Plumas Dialysis

What is Quality Safe Care?

We ask you to decide and ask yourself, if this the care you would want to receive, or want a loved one to receive? 

Recertification Survey - conducted on 1/29/2010 

Revisit Survey, conducted on 4/22/2010,  to ensure the facility has adhered to their own Plan of Correction/Corrective Action to ensure errors do not continue. It appears there were continued cited deficiencies, however, the survey does not state 'repeat deficiency' as other surveys have. This might have been an oversight on the part of the Surveyor. 

It is evident that patients in this  facility were placed in situations of potential or actual harm. It would be nice to know how many patients were affected by these preventable errors that were a result of staff not following their own facility policies and procedures. Additionally, it should be questioned what type of training/education was given to employees and what type of unit-level supervision was present?  Perhaps the data below will answer some of these questions.

General Information

http://projects.propublica.org/dialysis/facilities/52877

Note: This facility had the following data:
Mortality vs Expected - 2006-2009  ---   44% 'worse than expected'
First Year Mortality vs Expected  2006-2008 --- 111% 'worse than expected"
Hospitalizations - Hospital admissions versus expected -- 34% 'higher than expected'

QUESTION:  How many patients were hospitalized or died because of related-deficiencies cited?
This survey was conducted in 2010 and the survey prior was in 2001. This is a period of 9 years. Without adequate oversight, e.g. timely surveys, one must wonder if these types of deficiencies cited in these surveys are just a continuation of what was happening over nine years. We state this because the revisit survey showed continued deficiencies.

Plumas' Dialysis Facility Report (DFR)

 http://propublica.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/dialysis/facility-reports/CA/2010/CA_052877_2010.pd