On the stand · 11 of 12

“WNL.” What gets asked about a checkbox assessment, and what to chart instead

WNL.

Within normal limits of what, and when did you look? WNL says a finding matched your unit's definition. It does not show the value, what changed, or what is normal for this patient.

What they ask about it

It happened in court

Lama v. Borras, 16 F.3d 473

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994

After back surgery a nurse noted a “very bloody” bandage, and later pain at the incision, but the hospital had told nurses to chart by exception, so there were no notes for every shift. The jury could find that the gaps delayed the diagnosis of the infection, and the appeals court let the verdict stand.

one former nurse at the Hospital who attended to Romero in 1986 testified that, under the charting by exception policy, she would not report a patient’s pain if she either did not administer any medicine or simply gave the patient an aspirin-type medication (as opposed to a narcotic). ... the jury could have reasonably inferred that intermittent charting failed to provide the sort of continuous danger signals that would be the most likely spur to early intervention by a physician.

Beechwood Restorative Care Center v. Leeds, 856 F. Supp. 2d 580

U.S. District Court, Western District of New York · 2012

Two plaintiffs tied to a nursing home in Rochester sued New York State Department of Health employees, claiming retaliation that ended with the home's closure. The court quoted a final report by state investigators (MFCU): at the hearing, the home's charting by exception was the core issue, and the thin record made the care look poor until testimony and interviews said otherwise.

The core issue the ALJ continually referred to was Beechwood’s policy of charting by exception [a record-keeping procedure]. Due to the lack of documentation, it appeared that poor care was given. However, testimony during the hearing and interviews conducted by our office refuted that contention.

Write instead

1400: Lower abdominal dressing intact with 3 × 2 cm area of serosanguineous drainage, unchanged from 1200. Incision not visualized beneath dressing.

Observations call for specific detail: Record the color, consistency and quantity of wound drainage—“about the size of a quarter,” for example— rather than noting only that the dressing was “very bloody.”

Source: NSO: Charting by exception: the legal risks

What WNL leaves out, with five before and after rewrites

Already charted it this way?

Not legal advice. Your facility policy, your state and your own attorney are what bind you. Every question and every quote here links to where it was published; read the source, not us. Written by a med-surg RN, ten years, day shift. Why there is no name on it.