Heart attack misdiagnosis cases are very specialized and require various experts to show what information a doctor had and how he or she used that information to diagnose, or misdiagnose, the problem. In a recent interview, Jeff Milman, a California attorney who has been practicing law for over 25 years and whose practice focuses on medical negligence cases, explained the type of experts that are commonly used:

• Doctors. Many experts are required in heart attack misdiagnosis cases such as a physician in the same specialty as the doctor you are claiming failed to correctly diagnose the patient. For example, if this happens at a doctor's office, and it's a family practice document, then that’s the type of expert we would need to initially evaluate in order to find out whether a misdiagnosis occurred. It could involve any kind of doctor including a plastic surgeon, an urgent care doctor or an emergency room physician.
• Cardiologists. The second type of expert we need is a cardiologist. We need somebody to say that, had the patient been referred for treatment, this would have been the treatment, the patient's prognosis would be x, y, and z and they would have survived.
• Specialists. Sometimes we need a specialist for scans like echocardiograms, EKGs (or electrocardiograms, which record the electrical activity of the heart over time) or stress testing. Sometimes we need a pathologist. Issues come up on autopsy all the time. In addition, we often use other experts that deal with damages such as a legal nurse consultant, an economist and a future life care planner. These cases can require upwards of five, six or seven experts at times.

Common defenses in misdiagnosis cases

Doctors who misdiagnosis a heart attack commonly defend their diagnosis by claiming that they couldn’t have known that a heart attack occurred or that even if they could, treatment wouldn’t have helped. Milman explained the types of defenses often used in cardiac negligence claims:

• It was an atypical presentation. The most common defense asserted by doctors is that it was an atypical presentation. They say the doctor's mistake in diagnosis is justified because this was an unusual presentation or that the signs and symptoms were so unusual that they misled the doctor. They’ll use this defense even though there may have been an error in judgment and will claim that it wasn’t malpractice.
• It was the patient’s fault. Sometimes they’ll say that the patient failed to give an accurate history, even though we often see very poor record keeping. Doctors will say, ‘Oh, I always ask these questions. If the patient had told me x, y, and z, I would have put it down.’
• The patient would have died anyway. Many times they’ll argue proximate cause, that the delay in diagnosing it is not the cause of the patient's death or injuries. In other words – that even if they had made a timely diagnosis, this was so horrible that the patient would have died anyway.

If you or a loved one has been injured or died due to a heart attack misdiagnosis, contact an attorney whose practice focuses on medical negligence cases. Consultations are free, without obligation and are strictly confidential. To contact a qualified attorney to discuss your situation, please click here.