Failure to Assess Indwelling Catheter and Monitor for UTI in Catheterized Resident
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a resident admitted with an indwelling urinary catheter was appropriately assessed for timely catheter removal and monitored for urinary complications, including UTI, in accordance with facility policy and physician expectations. The resident was admitted from a hospital with a Foley catheter placed for postoperative urinary retention, with no documented prior history of urinary retention before that hospitalization. The care plan identified an indwelling catheter related to urinary retention and included an approach for a urology consult and reporting UTI symptoms. However, the physician’s initial progress note did not document the presence of the catheter or urinary retention, and there was no documented assessment for catheter removal as soon as possible after admission. Over the ensuing weeks, there were multiple indications that the catheter was causing discomfort and potential complications, but these did not result in timely diagnostic evaluation. Progress notes document that the resident’s wife reported there was no urinary retention diagnosis and requested discontinuation of the Foley, and that a referral to urology was initiated and later scheduled. Family concerns about catheter-related pain were documented, and nursing staff noted that the resident pulled on the catheter tubing and that he might have transferred germs from his hands to the catheter. A nurse documented sending a message to the NP requesting a urinalysis due to urinary pain, but there is no documentation that an order for a urinalysis was received or that any labs were obtained at the facility prior to the resident’s later hospitalization. The NP later confirmed by phone that the catheter should remain in place until the urology visit, and family was told it could not be removed until then. Additional clinical changes related to urinary function were documented without corresponding physician notification or diagnostic follow-up. On one occasion, the resident complained of inability to urinate, with abdominal distention and significant sediment in the urine; the LPN replaced the Foley catheter under a standing PRN order, noted good urine return, and did not notify the physician despite the facility administrator’s stated expectation that urinary retention and abdominal distention should be reported. Staff interviews confirmed that there was confusion about why the catheter remained in place, that follow-up urology appointments were not addressed promptly after admission, and that the urology appointment was not pursued until several weeks later. The assistant administrator acknowledged that the urology appointment should have been addressed sooner, and the administrator confirmed that no labs were obtained at the facility before the resident was sent to the hospital with altered mental status, where he was found to have a UTI and hypernatremia. The facility’s catheter care policy required notifying a physician or supervisor if a resident indicated bladder fullness or need to void and observing for signs of UTI or urinary retention, but documentation shows these symptoms occurred without corresponding physician notification or timely diagnostic testing. The sequence of events culminated in the resident’s decline and hospitalization. Progress notes shortly before transfer describe a change in behavior, decreased speech, inability to feed self, and abnormal movements, leading to transfer to the ER. The hospital history and physical documented that the family reported the resident had been slowly deteriorating over the prior two weeks, with ER workup significant for a positive urine for UTI, elevated sodium, and elevated lactic acid. Interviews with family and staff further indicated that the catheter had remained in place for an extended period, that family repeatedly raised concerns about pain, possible dehydration, and UTI, and that they requested to speak with the physician but were not given that opportunity. The physician later stated that, in general, he would order a urinalysis if he received a report of pain with a urinary catheter and that residents often arrive from the hospital with catheters despite no prior urinary issues, but in this case there was no documentation of such an order or in-house lab work before the resident’s hospitalization.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
A resident with intact cognition and multiple diagnoses, including BPH and stroke, had a physician order for a condom catheter at bedtime, but the EMR lacked orders or instructions for cleaning, disinfecting, monitoring, or changing the drainage bag. During observation, the bag was seen hanging in the bathroom, and an LPN, RN case manager, and DON all confirmed the absence of documented guidance for the catheter drainage bag care.
A resident with a suprapubic catheter had incomplete orders and unclear care coordination. The care plan did not identify the SP catheter or who was responsible for catheter care and bag changes, and the MAR/TAR contained repeated orders to clarify catheter size without a documented size in the orders. Staff interviews showed uncertainty about the catheter size, who would change the catheter, and whether the listed contact number was available at all times.
Surveyors found that two residents with indwelling urinary catheters did not receive care consistent with their care plans, physician orders, or facility policy. Catheter collection bags were repeatedly observed resting directly on the floor when residents were in bed or seated, and the bags were not contained in basins as specified for one resident. Required catheter care every shift was not documented, and an LPN reported that a catheter bag hung on a recliner had slipped down. The facility’s written policy required keeping catheter bags below bladder level and off the floor, as well as providing routine hygiene, but these standards were not followed.
The facility failed to provide and document catheter care for multiple residents with Foley or suprapubic catheters. A resident with a suprapubic catheter developed drainage, vomiting, and sepsis secondary to CAUTI, while other residents had repeated catheter pain, pus, blockage, hematuria, UTIs, and hospital transfers, including ICU admission for septic shock. The record showed no catheter care orders or task documentation for several residents, and the NHA and DON confirmed the missing documentation.
A resident receiving short-term rehab with an indwelling urinary catheter was observed in a wheelchair with the catheter drainage bag hung under the seat and touching the floor, despite facility documentation requirements that staff verify each shift that privacy bags are in place and drainage bags are not on the floor. An RN confirmed that catheter bags are not supposed to touch the floor, indicating a failure to follow established catheter care and infection control practices.
Indwelling Catheter Drainage System Left on Floor: A resident with CKD and a UTI had an indwelling urinary catheter, but staff observed the catheter tubing and drainage bag on the floor on multiple occasions. An LPN also lifted the bag above the level of the bladder while repositioning it, and staff interviews confirmed the bag and tubing should not touch the floor.
Missing Orders and Documentation for Condom Catheter Drainage Bag Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure appropriate care and services were provided for management of a resident’s external urinary catheter system. The resident had intact cognition and required assistance with ADLs, and diagnoses included atrial fibrillation, heart failure, BPH, stroke, malnutrition, anxiety disorder, and depression. Physician orders dated 4/29/26 indicated use of a condom catheter at bedtime, but the electronic medical record did not contain physician orders or documented instructions for cleaning, disinfecting, monitoring, or routinely changing the associated catheter drainage bag. During observation on 5/19/26 at 11:57 a.m., the resident’s catheter drainage bag was seen hanging on the side rail in the bathroom. Record review and observation did not identify documentation that the drainage bag was routinely cleaned, disinfected, monitored, or replaced according to accepted standards of practice. An LPN confirmed there were no physician orders addressing when the drainage bag should be changed or instructions for cleaning or disinfecting it. An RN case manager stated the drainage bag should have been changed weekly, but no orders related to changing, cleaning, or disinfecting were present. The DON stated the facility expected clear physician orders and nursing instructions for catheter care, cleaning, monitoring, and replacement schedules, and confirmed the facility could not provide evidence that such orders or guidance were in place for the resident’s condom catheter drainage bag care.
Incomplete Suprapubic Catheter Orders and Care Coordination
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper orders were obtained and adequate coordination was in place for a resident with a suprapubic catheter. The resident’s admission MDS identified intact cognition and an indwelling catheter. During interview, the resident stated he had a catheter before admission and that it was changed to a suprapubic catheter after moving to the facility because of infections. The resident also stated staff assisted with the catheter. The resident’s care plan addressed bladder incontinence and included brief use, perineal care, incontinence checks, and monitoring for signs and symptoms of UTI, but it did not identify that the resident had a suprapubic catheter or who was responsible for catheter care and changing the drainage bag. The MAR/TAR contained multiple catheter-related orders, including orders to clarify catheter size, change the drainage bag and tubing, clean around the suprapubic catheter exit site, monitor for leakage and infection, and flush the catheter if not draining properly. Several of these orders were left blank on some shifts or days, and the record showed repeated orders to clarify the catheter size without a documented size in the orders. Progress notes showed catheter-related documentation, including a resident refusal of catheter care, a successful suprapubic catheter exchange at the urologist office, and later documentation that the catheter was patent and sized at 16 fr. Staff interviews showed uncertainty about the current catheter size, whether the facility was responsible for catheter changes, and whether the contact number listed for catheter problems was available 24 hours a day. The DON stated orders should include the catheter size and clear responsibility for catheter changes in case of emergency, and the facility policy titled Indwelling Catheter Use and Removal did not address suprapubic catheters.
Failure to Maintain Proper Indwelling Catheter Care and Bag Positioning
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide appropriate indwelling urinary catheter care and to keep catheter collection bags off the floor for two residents with catheters. For one resident with paraplegia, cognitive communication deficit, and an indwelling catheter, surveyors repeatedly observed the catheter collection bag resting directly on the floor, both when the resident was in bed and when she was seated in a recliner. The bag was not contained in a basin despite a care plan revision indicating the catheter bag was to be kept in a basin on the floor per the resident’s preference, with the basin next to the bed. There were no physician orders or documentation indicating that catheter care was being provided, even though the resident’s care plan included interventions such as catheter care per orders and positioning the catheter bag and tubing below the level of the bladder. An LPN later stated she had hung the catheter bag on the side of the recliner and that it must have slipped down. For a second resident with diagnoses including obstructive and reflux uropathy and hydronephrosis with ureteral stricture, surveyors observed on multiple occasions that the urinary catheter collection bag was attached to the side of the bed in a low position and resting directly on the floor, without being contained in a basin. The resident’s care plan and physician orders required catheter care every shift and positioning the catheter bag and tubing below the level of the bladder. The facility’s own policy on indwelling urinary catheter management specified that the collecting bag must be kept below the level of the bladder and not rested on the floor, and that routine hygiene was appropriate. Despite these requirements, the observed practices for both residents did not comply with the care plans, physician orders, or facility policy.
Failure to Provide and Document Catheter Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate urinary catheter care for four residents with indwelling or suprapubic catheters. The report states that the facility policy required catheter care to be documented in the medical record, including the date and time care was provided, the staff member providing it, and assessment data obtained during care. For Resident 6, who had a suprapubic catheter, the record contained no order for catheter care and no task documentation showing catheter care had been completed since admission. Resident 6 developed suprapubic catheter drainage with serosanguinous fluid, vomiting, and later presented to the hospital with low suprapubic output, blood-tinged leakage, pus around the suprapubic tube, pus and gross hematuria in the tubing, suprapubic abdominal pain, and vomiting. The resident was admitted with sepsis secondary to CAUTI. The Nursing Home Administrator and DON confirmed there was no order or documented evidence that catheter care had been provided per policy. Resident 28’s record also lacked an order for catheter care and lacked task documentation showing catheter care had been completed since admission. The resident had repeated catheter-related complaints and findings, including pain, reports that nurses were not flushing the catheter, pus around the catheter, sediment nearly occluding the Foley, yellow drainage, redness, swelling, hematuria, and multiple transfers to the hospital. The record documents UTIs, positive urinalysis results, antibiotic treatment, and hospital admissions including sepsis. The NHA confirmed there was no documented evidence of catheter care for this resident. Resident 47 had a Foley catheter order, but the record failed to show an order for catheter care or documentation that catheter care had been completed since admission. The resident complained of abdominal and penile discomfort, a Foley flush met resistance, the catheter was changed, the resident remained unable to void, and a bladder scan showed 1211 cc with a hard, distended abdomen. The resident was sent to the hospital and was admitted to ICU with septic shock from ESBL Klebsiella and E. coli bacteremia from complicated UTI/CAUTI present on admission. Resident 8’s record likewise lacked an order for catheter care and lacked task documentation showing catheter care from return from the hospital until discontinuation of the catheter. The NHA and DON confirmed the absence of documented catheter care for Resident 8 as well.
Catheter Drainage Bag Allowed to Touch Floor, Breaching Infection Control
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate services to prevent urinary tract infections for one resident with an indwelling urinary catheter. A male resident admitted for short-term rehabilitation after a fall with a right femur fracture, and with diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of the prostate and secondary malignant neoplasm of the bone, was observed sitting in a wheelchair in the hallway with his indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag hung under the wheelchair seat and touching the floor. Facility records on the Treatment Administration Record showed staff were required to document each shift that the privacy bag was in place and that the urine collection bag was not touching the floor. During an interview, an RN confirmed that urine collection bags for all residents with indwelling urinary catheters are not supposed to touch the floor. This deficient practice exposed residents with urinary catheters to contaminants that may cause preventable urinary tract infections and had the potential to affect all residents with a urinary catheter.
Indwelling Catheter Drainage System Left on Floor
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper management of a resident’s indwelling urinary catheter drainage system by keeping it off the floor. Resident 25 had a diagnosis that included chronic kidney disease and had a care plan dated 3/26/26 identifying the use of an indwelling urinary catheter. The care plan interventions included maintaining a closed system with the urinary bag below the resident’s bladder and covering and observing the tubing while avoiding obstructions. The resident also had a nurse’s note dated 4/22/26 indicating a urine culture was received and reported to the physician, and a new order was received for Augmentin for a urinary tract infection. During observations, the resident’s catheter tubing was seen lying flat directly on the floor with the tubing coiled around the catheter, the drainage bag was hanging on the bedrail with the bottom slightly off the floor and was then placed onto the bed, and the bag later was observed scrunched up on the floor. During one observation, an LPN lifted the catheter bag above the level of the resident’s bladder while moving it onto the bed. Interviews with CNA 8 and the IP/LPN indicated the catheter bag and tubing should not be on the floor, and the IP/LPN stated that if the bag was on the floor it could cause infections or possible leaks.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 26, 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.