Davita Atwater Dialysis Facility

WHAT ABOUT THOSE FACILITIES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN INSPECTED

DAVITA - ATWATER DIALYSIS FACILITY

 

Davita Atwater Dialysis Facility was first certified in 1991. The facility has not been inspected since April 2001, thereby, leaving a ten year time frame of not knowing if the facility has been in compliance with regulations. Therefore, we take a closer look

http://projects.propublica.org/dialysis/facilities/compare?q=95301&w=10 and

we see that the ‘First Year Mortality - “Deaths during first year of treatment per 100 patient years, 2006 - 2008’ - 47% (this is almost double and higher than the national average and double the state average). Further review shows that the “First year death rate versus expected death rate, 2006-2008 was 123% WORSE THAN EXPECTED. “Hospital admissions versus expected admissions 2006 - 2008” - 18% (higher than expected). “Days in hospital versus expected days in hospital 2006-2008” 3% (higher than expected)

Infection - Septicemia - Percent hospitalized with a blood infection, 2007 - 2008 was 3% higher than national percentages and 4% higher than state and one percent lower than national rates for Access-Related infections, while one percent higher for state averages. (vascular access infections, 2008).

Hospitalizations - Hospital admissions versus expected admissions 2006-2008 was 18% (higher than expected) and Days in hospital was 3% (higher than expected)

Outcomes that CMS has focused on are anemia management and dialysis adequacy. This facility had 69% of patients with healthy hemoglobin levels, 2009, which was 12% lower than national and state average. Dialysis adequacy was 3% below national average and 2% for state.

A further look into the facility is seen in the Dialysis Facility Report (DFR) (this is NOT the facility inspection) http://propublica.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/dialysis/facility-reports/CA/2010/CA_052706_2010.pdf

This facility had 31% of their patients (out of 51) with a hemoglobin level of above 12 during 2009.

The facility had 24% more deaths than expected at this facility. . However, this report states that this might be a ‘chance occurrence.’

The first year death rate for patients starting at this facility during 2006-2008 was 123% more deaths than expected. This is “….statistically significant…so this higher mortality is unlikely to be due to random chance and probably represents a real difference from expected mortality in the nation.” This is cause for concern and perhaps a survey would have identified reasons for this high percentage.

Deaths in this facility due to infection are as follows:

2006 -- 8 deaths - 25% due to infection

2007 - 12 deaths 25% due to infection

2008 - 7 deaths - 28.6% due to infection

2009 - 9 deaths - 22% due to infection

New Patients --

2006 4 deaths - -

2007 10 deaths - 30% due to infection

2008 - 9 deaths - 11.1% due to infection

　

Diagnosis Associated with Hospitalization (Septicemia - blood stream infection)

2006 -- out of 50 patients 14% were hospitalized

2007 - out of 56 patients 12.5% were hospitalized

2008 - out of 57 patients 17.5% were hospitalized

These patients were in the hospital between 5 and 7 days.