Overall sentiment: Reviews for Lexington Health and Rehabilitation Center are highly polarized, producing a mixed but concerning overall picture. Many reviewers praise the rehabilitation services and single out individuals who provide outstanding care, while a large number of reports describe systemic failures in nursing care, cleanliness, medication management, communication, and safety. The divergence appears pronounced enough that patient experience often depends on unit, shift, and specific staff on duty rather than consistent institutional performance.
Care quality and clinical safety: The facility receives frequent, specific praise for its physical and occupational therapy programs; multiple reviewers report rapid, measurable rehabilitation progress and effective therapy staff. However, this strength coexists with recurrent and serious clinical concerns. Numerous reviews describe medication errors, missing medication doses for days, delayed administration of critical medicines (including diuretics and insulin), and heavy sedation or overmedication. Several instances allegedly resulted in deterioration of condition, emergency room transfers, or readmission to hospital. Infection control and wound care were also recurring problem areas: reports include UTIs, MRSA, scabies, pressure wounds, and poorly managed post-discharge care. These issues raise significant patient-safety concerns that contrast sharply with accounts of excellent rehab outcomes.
Staff behavior and variability: A pronounced pattern in the reviews is inconsistency in staff performance. Many reviews single out exceptional employees across CNAs, nurses, therapists, and administrators who are described as compassionate, attentive, and proactive. Specific staff members and managers receive strong commendations for going above and beyond, advocating for patients, and providing emotional support. Conversely, a substantial number of reviews describe rude, uncaring, or unprofessional behavior from nursing staff and CNAs, including yelling, rough handling, and ignoring residents. Reports of staff under the influence, inappropriate conversations from activity staff, and security incidents amplify concerns about supervision and hiring practices. Understaffing and high turnover are commonly cited as drivers of this variability and are linked to missed care, delays, and burnout.
Facility condition and cleanliness: Reviews about facility cleanliness and maintenance are sharply divided. Some families report spotless, spacious, well-appointed rooms and recently renovated areas, while many others describe severe sanitation problems. Complaints include bugs and flies, mold on ceilings and walls, caked dirt and biological contamination, peeling wallpaper and plaster, rusty beds and stained furniture, and broken or missing equipment. These conditions are not isolated to cosmetic complaints but are tied in reviews to infection risk, dignity concerns, and decisions to remove loved ones. The disparity suggests uneven maintenance across units and times, with certain wings or shifts performing much better than others.
Dining and nutrition: Dining experiences are inconsistent. Several reviewers describe adequate or even good nutritious meals with choice and sufficient portions; however, a large volume of reviews criticize food quality—meals arriving cold, inadequate portions, processed or unpalatable items, missing snacks, and limited fresh produce. Some reviewers explicitly link poor nutrition to weight loss and anemia, and express the belief that cost-saving compromises are made at the expense of resident nutrition.
Activities and resident life: Activity programming receives praise in multiple reviews, with creative programs and caring activity staff noted for improving residents' quality of life. However, other reviews describe inattentive or unprofessional activity staff and limited mental health or psychological therapy services. Overall, when activity staff are engaged and properly resourced, residents report better experiences; when not, the facility feels neglectful and isolating.
Communication, administration, and billing: Communication and administrative responsiveness are major recurring issues. Families frequently report poor notification about clinical events (falls, doctor visits), difficulty reaching staff by phone, unanswered or misrouted calls, and a perceived lack of transparency. Billing and insurance confusion are reported, with at least one reviewer citing a substantial unexpected bill and difficulty getting clear information about Medicare copays and secondary insurance. Several reviews include allegations of dishonesty from management or the director of nursing, and a few reports mention formal complaints to authorities, police involvement, or DCF/State's Attorney involvement, indicating escalated disputes and severe concerns.
Notable patterns and risk indicators: The reviews reveal clear patterns: rehabilitation services and certain staff/units can deliver high-quality, even outstanding care; simultaneously, there are repeated reports of neglect, unsafe med management, sanitation failures, and unprofessional conduct in other units or shifts. This inconsistency is the central theme: care quality appears highly dependent on which staff and unit a resident encounters. Reports of theft, exploitation, and severe neglect (residents left in filth, delayed toileting, pressure wounds) are especially alarming and suggest systemic vulnerabilities in oversight, staffing, and culture.
Conclusion and practical considerations: Based on the aggregated reviews, Lexington demonstrates meaningful strengths—particularly in therapy and among specific employees and managers—but also serious, recurring weaknesses that have patient safety and dignity implications. Prospective residents and families should be aware of both sides: the facility can provide excellent rehab and compassionate care in many cases, yet a significant number of reviewers have experienced or witnessed neglect, clinical errors, sanitation issues, and poor communication. If considering this facility, it would be prudent to inquire specifically about the unit your loved one would occupy, staffing levels for that unit, medication administration protocols, infection control practices, housekeeping schedules, and recent inspection or complaint resolution history. Advocating for documented care plans, frequent family updates, and placement in areas with the highest-rated staff or managers may mitigate some risk, but reviewers' experiences indicate that problems can be severe and warrant careful scrutiny.
