Wingate at Reading

Wingate at Reading

MI Elder Abuse Free Legal ConsultationDid someone you love suffer elder abuse or neglect at Wingate at Reading? Our lawyers can help.

Abuse of the elderly is not acceptable and we fight hard in these types of cases. If you suspect a nursing home or caregiver has caused harm to your loved one in someone elses’ care, contact our law firm today for a free legal consultation.

Talking to us does not obligate you to anything, but we may be able to tell you if you have a claim and the value of your case. If we accept your case, you pay no fee unless we recover for you.

About Wingate at Reading

Wingate at Reading is a for profit, 123-bed Medicare/Medicaid certified skilled nursing facility that provides services to the residents of Wakefield, North Reading, Lynnfield, Wilmington, Stoneham, Woburn, Burlington, Melrose, Winchester, and the other towns in and surrounding Middlesex County, Massachusetts.

Wingate at Reading
1364 Main St,
Reading, MA 01867

Phone: (781) 942-1210
Website: https://wingatehealthcare.com/location/wingate-at-reading/

CMS Star Quality Rating

Wingate at ReadingThe Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) rates all nursing homes that accept medicare or medicaid benefits. CMS created a 5 Star Quality Rating System—1 star is the lowest rating and 5 stars is the highest—that look at three areas.

As of 2018, Wingate at Reading in Massachusetts received a rating of 3 out of 5 stars.

Performance Area Rating
Overall Rating 3 out of 5 (Average)
State Health Inspections 3 out of 5 (Average)
Staffing 2 out of 5 (Below Average)
Quality Measures 3 out of 5 (Average)

Fines Against Wingate at Reading

The Federal Government has not fined Wingate at Reading in the last 3 years.

Fines and Penalties

Our Nursing Home Accident Lawyers inspected government records and discovered Wingate at Reading committed the following offenses:

Failed to immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor and a family member of the resident of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to appropriately notify the psychiatric services of a physician order [REDACTED].

Findings include:

Resident #11 was admitted to the facility in 7/2016 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of the most recent annual Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 6/28/17, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of two staff for bathing, grooming, dressing and transfer. Review of the resident’s clinical record indicated a Physician’s Interim Order form, dated 9/21/17, with an order written [REDACTED].

Review of the facility Communication Log, indicated that on 9/21/17, a nurse entered the purpose of the psychiatric service needed was for psychotherapy due to increased depression. There was no indication that the order was for the resident to be seen by psychiatric nurse practitioner (not a psycho therapist) and the entry did not include a question of suicidal ideation. During interview on 10/4/17 at 8:45 A.M., both Unit Manager #2 and the Social Worker said they were not aware of the nurse practitioner order from 9/21/17. Unit Manager #2 said she has not been seen by the psychiatric nurse practitioner since the order was written.

Failed to keep each resident free from physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to assess the use of a gerichair recliner as a restraint for 1 resident, (#1), out of a total of 22 sampled residents.

Findings include:

Resident #1 was admitted to the facility in 5/2017 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 8/2/17, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status exam (BIMS) score of 7 of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance for bathing, dressing, grooming and transfers. On 10/2/17 at 2:00 P.M., review of the Resident Care Plan for Falls and Pressure Ulcers, both created 5/11/17, did not indicate use of a gerichair recliner. On 10/4/17 at 1:35 P.M., Review of the facility Healthcare Interdisciplinary Device/Restraint Assessment form, not dated, included in the device section, the assessment of a gerichair/recliner, and asks the question Demonstrates ability to rise independently, yes or no.

On 10/4/17 at 11:00 A.M., review of the Certified Nurses Aide Care Card, dated 5/2/17, indicated that the section related to Mobility/Wheelchair indicated that the resident used a wheelchair with assist (the recliner section was not checked off as being utilized). During observation on 10/2/17 at 8:45 A.M., of the second floor dining/activity room, revealed Resident #1 sitting in an unlocked wheelchair able to move him/herself freely. During observation on 10/3/17 at 8:20 A.M., of the second floor dining/activity room, revealed Resident #1 sitting in an unlocked wheelchair able to move him/herself freely. During observation on 10/4/17 at 7:00 A.M., of the second floor dining/activity room, revealed Resident #1 sitting in a gerichair recliner pushed up against a table, both of the resident’s feet were dangling from the chair, unable to touch the floor. The resident was moving back and forth in the chair in an attempt to move the recliner, it did not move. There were no food items or activity items on the table. The television was on, playing music with no active picture on the screen.

During interview on 10/4/17 at 12:00 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said that she was not aware that resident #1 was using a gerichair recliner at all. She said that if a resident required a gerichair recliner the facility would do a Device Assessment to determine if it was a restraint or a positioning device. During interview on 10/4/17 at 1:35 P.M., the DON said that she could not locate a Device Assessment form for Resident #1. She said that she believed the staff used it for pressure relief at night, but the staff did not care plan for it’s use nor could she find that an Device Assessment was completed to determine if it was a restraint or not.

Failed to provide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to implement the medical plan of care for 2 sampled residents (#1 and #6) in a sample of 22.

Findings include:

1. For Resident #6, the facility failed to ensure that an order to off-load the resident’s heels was followed. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility in 7/2015. The resident’s [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. The resident’s Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified the resident as having moderately impaired cognition. In addition, the resident was non-ambulatory. Review of the resident’s record indicated a 10/02/2017 physician’s orders [REDACTED]. Off-load heels from mattress while in bed every shift; 11:00 P.M.-07:00 A.M., 07:00 A.M.-3:00 PM., 03:00 P.M.-11:00 PM.

The resident was observed on 10/04/17 at 7:05 AM lying in bed. His/her heels were observed to be lying flat against the mattress and not off loaded, as ordered by the physician. On 10/04/17 at 7:07 A.M., an interview was held with the resident. He/she was asked if staff had put anything in place to keep his/her heels off his/her mattress during the evening. He/she said no. The surveyor further asked him/her if staff had placed a pillow or any other item under his/her heels during the night to keep his/her heels from resting on the mattress. Again, he/she said no. The resident further said that his/her heels felt sore at times.

Record review indicated the resident’s skin was intact. On 10/04/17 at 2:00 P.M., the resident’s treatment Flowsheet was reviewed. The treatment Flowsheet read: off-load heels from mattress while in bed every shift; 07/30/2015-open ended. Further review indicated that the 11:00 P.M.-7:00 A.M. nurse signed off on 10/04/17 that the resident’s heels were off-loaded from the mattress while the resident was in bed. On 10/04/17 at 2:15 P.M., an interview was held with Unit Manager #1. The surveyor informed her of the observation above as well as the signature of the nurse who signed off that morning that the resident’s heels were off-loaded in his/her bed. She identified the nurse as an agency nurse that was working for the first time in the building. She further said the nurse was oriented by nursing last night and should have checked on the resident to ensure that his/her heels were off-loaded.

2. For Resident #1, the facility failed to follow a physician’s orders [REDACTED]. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility in 5/2017 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 8/2/17, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status exam (BIMS) score of 7 of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance for bathing, dressing and grooming. Review of a Physician’s Interim Order Form, dated 8/24/17, indicated an order for [REDACTED]. Review of the resident’s Medication Administration Record [REDACTED]. The times listed were 8:00 A.M., 11:30 A.M. and 4:30 P.M. The MAR indicated [REDACTED]. On 10/3/17 at 8:20 A.M., during observation, facility staff gave Resident #1 his/her breakfast tray and the resident began to eat.

On 10/3/17 at 9:00 A.M., during observation of the 2nd floor unit, the surveyor observed Nurse #1 enter Resident #1’s room with a black pouch containing the fingerstick blood sugar meter. On 10/3/17 at 9:08 A.M., during interview, Agency Nurse #1 said she just performed the resident’s fingerstick blood sugar. When the surveyor asked why it was done at 9:00 A.M. and not prior to the resident’s breakfast, Agency Nurse #1 said that she arrived late for work (7:40 A.M.) and saw that the MAR indicated [REDACTED].M., so she thought she had an hour to do it. She also said that the resident had already started eating, so she waited to perform the test. On 10/3/17 at 9:15 A.M., during interview, Unit Manager (UM) #2 said that the MAR indicated [REDACTED]. UM #2 said that the resident should have had his/her fingerstick blood sugar testing before the staff gave him/her breakfast.

Failed to make sure that each resident who enters the nursing home without a catheter is not given a catheter, and receive proper services to prevent urinary tract infections and restore normal bladder function.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, facility policy and record review, the facility staff failed to conduct an assessment to achieve or maintain as much normal urinary function as possible for 1 resident (#1) of 17 applicable residents in a total sample of 22 residents.

Findings include:

For Resident #1, the facility failed to conduct an appropriate assessment for bladder incontinence when the resident was found to have urinary incontinence. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility in 5/2017 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of the Admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 5/9/17, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired per a Brief Interview of Mental Status exam (BIMS) score of 5 of 15, required extensive assistance for toileting and was frequently incontinent of bladder (7 or more episodes of urinary incontinence, but at least one episode of continent voiding) during the previous 7 days. The quarterly MDS assessment, dated, 8/2/17 indicated a BIMS score of 7 of 15 (slightly improved from the admission MDS), which indicated severe cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance for toileting and was frequently incontinent of bladder.

Review of the facility policy entitled, Incontinence Management, dated 7/2015, indicated the following:

* Each resident will be assessed for bowel and bladder function within 14 days of admission, quarterly, and for a change of condition that may affect continence.

* A 3-day bladder patterning will be completed on admission or as indicated for incontinence.

* The Certified Nurses Assistant Care Card/Care Plan will be reviewed and updated accordingly.

Review of the clinical record indicated a Bladder Assessment, dated 5/2/17, indicated the resident was a new admission and had a urinary catheter in place. The Bladder Assessment also indicated that another Bladder Assessment would be completed when a Foley (Urinary) catheter was removed. Review of the resident’s nursing progress notes, dated 5/5/17, indicted that the urinary catheter was discontinued on 5/5/17. There was no evidence in the clinical record that a subsequent Bladder Assessment was completed, despite a facility policy which indicated that a change in condition would require a new assessment as well as the Bladder Assessment form which indicated that a Bladder Assessment should be completed with the removal of a urinary catheter.

Review of the resident’s care plan, initiated 5/11/17, did not indicate any care plan interventions to address assessing the resident’s bladder incontinence to minimize his/her incontinence status, rather it only addressed checking the resident for incontinence episodes and providing incontinent care after incontinence episodes. Review of the Certified Nurses Aide Care Card, dated 5/2/17, indicated that the section related to bladder continence and toileting was left blank. On 10/3/17 at 9:30 A.M., during interview, Unit Manager (UM) #2 said that the resident should have had another Bladder Assessment completed once the urinary catheter was discontinued.

On 10/3/17 at 11:30 A.M., during interview, UM #2 said she still could not locate a Bladder Assessment for Resident #1. During interview on 10/4/17 at 9:00 A.M., Certified Nurse’s Aide (CNA) #1, said she was caring for Resident #1 and that when she would bring Resident #1 to the bathroom, the resident would often be continent and urinate on the toilet.

Failed to maintain drug records and properly mark/label drugs and other similar products according to accepted professional standards.

Based on observation, staff interview and Manufacturers Directions for Use (MDFU), the facility failed to ensure that all medications and biologicals were of current date to provide reliability of strength and accuracy of dosage in 2 of 3 medication storage rooms.

Findings include:

1. During inspection of the first floor medication room, with Nurse #1, on 10/4/17 at 2:30 P.M. it was revealed that one vial of Humalog insulin 75/25(medication to treat diabetes) was not dated when opened. One bottle of Latanoprost ophthalmic solution 0.005%(eye drops to treat glaucoma) was not dated when opened. During interview on 10/4/17 at 2:30 P.M., Nurse#1 said both medications should have been dated when opened.

2. During inspection of the second floor medication room, with Nurse #2, on 10/4/17 at 3:00 P.M. it was revealed the following:

* One bottle of Latanoprost ophthalmic solution 0.005% was open and dated 7/1/17.

* One bottle of Latanoprost ophthalmic solution 0.005% was open and dated 8/3/17.

Review of the MDFU of Latanoprost indicated that once a bottle is opened for use, it may be stored at room temperature up to 25°Celsius (77°Fahrenheit) for 6 weeks. During interview on 10/4/17 at 3:00 P.M., Nurse #2 said both the eye drops were outdated for use.

Failed to make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility was free of fruit fly insects.

Findings include:

On 10/03/17 at 12:30 P.M., the Surveyor observed at least 7 fruit flies on the wall of the lobby are where a coffee urn, water urn and pitcher of water with fruit in it sat on a table. The head of Housekeeping was present during the observation. He said the fruit flies are a problem and they have been around for a while. The facility had a monthly (or as needed) visit by the pest control company. The problem with fruit flies failed to be eradicated.

Review of the pest control logs indicated that the fruilt fly problem began in (MONTH) (YEAR). The log indicated treated for [REDACTED]. Note: Wall board, grout, and covebase tiles need repair. Flies are breeding in damage soaked areas.

January (YEAR) log indicated that the dishwasher and equipment treated for [REDACTED]. It was also noted that a through cleaning is needed under all equipment, fans are needed to dry out wet floors through kitchen and dishroom. Logs between (MONTH) and (MONTH) indicated that the facility was treated for [REDACTED]. In (MONTH) (YEAR) dishware was treated for [REDACTED].

September 8, (YEAR) log indicated area by dishwasher treated for [REDACTED]. The walk through (MONTH) 3,2017 of the kitchen and dishroom a couple of fruit flies were observed in the dishroom. None were observed in the kitchen. (MONTH) 4, (YEAR) walk through of dishroom and kitchen indicated about 25 fruit flies were observed in the dishroom. Discussion with pest control staff indicated where the fruit flies were nested. Uncaulked area left opening for the flies to nest. They also require moisture and food to grow and reproduce.

 

Wingate at Reading, Nursing Home Neglect and Elder Abuse Lawyers

If someone you love has suffered neglect or elder abuse by a senior caregiver, nursing home, or other care facility, our lawyers may be able to help. Regardless of whether or not criminal charges are filed against an alleged abuser, you may still be able to pursue compensation in a civil claim. Compensation in elder abuse cases may be awarded if someone in the care of another suffers harm due to intentional or negligent actions (including failure to take action).

Abuse of the elderly is not acceptable and we fight hard in these types of cases. If you suspect a nursing home or caregiver has caused harm to your loved one in someone elses’ care, contact our law firm today for a free legal consultation. Talking to us does not obligate you to anything, but we may be able to tell you if you have a claim and the value of your case. If we accept your case, you pay no fee unless we recover for you.

Oftentimes, victims of abuse either cannot or will not speak up for themselves out of fear. If you notice any warning signs or symptoms of neglect of abuse an an elderly person, it is important you contact an elder abuse lawyer immediately. Not only are there statute of limitations on filing a claim, but the sooner we start helping you, the easier it will be to collect evidence and talk to any witnesses before important details are lost, hidden, or forgotten.

Boston Personal Injury Lawyers for Elder Abuse Cases

We offer a free, no-obligation legal consultation to help you understand your rights and the value of your case. Our personal injury law firm takes cases involving elder abuse and neglect. We offer legal service to clients in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Hampshire.


Sources:

Medicare Nursing Home Profiles and Reports – Wingate at Reading

Inspection Report for Wingate at Reading – 10/04/2017

Page Last Updated: September 11, 2018

Call Now Button