Carlyle Senior Care: Antibiotic Misuse, Abuse Issues - SC

The March incident at Carlyle Senior Care of Florence exemplified systematic failures in antibiotic monitoring that federal inspectors documented across multiple cases during a March 27 inspection. The facility failed to properly oversee antibiotic use for four of five residents reviewed, potentially compromising patient safety through inappropriate medication practices.

The problems extended beyond medication oversight. Inspectors arrived at the facility to investigate three abuse complaints, all of which were substantiated. Three weeks earlier, state investigators had examined several additional abuse allegations at the 133 West Clarke Road facility.

When confronted about the facility's performance improvement plan aimed at eliminating abuse, Administrator responded that the goal was "zero abuse." Asked if he believed this plan was achievable, he did not reply.

The antibiotic stewardship failures revealed a pattern of prescribing without proper testing. Resident 24 was sent to the emergency room on February 18 for an indwelling urinary catheter issue. The ER completed a urine analysis and started an antibiotic, but no culture was performed. When the resident returned to the facility and completed the antibiotic course, the Infection Preventionist never questioned whether the medication was appropriate.

Resident 81 faced similar treatment gaps. After being sent to the emergency room for urinary retention and catheterization, the resident returned on an antibiotic despite no urine analysis or culture being completed.

The facility's own policy, dated September 30, 2024, explicitly required monitoring antibiotic appropriateness. The document stated that "antibiotic orders obtained from consulting, specialty, or emergency providers shall be reviewed for appropriateness" and mandated "random audits of antibiotic prescriptions."

None of this oversight occurred in the cases inspectors reviewed.

Resident 55's case on March 4 followed the same pattern. Sent to the emergency room for a change in condition, the resident returned on antibiotics after the ER completed a urine analysis but ordered no culture to confirm infection.

The most concerning case involved Resident 15, who had developed a foul-smelling Stage IV pressure ulcer on the sacrum with drainage. Licensed Practical Nurse 9 noticed the odor and notified the wound doctor, who evaluated the resident and prescribed Doxycycline for 14 days without taking a culture.

"I noticed a foul odor coming from the sacrum with drainage," the nurse told inspectors on March 25. "I notified the wound doctor, and he came and evaluated the resident. A culture was not completed on the wound."

The Infection Preventionist acknowledged the error during a March 27 interview. "I told LPN9 and the wound doctor that a culture should have been done on R15," she said. "The wound doctor usually does a culture, but for some reason, did not do one on this resident."

She admitted learning during the inspection process that she needed to obtain cultures from hospitals to verify urinary tract infections and ensure residents received appropriate antibiotics. "If I do not have a culture, I will call the hospital to get one," she told inspectors.

The wound doctor expressed confusion about his own practices. "I normally do a culture. I am not sure why I did not do one," he said during a March 27 interview. "I understand that a culture should always be completed before an antibiotic is given."

His admission revealed a fundamental breakdown in basic infection control protocols that the facility's policies explicitly required.

The Administrator's response to questions about antibiotic stewardship was limited. "My expectation for antibiotic stewardship is to follow the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines," he said during a March 27 interview.

Those same CMS guidelines require the monitoring that inspectors found absent across multiple cases.

The abuse-related performance improvement plan that drew inspectors' scrutiny contained no documentation, summary, or analysis of processes. When questioned about the plan's effectiveness, the Administrator could only restate the zero-abuse goal. The plan referenced an outdated federal regulation for abuse and lacked basic components required for quality assurance programs.

The Administrator confirmed he understood the purpose of quality assurance and performance improvement programs, yet the abuse plan contained none of the required elements for identifying problems, implementing solutions, or measuring progress.

The antibiotic stewardship failures represented more than paperwork violations. Inappropriate antibiotic use can lead to drug resistance, adverse reactions, and treatment of non-existent infections while missing actual medical needs. For Resident 15, the decision to treat a malodorous wound without confirming bacterial infection could have delayed appropriate care for the Stage IV pressure ulcer.

Stage IV pressure ulcers represent the most severe category of bedsores, extending through skin and fat into underlying muscle and potentially reaching bone. These wounds require precise treatment protocols, and infection management depends on accurate identification of causative organisms through cultures.

The facility's September 2024 antibiotic stewardship policy outlined clear expectations for monitoring medication appropriateness and conducting random prescription audits. The policy aimed to "optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the adverse events associated with antibiotic use."

Inspectors found no evidence these audits occurred or that anyone reviewed the appropriateness of antibiotics prescribed by emergency departments or consulting physicians.

The Infection Preventionist's admission that she learned during the inspection to request hospital cultures highlighted the gap between written policies and actual practice. Her role specifically included monitoring antibiotic use, yet she had not been obtaining basic diagnostic information needed to evaluate medication appropriateness.

The convergence of antibiotic monitoring failures and substantiated abuse complaints suggested broader systemic problems with oversight and quality assurance at the facility. Both issues involved failures to implement existing policies and monitor staff compliance with established protocols.

Federal inspectors classified the antibiotic stewardship violations as having potential for actual harm to residents, reflecting the serious nature of inappropriate medication practices in vulnerable populations. The facility's 28 sample residents included at least five who had received antibiotics, with four experiencing monitoring failures that could have compromised their care and safety.

Full Inspection Report

The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Carlyle Senior Care of Florence from 2025-03-27 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.

Additional Resources

• View all inspection reports for Carlyle Senior Care of Florence
• Browse all SC nursing home inspections