Coronial
SAhospital

Coroner's Finding: CANDY Jonathon Craig

Deceased

Jonathon Craig Candy

Demographics

42y, male

Date of death

2010-05-20

Finding date

2013-01-31

Cause of death

ischaemic heart disease due to coronary atherosclerosis

AI-generated summary

Jonathon Candy, aged 42, died from acute coronary syndrome one day after inappropriate discharge from Queen Elizabeth Hospital ED. He presented with recurrent chest pain on exertion (gym evening of 18 May, workplace morning of 19 May) with prior stent history. Critical communication and history-taking failures occurred: triage notes were inaccurate, nurse Wu misinterpreted timing of pain episodes, and Dr N. failed to obtain complete history despite paramedic documentation of morning chest pain. ECG showed nonspecific changes; troponin was normal but single test insufficient given symptom timing. Expert evidence established that proper history-taking would have mandated repeat ECG and troponin testing before discharge. Angioplasty would have offered 95% one-year survival. Death was entirely preventable through adherence to standard cardiac assessment protocols and communication of critical clinical information.

AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.

Contributing factors

  • failure to obtain complete and accurate history
  • miscommunication about timing of chest pain episodes
  • inaccurate triage documentation
  • failure to review ambulance service patient report form
  • inadequate ECG interpretation
  • single troponin test insufficient given symptom timeline
  • failure to escalate for cardiology review despite cardiac history and abnormal ECG computer interpretation
  • discharge without repeat investigation
Full text

Source and disclaimer

This page reproduces or summarises information from publicly available findings published by Australian coroners' courts. Coronial is an independent educational resource and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any coronial court or government body.

Content may be incomplete, reformatted, or summarised. All court orders for redaction and non-publication are respected; documents with technically defective redaction have been excluded from the database entirely. Always refer to the original court publication for the authoritative record.

Copyright in original materials remains with the relevant government jurisdiction. AI-generated summaries and tagging are for educational purposes only, may contain inaccuracies, and must not be treated as legal documents. We welcome feedback for correction —