Finding Description
Based on observation, resident interview, family interview, staff interview, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to maintain a resident's personal privacy affecting one resident (Resident #110- R110) in a survey sample of 11 residents.
The findings included:
For R110, the facility staff failed to ensure the resident's privacy was maintained during care, conversations with visitors, and during phone calls, due to the constant monitoring of the resident while in their room, via a video camera with auditory monitoring being observed by a staff member 24 hours a day.
On 5/13/24 at 6:15 p.m., upon the survey team's arrival to the unit, it was observed that in the hallway across from the nursing station there were several devices that were on vertical poles, that could be moved around and at the top, there was a camera.
On 5/13/24 at 6:30 p.m., R110 was observed to be on the telephone in the room and was not available for an interview.
On 5/14/24 at 09:13 AM, observations were conducted in R110's room. It was noted that one of the video cameras on the pole was observed in the room. R110 was asked about the device, and he stated that it keeps an eye on him and will scold him if he tries to get up. When asked how it made him feel to know someone was watching him all the time, R110 said, not good, uncomfortable. R110 was asked if he agreed to it being in the room and R110 said, no, all the rooms have it. The survey team did not observe this device in other resident rooms on the unit. R110 went on to say that if he tries to get up it will tell him to stop and wait for someone to come help him.
On 5/14/24 at approximately 9:30 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON was asked about the device in R110's room. The DON explained that it was a virtual monitor that is a video camera and has the option for audio. A virtual monitor tech is upstairs and can watch and listen to him and can talk to him. The DON asked if the resident consented to such device. The DON explained that they are educated on the device and what it does but no formal consent it obtained.
On 05/14/24 at 09:55 a.m., during a clinical record review, a Virtual Sitter Patient Initiation Report Form was noted. The form indicated that for R110 the initiation criteria identified was: falls, medical device interference (pulling of lines), dementia, poor short-term memory, impulsivity, and foley in place. Review of the physician orders revealed no order for the virtual monitor. During the clinical record review, it was noted that on 5/13/24, R110 sustained a fall, which required sutures for a laceration to the head.
On 05/14/24 at 10:01 a.m., the DON provided the surveyor with an education document, that he indicated is reviewed with residents and/or families. The DON also assisted the surveyor in reviewing R110's clinical record and on 5/7/24, which was the day of admission, R110's behavior was noted as attempt to get OOB [out of bed], confused and noted, observation status initiated, monitoring type virtual, education provided. There was no evidence of any consent of such device by the resident and/or family.
On 05/14/24 at 10:37 a.m., a telephone interview was conducted with the daughter of R110. The daughter was asked about the virtual monitor and stated, I don't like that the machine can hear us when we are there privately, if there was some button that showed it was muted would be great. The family member said that she wasn't aware initially that there was a 2-way microphone and wasn't told that they could listen and communicate through the device. She went on to say that the facility staff just brought it in, there was no discussion as to if they wanted it or it being optional. She said that at one time her father had a roommate, and she didn't know if the roommate was aware that they could watch him as well.
During the above conversation with R110's daughter, she said, If he said he didn't want it, it's not his option, it's the nurses, he doesn't like it. it is creepy, that someone can watch and hear all the time. She added, If I were a patient rehabilitating, I would be very offended to have that in my room, as a woman to have body parts exposed, it would be very intrusive, and sometimes it is embarrassing if staff listen to us, because he picks at me. I would want them to ask me.
On 05/14/24 at 01:02 p.m., R110 was interviewed again. R110 said, It doesn't feel too good to know they are watching and listening all the time.
On 5/14/24 at approximately 2 p.m., the surveyor visited the virtual monitor technician (other staff #1- OS#1), in their office. It was noted that OS #1 was sitting in front of two large screens that had multiple residents with a live video feed of their room. It was noted that one Resident, who was located elsewhere within the hospital and not on the skilled care unit, was being assisted with a bed bath by two staff members, and the resident's body could be seen unclothed. OS #1 adjusted the camera to take the resident's body out of view and indicated she did that because the surveyor was in the room, but normally wouldn't adjust it. OS #1 was observed to talk to residents through the camera device/virtual monitor located in the resident's room and could hear what the resident was saying. OS #1 stated that during care such as baths, nursing staff are to call the virtual monitor tech and ask them to turn the privacy screen on, which was like a screen saver on a computer. OS #1 said, staff rarely remember to call to have this done. When asked if there was a way for nursing staff to turn off the device during care, OS #1 said, no, they have to call us and tell us to put a privacy screen on. OS #1 went on to explain the device cannot be disengaged by the resident, staff, or visitors to stop the monitoring or allow for privacy.
On 5/14/24 at 3 p.m., during an end of day meeting, the above concerns were shared with the director of nursing. When asked if consent is obtained prior to the virtual monitor being used, the DON stated that it was part of the consent to treat.
On 05/15/24 at 08:37 a.m., the DON reported to the survey team that the virtual monitor for R110 had been discontinued following the end of day meeting.
On 05/15/24 at 08:42 a.m., an interview was conducted with RN #2 (registered nurse). RN#2 said the virtual monitor is used if a patient is confused, impulsive and high fall risk. When asked if this is something that the doctor must order and consent be obtained for, RN #2 said, no, and explained that a nurse can initiate it and no physician order is needed. RN #2 said, they [the resident and/or family] are aware, we tell them what it is, that it is a camera it can keep eyes on you and keep you safe, it can speak to you, and you can speak to them. When asked about privacy during care, RN #2 said, If we are going to bathe or toilet a resident we call, and the virtual monitor and they will turn camera off.
On 5/15/24, a review of the facility document titled Resident Rights was conducted. This document read in part, As a resident on our skilled nursing unit, we want you to be informed and involved in making decisions about your care. All residents shall have rights, which include, but are not limited to the following: . 9. Each resident may communicate privately with individuals of his/her choice .
The document titled, Virtual Sitter: Patient Monitoring Technology was reviewed. It read, Patient safety and privacy are our highest priorities at [facility name redacted]. For this reason, we are using a virtual sitter for your safety. Virtual sitter is a patient monitoring device to assist your care team to maintain your safety and required medical treatment. Examples include fall prevention and keeping lines and devices in place; all of which can lead to a delay in healing and recovery. How the virtual sitter works: never records video or audio, video camera and two-way audio- trained staff member to see and speak to you, . Privacy mode (no video or audio) is used when a doctor or nurse is providing care or dressing, bathing, and using the toilet. When the light goes off, privacy mode is on.
No additional information was provided.
The findings included:
For R110, the facility staff failed to ensure the resident's privacy was maintained during care, conversations with visitors, and during phone calls, due to the constant monitoring of the resident while in their room, via a video camera with auditory monitoring being observed by a staff member 24 hours a day.
On 5/13/24 at 6:15 p.m., upon the survey team's arrival to the unit, it was observed that in the hallway across from the nursing station there were several devices that were on vertical poles, that could be moved around and at the top, there was a camera.
On 5/13/24 at 6:30 p.m., R110 was observed to be on the telephone in the room and was not available for an interview.
On 5/14/24 at 09:13 AM, observations were conducted in R110's room. It was noted that one of the video cameras on the pole was observed in the room. R110 was asked about the device, and he stated that it keeps an eye on him and will scold him if he tries to get up. When asked how it made him feel to know someone was watching him all the time, R110 said, not good, uncomfortable. R110 was asked if he agreed to it being in the room and R110 said, no, all the rooms have it. The survey team did not observe this device in other resident rooms on the unit. R110 went on to say that if he tries to get up it will tell him to stop and wait for someone to come help him.
On 5/14/24 at approximately 9:30 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON was asked about the device in R110's room. The DON explained that it was a virtual monitor that is a video camera and has the option for audio. A virtual monitor tech is upstairs and can watch and listen to him and can talk to him. The DON asked if the resident consented to such device. The DON explained that they are educated on the device and what it does but no formal consent it obtained.
On 05/14/24 at 09:55 a.m., during a clinical record review, a Virtual Sitter Patient Initiation Report Form was noted. The form indicated that for R110 the initiation criteria identified was: falls, medical device interference (pulling of lines), dementia, poor short-term memory, impulsivity, and foley in place. Review of the physician orders revealed no order for the virtual monitor. During the clinical record review, it was noted that on 5/13/24, R110 sustained a fall, which required sutures for a laceration to the head.
On 05/14/24 at 10:01 a.m., the DON provided the surveyor with an education document, that he indicated is reviewed with residents and/or families. The DON also assisted the surveyor in reviewing R110's clinical record and on 5/7/24, which was the day of admission, R110's behavior was noted as attempt to get OOB [out of bed], confused and noted, observation status initiated, monitoring type virtual, education provided. There was no evidence of any consent of such device by the resident and/or family.
On 05/14/24 at 10:37 a.m., a telephone interview was conducted with the daughter of R110. The daughter was asked about the virtual monitor and stated, I don't like that the machine can hear us when we are there privately, if there was some button that showed it was muted would be great. The family member said that she wasn't aware initially that there was a 2-way microphone and wasn't told that they could listen and communicate through the device. She went on to say that the facility staff just brought it in, there was no discussion as to if they wanted it or it being optional. She said that at one time her father had a roommate, and she didn't know if the roommate was aware that they could watch him as well.
During the above conversation with R110's daughter, she said, If he said he didn't want it, it's not his option, it's the nurses, he doesn't like it. it is creepy, that someone can watch and hear all the time. She added, If I were a patient rehabilitating, I would be very offended to have that in my room, as a woman to have body parts exposed, it would be very intrusive, and sometimes it is embarrassing if staff listen to us, because he picks at me. I would want them to ask me.
On 05/14/24 at 01:02 p.m., R110 was interviewed again. R110 said, It doesn't feel too good to know they are watching and listening all the time.
On 5/14/24 at approximately 2 p.m., the surveyor visited the virtual monitor technician (other staff #1- OS#1), in their office. It was noted that OS #1 was sitting in front of two large screens that had multiple residents with a live video feed of their room. It was noted that one Resident, who was located elsewhere within the hospital and not on the skilled care unit, was being assisted with a bed bath by two staff members, and the resident's body could be seen unclothed. OS #1 adjusted the camera to take the resident's body out of view and indicated she did that because the surveyor was in the room, but normally wouldn't adjust it. OS #1 was observed to talk to residents through the camera device/virtual monitor located in the resident's room and could hear what the resident was saying. OS #1 stated that during care such as baths, nursing staff are to call the virtual monitor tech and ask them to turn the privacy screen on, which was like a screen saver on a computer. OS #1 said, staff rarely remember to call to have this done. When asked if there was a way for nursing staff to turn off the device during care, OS #1 said, no, they have to call us and tell us to put a privacy screen on. OS #1 went on to explain the device cannot be disengaged by the resident, staff, or visitors to stop the monitoring or allow for privacy.
On 5/14/24 at 3 p.m., during an end of day meeting, the above concerns were shared with the director of nursing. When asked if consent is obtained prior to the virtual monitor being used, the DON stated that it was part of the consent to treat.
On 05/15/24 at 08:37 a.m., the DON reported to the survey team that the virtual monitor for R110 had been discontinued following the end of day meeting.
On 05/15/24 at 08:42 a.m., an interview was conducted with RN #2 (registered nurse). RN#2 said the virtual monitor is used if a patient is confused, impulsive and high fall risk. When asked if this is something that the doctor must order and consent be obtained for, RN #2 said, no, and explained that a nurse can initiate it and no physician order is needed. RN #2 said, they [the resident and/or family] are aware, we tell them what it is, that it is a camera it can keep eyes on you and keep you safe, it can speak to you, and you can speak to them. When asked about privacy during care, RN #2 said, If we are going to bathe or toilet a resident we call, and the virtual monitor and they will turn camera off.
On 5/15/24, a review of the facility document titled Resident Rights was conducted. This document read in part, As a resident on our skilled nursing unit, we want you to be informed and involved in making decisions about your care. All residents shall have rights, which include, but are not limited to the following: . 9. Each resident may communicate privately with individuals of his/her choice .
The document titled, Virtual Sitter: Patient Monitoring Technology was reviewed. It read, Patient safety and privacy are our highest priorities at [facility name redacted]. For this reason, we are using a virtual sitter for your safety. Virtual sitter is a patient monitoring device to assist your care team to maintain your safety and required medical treatment. Examples include fall prevention and keeping lines and devices in place; all of which can lead to a delay in healing and recovery. How the virtual sitter works: never records video or audio, video camera and two-way audio- trained staff member to see and speak to you, . Privacy mode (no video or audio) is used when a doctor or nurse is providing care or dressing, bathing, and using the toilet. When the light goes off, privacy mode is on.
No additional information was provided.