legal resources necessary to hold negligent facilities accountable.
Information & Ratings on Bloomsburg Care and Rehabilitation Center, Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania
Families throughout Pennsylvania place their loved one in nursing facilities to ensure they receive the highest level of care and hygiene assistance. However, when the establishment fails to provide adequate care and supervision and the resident is harmed by a dangerous employee, it is often deemed to be the result of negligence, mistreatment or abuse. Any negligent institution that causes the harm of anyone can be held legally accountable and financially responsible for damages. The Pennsylvania Nursing Home Law Center Attorneys have represented many Columbia County residents who are harmed by the nursing staff, other residents, visitors, and employees, and we can help your family too.Bloomberg Care and Rehabilitation Center
This Center is a 149-certified bed Medicaid/Medicare-participating Facility providing services to residents of Bloomsburg and Columbia County, Pennsylvania. The “not for profit” Long-Term Care Home is located at:
211 East First Street
Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, 17815
In addition to providing around-the-clock skilled nursing care, the facility also offers diagnostic testing, specialist consultation, and:
- Cardiac care
- Stroke care
- Diabetes care
- Neurological disorder care
- Post amputee management
- Physical medicine and rehabilitation
- Comprehensive therapies including speech, occupational and physical therapies
- Orthopedic rehab
- Respiratory monitoring
- Advanced wound care
- Pain management
- Colostomy care
- Gastronomy care
- IV/PICC insertion
- Social and psychology services
The investigators for the state and federal nursing home regulatory agencies have the legal responsibility of penalizing any facility that has violated rules and regulations that harmed or could have harmed a resident. These penalties often include monetary fines and denying payment of Medicare services. Within the last three years, Bloomsburg Care & Rehab Center was fined twice by the government including a $3,350 fine on August 18, 2016, and $13,005 fine on July 25, 2017. Additional documentation about penalties and fines can be found on the Pennsylvania Department of Public Health posted surveys website concerning this nursing home.
Families can review publically available data on every long-term and intermediate care facility in Pennsylvania by visiting numerous state and federal government databases including the Medicare.com and the PA Department of Public Health website. This data is a valuable tool when searching for the best location to place a loved one who needs the highest level of services and care in a safe environment.
According to Medicare.gov, this facility maintains an overall rating of one out of five stars, including two out of five stars involving health inspections, one out of five stars for staffing issues and three out of five stars for quality measures. The Columbia County neglect attorneys at Nursing Home Law Center have reviewed numerous deficiencies and safety concerns at Bloomberg Care and Rehab that include:
- Failure to Ensure Every Resident Is Provided Environment Free of Accident Hazards and Risks and Provided Adequate Supervision to Prevent Avoidable Accidents
- Failure to Ensure That Every Resident’s Drug Regiment Is Free from Unnecessary Medications
- Failure to Follow Physician’s Orders to the Detriment of the Resident’s Highest Well-Being
- Failure to Ensure the Environment Remains Free from Accident Hazards and Risks and Residents Are Provided Adequate Supervision to Prevent Avoidable Accidents
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated July 21, 2017, a notation was made by a state investigator concerning the facility's failure to "provide sufficient staff supervision and necessary safety measures to prevent elopements” by three residents at the facility. The deficient practice by the nursing staff resulted in a resident falling and suffering “a hip fracture.” The documentation shows that the resident “has a known history of falls and unassisted transfers.” The state investigator noted that the facility further failed to maintain an environment free of potential accident hazards on one of five nursing units in the facility (third floor).”
The investigator reviewed the resident’s Clinical Record and MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment that revealed that the “resident was severely cognitively impaired” and requires “assistance for Activities of Daily Living including transfers and utilized a wheelchair for ambulation.”
A review of the facility Incident/Accident Report Investigation revealed that the resident “had a fall from bed without injury. At the time of the fall, the safety measures in place [included] alarms to the resident’s bed and chairs to alert staff to unassisted transfer attempts, a bathroom door alarm, sensor alarms on both sides of the bed and a seat belt alarm on the resident’s wheelchair.” After the fall “the facility initiated the use of a low-lying bed to prevent recurrence of a similar nature.”
Nursing documentation revealed that “the resident was found on the floor. New interventions to prevent recurrence included a therapy referral.” However, the investigator documented that there was “no evidence that the facility had promptly evaluated the resident for the need of increase staff supervision at the type or level required to prevent falls, due to the repeated unsafe behaviors displayed by the resident and the resident’s history of falls.”
Surveyors noted that the facility had “failed to implement safety measures [before] the falls that would prevent or decrease the potential severity of the injury as a result of the fall. The facility relied on the use of safety alarms to maintain the resident’s safety, but these devices were ineffective in preventing this fall with serious injury for this ‘at risk’ resident.” The investigator interviewed the Director of Nurses who “confirmed the facility had not implemented the intervention of increase staff of this resident at high risk for falling.”
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated July 21, 2017, a state surveyor documented the facility’s failure to “attempt a dosage reduction of antipsychotic medication for [one resident].” A review of the cognitively impaired resident’s clinical records revealed the resident was taking an antipsychotic drug and antianxiety medication three times a day. Other documentation shows that the resident “had no mood or behavioral issues according to these assessments” and the Clinical Record “revealed no documented evidence of behavioral symptoms.”
However, “there was no documented evidence that a gradual dose reduction of the antipsychotic medication had been attempted during the last year or physician documentation indicating that a dose reduction attempt was clinically contraindicated for this resident. There was also no documented evidence of a gradual dose reduction attempt to the antianxiety drug during the last year.” An interview with the facility Director of Nurses “confirmed that there had not been attempts to gradual dose reductions [involving] the antipsychotic drug or the antipsychotic drug during the last year.”Failure to Provide Medically-related Social Services to Help Each Patient Achieve the Highest Possible Quality of Life
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated July 17, 2015, a notation was made by a state investigator concerning the facility's failure to "provide medically-related social services for the coordination of medical services for one resident.” The investigator reviewed the Physician Consult Report that revealed that the physician had recommended “a bone stimulator (electrical stimulation therapy for fracture healing and bone growth) for a left tibia stimulation. Partial weight-bearing left lower extremity as tolerated with a walker. Follow-up in two weeks and repeat x-rays were also noted in the Consult Report.”
The resident was admitted to the facility “under private insurance” company coverage. Nurse documentation “revealed that nursing staff spoke with a representative for a bone stimulator [device] and the representative indicated that the resident would have to pay for the bone stimulator.” The surveyor interviewed the Director of Nurses who “revealed that the nursing staff informed Social Services of the need for follow-up with the resident regarding the use of a bone stimulator.” The Social Service Assistant “visited the resident secondary to the information given about the bone stimulator [device].”
The Assistant “informed the resident that payment was not covered under her insurance while residing at the facility and if the resident wanted the bone stimulator, it would cost out of pocket at $2500.” The Assistant “also informed the resident that if she were discharged from the facility, the bone stimulator would be covered under the insurance. The resident decided to wait until she was discharged from the facility to obtain the bone stimulator.”
However, further nursing documentation “revealed the resident now wanted the bone stimulator and would be able to pay $50 a month in installment payments. Nursing made social service aware. However, there was no evidence that Social Services had pursued the resident’s request and attempted to secure the device.” The investigator interviewed the Social Service Director and the Assistant that revealed that the Assistant “confirmed that she had not spoken to either the Nursing Home Administrator or the business office manager to arrange billing/payment information for the bone stimulator in an attempt to secure [the device for] the recommended treatment.”
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated July 17, 2015, a state surveyor noted the facility’s failure to “follow physician’s orders for the treatment of a resident.” A review of the resident’s physician’s orders for daily weights indicated that “if a five-pound gain is noted in a week, to call the physician to notify him and start diuretic therapy.” A review of the resident’s weights noted a “weight gain of greater than five pounds and a week. Additionally, “there was a 6.2 pounds gain noted in a week,” and a” 6.4 pounds gain noted in a week. There is no indication the physician was notified on either of these dates, and no indication diuretic therapy was started as per the physician’s orders.”
The state investigator interviewed the facility Director of Nurses who “confirmed the physician was not notified of the weight gain on either the two above dates nor was the diuretic therapy started as per the physician’s orders.
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated July 17, 2015, a state investigator noted the nursing home’s failure to “ensure that measures prescribed to maintain resident safety were consistently implemented for [one resident].” The investigator reviewed the resident’s records that showed that the resident “was able to independently utilize a wheelchair when off of the nursing unit and on facility grounds.”
However, the Nurses Notes and the resident’s Incident/Accident Report “revealed that the resident was found downtown with his walker (off the facility grounds). Facility staff transported the resident back to the facility in a staff member’s personal vehicle.” During an interview with the resident, it was revealed that “he told the staff he was going to buy some cigarettes. The resident stated that staff did not ask him any questions [before] his leaving the facility nor instructed him that if he was leaving the nursing unit, that he needed to use a wheelchair for mobility. The resident stated that on the day he left the facility to buy cigarettes, he walked down an incline with his walker. The resident reported that he realized, partway down, that he would not be able to navigate back up the hill and had no choice, but to continue to the bottom of the hill.”
During the interview, “the resident stated he was going to call for a taxi to ride back to the facility when the staff showed up to give him a ride back to the facility.” An observation of the resident was made while “exiting the building unsupervised and proceeding toward the smoking unit outside the building using a wheeled walker and not the physician-ordered wheelchair.” The investigator interviewed the Director of Nurses who “confirmed that the resident was to use a wheelchair when off of the nursing unit and [before] this observation, therapy had not screened the resident for safe ambulation for distances without a wheelchair. There was also no evidence that the staff asked the resident where he was going to obtain cigarettes on the day the resident left the facility and had instructed the resident on the use of a wheelchair as ordered by the physician for mobility off the resident unit.”
If you and your family believe your loved one has suffered injuries or harm while a resident at Bloomsburg Care and Rehab, contact Pennsylvania nursing home abuse attorneys at Nursing Home Law Center at (800) 926-7565 now. Our law firm fights aggressively on behalf of Columbia County victims of mistreatment who live in long-term nursing homes in Bloomsburg. Our skillful attorneys provide legal representation in victim cases involving nursing home abuse when it occurs in private and public nursing settings. Contact us now to schedule a free case review to discuss how to obtain justice and resolve a financial compensation claim. Let us fight aggressively on your behalf to ensure your rights are protected.
We accept every case involving nursing home abuse, wrongful death or personal injury through a contingency fee agreement. This arrangement postpones the need to make a payment to pay for legal services until after your case is successfully resolved through a jury trial award or negotiated out of court settlement. Our law firm provides every client a “No Win/No-Fee” Guarantee. This guarantee ensures that your family will owe us nothing if we are unable to obtain compensation on your behalf. Let us begin working on your case today to ensure your family is adequately compensated for the damages that caused your harm. All information you share with our law offices will remain confidential.