Luling Living Center: Catheter Care Neglect Findings - LA
The resident, identified in inspection records as Resident #2, has a suprapubic catheter, a tube inserted directly through the abdomen into the bladder. His physician had ordered that a catheter anchor be applied weekly to secure the tubing to his body, and that catheter care be performed every shift. Neither was happening.
Inspectors arrived on August 25, 2025, at 11:30 in the morning and found the catheter had no anchoring device. The tubing was not secured to his body. Near the insertion site, dried drainage had collected on the tube. They came back the next day at 12:40 in the afternoon. The catheter still had no anchor. The tubing was still loose. The dried drainage was still there.
On August 27, at 11:00 in the morning, nothing had changed.
The resident, who scored a 15 out of 15 on a cognitive assessment, meaning he was fully intact mentally, told inspectors directly what was happening to him. On August 26, he said catheter care was not performed every day, and that nobody had cleaned the catheter or the insertion site that day or the day before. The next morning, he told inspectors again: nobody had come to clean his catheter or the insertion site on August 26. He said he had not had a catheter anchoring device placed in months.
A review of his electronic treatment records for July and August 2025 found no documentation that the anchor had been applied or changed at any point during either month.
When inspectors spoke with a certified nursing assistant on August 26, she said she did not perform suprapubic catheter care on the resident, and that his nurse was responsible for that. A licensed practical nurse interviewed the same day said catheter care was only done on the night shift, that she had not performed it during the day shift, and that she did not know catheter care was ordered every shift.
The director of nursing, interviewed on August 27, confirmed that catheter care should have been performed every shift as ordered. She confirmed the resident did not have a catheter anchoring device and should have.
The administrator, presented with the findings the same afternoon, offered no explanation.
A suprapubic catheter that is not anchored can pull against the insertion site with movement, causing irritation or injury to the surrounding tissue. Dried drainage near an insertion site that is not being cleaned regularly creates conditions for infection. The inspection report classified the violation as causing minimal harm or the potential for actual harm.
What the records show is a man who was fully aware of what was and was not being done to his body, who told inspectors the care had been missing not for days but for months, and whose account matched what inspectors found every time they checked. His treatment records for two full months had no documentation of the anchor being applied even once.
The nurse who should have been performing catheter care during the day said she did not know it was ordered every shift. The nursing assistant said it was someone else's job. The director of nursing confirmed the orders existed and were not being followed. The administrator said nothing.
On the morning of August 27, three days into the inspection, the catheter still had no anchor, the tubing was still unsecured, and the dried drainage was still on the tube near the site where it entered his body.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Luling Living Center from 2025-08-27 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Download the official CMS inspection PDF from Medicare.gov
Additional Resources
Data source: This article is based on inspection data downloaded directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) via Medicare.gov. CMS releases inspection reports in bulk; we publish the findings as documented by state surveyors in the official Form CMS-2567 Statement of Deficiencies.
Plan of correction: The CMS report we receive does not include the facility's plan of correction. Facilities submit plans of correction separately to state survey agencies and those responses may not be reflected in CMS data at the time of publication. The absence of a plan of correction in our data does not mean one was not filed. Readers who want information about corrective steps taken are encouraged to contact the facility directly or their state survey agency.
Corrections may have occurred: Inspection reports reflect conditions observed on the date of the survey. Facilities may have implemented corrections, staffing changes, additional training, or other remediation since the report was issued. We report what CMS provides and encourage readers to seek current information from the facility.
Editorial process: Inspection findings are extracted from CMS source documents and synthesized using AI, reviewed for factual accuracy against the original report by our editorial team.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: September 22, 2026 · Our methodology
Luling Living Center in Luling, LA was cited for neglect violations during a health inspection on August 27, 2025.
The resident, identified in inspection records as Resident #2, has a suprapubic catheter, a tube inserted directly through the abdomen into the bladder.
Health inspections identify deficiencies that facilities must correct. Violations range from minor documentation issues to serious safety concerns. Review the full report below for specific details and facility response.