Overall impression: The reviews for Signature HealthCARE of Rogersville present a highly mixed picture: many families and residents report excellent, compassionate care, strong therapy services, and engaged leadership, while a significant number of reviews describe serious clinical lapses, safety concerns, staffing shortages, and communication breakdowns. Positive accounts emphasize individualized attention, successful clinical outcomes, and a warm, family‑like environment; negative accounts describe neglect, medication and monitoring failures, wound care problems, and inconsistent standards of care. The prevalence and severity of the negative reports, particularly around basic clinical monitoring and safety, are notable and contrast sharply with the glowing testimonials.
Care quality and clinical outcomes: Several reviewers praise the facility for concrete positive clinical outcomes — successful trach and oxygen weans, strong speech and physical therapy progress, effective case management, and supportive NP involvement. Those families cite clear care plans, thorough explanations, and therapists and nurses who helped residents regain function and return home. Conversely, a recurring set of clinical concerns appears in multiple reviews: medications given late or not at all, failure to chart or monitor vital signs and blood glucose, insulin administration without appropriate monitoring, and inadequate wound care leading to worsening decubiti. There are also reports of falls with head injuries and subsequent poor wound management. These are not minor complaints; they describe lapses that can lead to rapid clinical decline and are repeatedly raised by different reviewers.
Staffing, professionalism, and communication: Staffing emerges as a central theme that likely underpins many of the inconsistent experiences. Several reviews describe long‑tenured, mission‑driven staff who provide 24/7 dedication and form strong personal relationships with residents. Those reports highlight compassionate CNAs, patient nurses, and professional leadership. In contrast, other reviews describe chronic understaffing (including nights with only two CNAs), rude or unprofessional behavior, slow or nonresponsive call button response times, long waits for care, and “lazy” administrative/paperwork practices. Communication problems appear frequently: families report unclear or inconsistent updates, trouble with a resident’s phone or being barred from seeing a patient, and distress from being restricted during COVID. These mixed reports suggest variability in staff performance by shift or unit and underline that family experience may depend heavily on which staff are on duty.
Safety, infection control, and operations: Multiple reviewers raised operational concerns beyond individual caregiver behavior. Cleanliness problems were described (including blood not being cleaned), which, combined with reports of weekly positive COVID cases and staff vaccine opt‑outs, feed serious infection control and safety worries. There are accounts of visitation restrictions and limited family access during the pandemic that exacerbated family distress. Several reviews also charge the facility with abrupt or premature discharges — including allegedly attempting to discharge residents around survey times — and very short rehab stays that families felt were inappropriate. Food quality and dietary management are inconsistent in reports: some reviewers praised meals, while others said the food was poor and diets were inappropriate for diabetic residents.
Patterns and variability: The dominant pattern in these reviews is inconsistency. The facility appears capable of delivering excellent, compassionate, and effective care at times — especially where strong therapy teams, proactive nursing leadership, and engaged case management are involved. However, an arguably equal number of reviews document neglectful or unsafe care, poor documentation, and staffing shortages. This split suggests either variability across units or shifts, differences in staff assignment, or inconsistency in management follow‑through. Positive reviewers tend to highlight specific staff members, therapy successes, and clear leadership; negative reviewers point to systemic problems like missed meds, unmet basic care needs, and inadequate infection control.
Conclusion: Signature HealthCARE of Rogersville demonstrates clear strengths — dedicated long‑tenured personnel, strong therapy programs, and instances of excellent clinical work and family communication — but also exhibits recurring and serious weaknesses related to medication management, clinical monitoring, wound care, safety, staffing levels, cleanliness, and communication. Families considering this facility should weigh both sets of experiences, ask targeted questions about staffing ratios (particularly night shift CNAs), medication administration and documentation practices, wound care protocols, infection control and vaccination policies, and discharge planning. The pattern of mixed reviews indicates that resident outcomes may depend heavily on unit staffing and the specific clinicians involved; families should advocate proactively and verify current operational and infection‑control metrics before placement.
