HospitalInspections.org

Based on observation, interview, and record review, Physician (ID # 59) admitted a patient (ID # 21) with care requirements listed as " exclusion to admission."

Physician (ID # 5) admitted Patient (ID # 21) who required continuous telemetry monitoring on 02-26-12. The facility ' s admission criteria, approved by the Governing Body, excluded from admission those patients who required continuous telemetry.

Findings include:

Intake # TX 00155108

Observation on 02-27-12 at 9:40 a.m., during initial tour of the facility, revealed an in-patient census of one (1) patient (ID # 21).

Interview with Registered Nurse (RN / ID # 58) at the time of observation she stated Patient # 21 had been admitted the day before for observation with " chest pain and was on telemetry. "

Record review of Patient # 21 ' s clinical record revealed she was 62 years old and admitted to the facility on 02-26-12 for observation status for chest pain.

Further review of Patient (ID # 21) ' s record revealed orders written by Physician ( ID # 59), dated 02-26-12 that read: Chest pain/ telemetry ...EKG every 8 hours with cardiac enzymes x 2. "

Review of hospital policy titled " Admission Exclusion, " revised date 02-06-12, revealed
" ...The hospital (s) is designed to provide inpatient medical care for all medical conditions excluding the following: Patients Requiring Continuous Telemetry ... " Further review of the policy revealed it had been approved by the Governing Body.

Interview on 02-27-12 at 10:30 a.m. with the Chief Nursing Officer (CNO/ ID # 53) he stated Patient ID # 21 was admitted for continuous telemetry and acknowledged the admission criteria excluded the acceptance of patients requiring telemetry. He went on to say the facility currently had a telemetry monitor on the " Emergency Room side and had ordered an additional telemetry monitor for the in-patient nurse ' s station. " The CNO (ID # 53) said it was his understanding the facility would not accept patients requiring telemetry until the in-patient nurse ' s station monitor was obtained. The CNO (ID # 53) said there must have been a miscommunication with Physician # 59