On May 28, 2019, plaintiff Michelle Klapp, who was 49 years old at the time, was at work. Between 2:00 p.m. and 2:30 p.m., Klapp began to experience difficulty gripping a pen and writing. Klapp arrived at Oakwood Hospital at 3:36 p.m., and she was admitted as an emergency patient at 3:50 p.m. At approximately 3:55 p.m., defendants Lauren Chipman, R.N. and Dr. Jonathan Leischner, D.O. evaluated Klapp.
Klapp reported the sudden hand numbness that occurred at approximately 2:00 p.m. Defendant Chipman observed Klapp to have a strong grip, clear speech, no facial droop, and that she had been “very hypertensive in triage.” Dr. Leischner observed that Klapp had “no weakness,” and he ordered imaging, laboratory tests, and medications. Defendants noted that Klapp had not been taking her blood-pressure medication. At approximately 5:30 p.m., Klapp underwent a noncontrasted CT scan, which did not show any abnormalities.
Defendant Dr. Jonathan Sorini, D.O. examined Klapp at approximately 7:20 p.m. Dr. Sorini noted that Klapp had a history of high-blood pressure and diabetes and that Klapp’s symptoms had gone away and returned after arriving at the hospital. At 7:50 p.m., Dr. Sorini discussed with Klapp the administration of tPA. Dr. Sorini discussed this with another physician and determined that Klapp was no longer a tPA candidate. Klapp’s weakness progressed into the following morning, and she was ultimately diagnosed as having had an acute left subcortical ischemic stroke.
Klapp sued the defendants, alleging medical malpractice against all defendants related to their failure to administer tPA to her. Along with her complaint, Klapp included an affidavit from Dr. Michael F. Brin, D.O., in which he opined that breaches in the standard of care were “more likely than not, the direct and proximate cause” of Klapp’s injuries. Dr. Brin further opined “[t]hat the lost opportunity to achieve a better result due to the above stated breaches of the
standard of care was greater than fifty (50%) percent.” In a subsequent deposition, Dr. Brin stated that “an accumulation of understanding and education” was the basis of his opinion. During his deposition, Dr. Brin made clear that his focus was on standard of care. When asked, he made mention of causation, but he did not rely on any studies or other research.
The trial court concluded that even if Klapp established all of the factual assertions in her Michigan medical malpractice complaint, there was no reliable literature that supported the proposition that she would have been 50% more likely to achieve a better result with the timely administration of tPA. Further, because Dr. Suite’s testimony was inadmissible, Klapp had failed to provide expert testimony on causation as was required for her medical-malpractice claim. Therefore, the trial court found that there was no genuine issue of material fact and granted defendants’ motion for summary disposition. Klapp appealed.
The State of Michigan Court of Appeals stated in its Per Curiam dated May 23, 2024: “Dr. Suite’s assertion of a 64% chance of success stood in stark contrast to the meta-analysis that showed that tPA administration never showed a success rate above 50% … plaintiff has not pointed this Court to any studies that support Dr. Suite’s opinion that a
person in plaintiff’s position would have a 64% chance of a positive outcome following tPA administration under the circumstances present here … The published literature consistently shows that tPA administration is effective 30% to
35% of the time. Plaintiff has shown that there are occasional data points that possibly support Dr. Suite’s opinions, but it is not particularly surprising to see outlier data in any robust study. Simply put, plaintiff has not pointed to any study that concludes, with a statistically relevant confidence level, that there is a better-than-even chance of a successful outcome after tPA administration. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it ruled that Dr. Suite’s expert testimony was inadmissible.”
Source Klapp v. Beaumont Health, No. 364827.
If you or a loved one may have been injured (or worse) as a result of medical malpractice in Michigan or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find a Michigan medical malpractice attorney, or a medical malpractice attorney in your state, who may investigate your medical negligence claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Click here to visit our website or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to find medical malpractice lawyers in your U.S. state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
