Reviews of Roanoke Landing Nursing and Rehabilitation Center describe a facility with clear strengths in rehabilitative therapy but multiple operational shortcomings that families should weigh carefully. Physical and occupational therapy services receive consistent praise for producing measurable functional gains; several comments emphasize effective therapy interactions and observable progress. Individual caregivers are also frequently described as compassionate and committed, and administrative staff can be helpful in answering questions.
Clinical care impressions are mixed. While therapy appears competent, reviewers identify delays in nursing responsiveness and assistance, which raise concerns about routine care timeliness. There are also specific concerns about bed-safety practices and fall risk mitigation, including absence of appropriate bed rails or low mattresses in some cases; these point to gaps in standard resident-safety protocols. In at least one instance reviewers described problematic interactions around consent and power-of-attorney documentation and delays in treatment and property release, which highlights potential weaknesses in informed-consent processes and family communication during critical events.
Facility maintenance and housekeeping are recurring issues. Multiple comments reference odor concerns in common and patient areas and an overall rundown appearance, including broken furniture and worn rooms. These observations align with concerns about the adequacy of environmental upkeep and may affect perceived value given the facility’s cost. Reviewers also report problems with handling and returning resident property, including missing or misplaced items, and challenges obtaining discharge equipment or receiving appropriate, functional devices at discharge.
Management and communication patterns are an important theme. Families describe defensive or unhelpful responses when raising concerns, and inconsistent communication about clinical status, belongings, and discharge plans. At the same time, some staff members and administrators are described positively for being responsive and helpful, suggesting variability in how issues are handled depending on personnel or shift. There is limited information in the reviews about dining and activity programming; neither area received notable positive or negative commentary.
Overall, prospective residents and families should balance the facility’s demonstrated strengths in rehabilitation and certain caregiving relationships against recurring operational weaknesses: environmental maintenance, property-management controls, nursing responsiveness, discharge coordination, and communication/consent processes. If considering this facility, it would be prudent to tour patient rooms, review safety and discharge protocols, ask specific questions about property safeguards and consent procedures, and seek direct references regarding therapy outcomes and staff responsiveness on the unit where care will be provided.








