Overall impression and sentiment Reviews for PruittHealth - Brookhaven are highly polarized, with a clear pattern of strong clinical rehabilitation services and several highly praised individual staff members contrasting sharply with frequent, serious complaints about nursing care, staffing levels, facility condition, communication and safety. Many reviewers emphatically recommend the therapy department (physical, occupational and speech therapy) and credit therapy teams with substantial recovery and discharge success. At the same time, a large portion of reviews describe neglectful nursing, long call-response times, hygiene problems, medication errors and safety incidents. The overall picture is one of inconsistency: when specific staff, leaders, or departments are engaged and well-led the experience can be excellent; when understaffing, poor leadership or operational breakdowns occur the results can be dangerous or negligent.
Care quality and safety The most consistent positive across reviews is the quality of rehabilitation services. Multiple families and reviewers highlight top-tier PT/OT/SLP teams, named therapists, and good therapy outcomes. Conversely, skilled nursing care receives very mixed to poor ratings. Recurrent themes include long delays or failures to answer call lights, missed medications or incorrect medication administration, delayed pain management, bathing and hygiene omissions, unattended incontinence leading to diaper rash or UTIs, and wound-care lapses including pressure ulcers and unreported wounds. Numerous safety incidents are described—falls left unattended, missed dialysis or delays in treatment, infections that led to hospital transfers, and in extreme cases allegations that neglect precipitated severe outcomes including gangrene/amputation and death. Several reviewers reported documentation gaps (tests ordered but not performed) and incidents where family members were not informed of significant events. These reports create a pattern of risk for residents who require consistent nursing oversight.
Staffing, responsiveness and communication A dominant theme is understaffing and the impact it has on care. Many reviewers say staff are overworked or that certain shifts (particularly evenings/nights/weekends) are significantly weaker. This connects directly with complaints about ignored call buttons, long hold times on phone calls, staff distracted or on personal phones, and failure to provide timely assistance. Communication problems are frequent: families report difficulty reaching nurses, unreturned calls from management, poor handoffs between nurses and visiting doctors, and confusing or deceptive information about care plans and discharge. Several reviewers praised specific social workers, admission staff, or unit managers who were communicative and helpful, indicating that individual leadership can markedly influence the family experience.
Facilities, cleanliness and physical environment Reviewers repeatedly describe the building as outdated and in need of repair: non-insulated windows, broken vents, toilets backing up, worn furniture and a generally run-down feel. Sanitation concerns—urine odor, roaches/ants/large bugs, bed bugs alleged by some, blood-soaked cloths and dirty hallways—are raised in multiple reports and represent a serious concern for infection control and overall dignity. Positive comments about a well-kept lobby, gardens and bird feeders indicate some areas are maintained attractively, but these contrast with reports of dirty rooms and inconsistent housekeeping. Parking and visitor seating were also mentioned as practical annoyances.
Dining, nutrition and ancillary services Food and dining get mixed marks: a number of reviewers praised dining-room staff, certain meals and dietitian involvement, while many others complained about poor-quality meals, cold food, missed meals, wrong diet substitutions (sugary drinks given despite diabetic needs), and failure to provide prescribed textures (mechanically soft) or necessary fluids. Laundry problems—late or missing clothing, clothes given to other residents—and issues with personal items (lost phones, hearing aids, dentures) emerged as recurrent frustrations. Positive mentions of an on-site beautician and activity programming show available amenities, but families warned these do not compensate for clinical shortfalls.
Management, leadership and company response Feedback about leadership is split. Several reviews single out positive directors and staff (names such as Margaret Abbott, Karell, Malik, Jasmine, Shalimar and others were mentioned) and describe a tangible turnaround in staff morale and quality where new leadership engaged with families and clinicians. These reports suggest that targeted leadership improvements can rapidly change the local culture. However, many other reviews describe unresponsive or dismissive management, failure to return calls, defensive or hostile answers to complaints, and a sense that financial motives (billing/Medicare/insurance focus) outweigh clinical priorities. Several families reported filing complaints with state agencies, CMS, or police, and some mentioned regulatory investigations.
Patterns, extremes and reliability The reviews show two consistent patterns: (1) a reliably strong therapy program that families often seek out for short-term rehabilitation, and (2) unpredictable nursing and long-term care quality that varies by shift, unit, and leadership. Many positive reports emphasize prompt therapy, caring CNAs and effective discharge planning; many negative reports emphasize neglect, safety lapses, and poor hygiene. These extremes mean that outcomes appear highly dependent on which staff are working and whether leadership is actively managing operations on a given unit or shift.
Notable allegations and risks There are multiple serious allegations across reviews: medication administration errors, missed antibiotics and pain medication gaps (including an 11-hour gap), unreported wounds and pressure ulcers, infections including COVID outbreaks, and at least one reported case leading to amputation. Reports of theft, lost belongings, HIPAA concerns and rude or humiliating conduct toward residents also recur. Families should treat these serious claims as red flags that merit independent verification (state inspection reports, recent deficiency citations, and direct conversations with current families and clinicians).
Guidance and takeaways for families - If your priority is short-term rehabilitation (e.g., post-surgical PT/OT/SLP), Brookhaven’s therapy department receives strong and repeated praise and may deliver good outcomes. Confirm therapy schedules and observe sessions in person if possible. - For long-term skilled nursing needs or frail residents requiring continuous oversight, the reviews indicate significant variability and potential safety risk. Ask specific questions about staffing ratios, night/evening coverage, call response times, wound-care protocols, medication administration procedures, and infection-control practices before accepting placement. - Verify leadership stability and recent changes. Several reviewers report clear improvements under particular directors; others report persistent management inaction. Request recent facility inspection reports, complaint histories, and ask to speak with the director of nursing. - Monitor hydration, meals and dietary requirements closely, and confirm processes for laundry, belongings tracking, and documentation of baths/skin checks. Maintain active communication channels (designate a primary family contact) and visit when possible across different shifts to assess consistency.
Summary judgement PruittHealth - Brookhaven shows pockets of excellence—especially in rehabilitation, certain therapists, and individual nurses/CNAs—but also a large and persistent set of serious complaints around nursing care, staffing, sanitation, communication, and safety. The facility appears capable of delivering outstanding therapy-driven recovery for many patients, yet families and prospective residents should be cautious and perform due diligence when considering long-term or complex skilled nursing placement. Frequent, specific reports of neglect and safety incidents warrant careful scrutiny and, where concerns are elevated, escalation to regulatory authorities and consideration of alternative facilities.
