26 the resident asked about antibiotics and was told the culture result was being reviewed and that the upcoming nurse should message the MD in the morning. The positive culture was not communicated to the NP until 6/28/26, when the wound culture result was reviewed and new orders were obtained for a midline/PICC and ertapenem. The resident stated she believed she was already receiving antibiotics and said she was told the culture was positive and placed in the file without follow-up to the doctor. Staff interviews confirmed the delay: the wound care nurse said she assumed the resident knew about antibiotics, the LPN said she did not know the culture was pending, the NP said she was first notified on 6/28/26 and should have been notified right away or the next morning, and the DON, ADON, and Administrator all confirmed the delay in reporting and treatment.
Missed Ordered CMP and Lipid Panel Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure ordered laboratory testing was obtained for a resident with a history of ASHD and heart failure who was receiving Atorvastatin 40 mg at bedtime, Furosemide 40 mg twice daily, and Potassium Chloride ER 20 mEq every morning. The physician had ordered a CMP every three months in March, June, September, and December, and a lipid panel every six months in June and December. The lab order for routine monitoring was provided on 05/20/26, but the resident’s record showed the last CMP was obtained on 04/14/26 and there was no evidence that a CMP or lipid panel was obtained in June 2026. During interview, RN #160 stated that lab orders were entered into the computer, appeared on the TAR when due, and the night shift nurse would review the TAR and complete lab slips for the labs to be drawn by the hospital lab technician. She reported the lab slips for the day had already been filled out and denied any labs were due that day for the resident. The DON and ADON were asked for documentation of any CMP or lipid panel obtained for the resident, and the ADON provided only the 04/14/26 CMP. She denied that a CMP or lipid panel had been obtained in June 2026 and acknowledged the resident’s CMP and lipid panel would have been missed for that month without surveyor intervention.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release October 8, 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.