RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW
NAME: BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY
CASE NUMBER: PD0900259 BOARD DATE: 20090820
SEPARATION DATE: 20051116
________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY OF CASE: This covered individual (CI) was a junior officer medically separated from the Army in 2005, after 18 months of service, for a cervical condition. The CI injured her neck initially in a fall during ROTC training in 2002 (EPTS). Although she had difficulty with her subsequent ROTC training because of neck pain, her entrance physical did not address the neck pain and she was commissioned. She fell at home in 2004 after she was on active duty, suffering a concussion. A subsequent MRI of the brain was normal, but a cervical MRI demonstrated stenosis and suspected disc disease at the C5-6 level. Her cervical condition did not respond to conservative management, and surgery was recommended. She declined for family reasons and underwent a MEB. Electromyelography during the course of her cervical work-up demonstrated mild bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) deficits which were treated conservatively. She was issued wrist splints, but there is no evidence they were in use at the time of her MEB physical. CTS was noted in the NARSUM, but not forwarded on the MEB DA 3947. It was, therefore, not formally adjudicated by the PEB. An EPTS component for her cervical condition was acknowledged by the PEB, but it was deemed to be service-aggravated. No deduction is evidenced. The CI was found unfit for the cervical condition only and separated at 10% disability.
________________________________________________________________
CI CONTENTION: The CI contends: ‘Within a year of my separation, the VA changed my rating from 20% to 30% when my neck injury continued to worsen and required immediate surgery.’
________________________________________________________________
RATING COMPARISON:
| Service PEB | VA (Pre-Separation) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEB Condition | Code | Rating | Date | Condition | Code | Rating | Exam | Effective |
| CHRONIC NECK PAIN DUE TO C5-6 DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE AND SPINAL STENOSIS | 5238 | 10% | 20050902 | CERVICAL STENOSIS, C5-6 | 5242 | 0% 10% |
20050816 20060628 |
20051117 20060420 |
| NO DA 3947 ENTRY | - | - | - | CTS, LEFT | 8615 | 10% | 20050816 | 20051117 |
| NO DA 3947 ENTRY | - | - | - | CTS, LEFT | 8615 | 10% | 20050816 | 20051117 |
| NO DA 3947 ENTRY | - | - | - | HYPERTENSION | 7101 | 0% | 20050816 | 20051117 |
| TOTAL Combined: 10 % | TOTAL Combined (incl non-PEB Dxs): 20% |
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:
Cervical Rating. There was a single goniometric range-of-motion (ROM) exam in the service treatment record, which is quoted in the NARSUM. It demonstrated active flexion of 25⁰ (Total 135⁰) with pain noted at 18⁰. The VA rating examination was performed 2 months later (still prior to separation), and demonstrated normal ROM in all planes. The VA examiner further noted no painful motion or spasm. The PEB applied the USAPDA pain policy regarding ROM measurements for rating, but rated 10% based on spasm. Based on their normal rating examination, the initial VA rating was 0%. This was raised to 10% based on a worse exam 10 months later. The cervical flexion documented on the Army goniometric exam rates 20% IAW §4.71a of the VASRD.
CTS. Consideration is given to adding the CTS ratings as additionally unfitting conditions at separation. It cannot be medically ascertained if the bilateral condition represents radiculopathic complications of the cervical pathology or if it is a separate peripheral entrapment neuropathy (the usual etiology of CTS). The issue before this Board, however, is whether it is a significant detriment to fitness. The CI’s U3 profiles were worded as applicable to the neck only, although some of the activity restrictions could apply to bilateral CTS. The Commander’s statement was explicit regarding neck pain itself as the limiting factor in her performance. Both the NARSUM and the MEB physical exam documented normal reflexes and motor strength of both upper extremities, without tenderness or mention of the use of splints. The VA rating examiner made note of subjective complaints of intermittent bilateral hand weakness, numbness and pain; but the physical documented normal motor/sensory and ROM exams of both upper extremities. There would appear, therefore, to be no functional tie-in of CTS to fitness.
________________________________________________________________
BOARD FINDINGS: IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the PDBR to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication. The PEB adjudication in this case reflected application of the USAPDA pain policy to the cervical rating, which was eliminated as a factor in the Board’s rating. In the matter of the cervical condition, although there was a significant disparity between the Army and VA examinations, it was concluded that, IAW VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the rating should be based on the MEB findings. The Board, therefore, unanimously recommends an increase in the cervical rating to 20% IAW VASRD §4.71a. In the matter of the bilateral CTS condition, the Board unanimously concluded that there is no reasonable basis for a recommendation of additionally unfitting.
________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION: The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows, effective as of the date of her prior medical separation.
| UNFITTING CONDITION | VASRD CODE | RATING |
|---|---|---|
| CHRONIC NECK PAIN DUE TO C5-6 DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE AND SPINAL STENOSIS | 5238 | 20% |
| COMBINED | 20% |
______________________________________________________________
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20090330, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record.
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans' Affairs Treatment Record.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00343
The MEB forwarded only one condition; “Cervical spondylosis and multilevel degenerative disk disease with previous radicular and myelopathic signs.” The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the chronic radiating neck and shoulder pain condition as unfitting, rated 0% with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Board evaluates DVA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00010
The Commander’s statement lumps the peripheral nerve symptoms in with the neck pain and ‘shoulder pain’ when describing interference with her performance. The only other condition rated and service-connected by the VA is a headache condition. The Board has no reasonable basis for recommending the shoulder or headache conditions as additional unfitting conditions for separation rating, and does not have jurisdiction for considering tinnitus.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00909
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The Board next considered if there was evidence of a functionally impairing radiculopathy due to the low back condition to provide additional rating. The Board considered the evidence in record supports thatthe CI’s...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00586
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY CASE NUMBER: PD1200586 SEPARATION DATE: 20060711 BOARD DATE: 20130220 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (11B, Infantryman) medically separated for chronic neck pain. Chronic neck pain. Therefore, both of the ROM exams meet VASRD criteria for a 10% rating.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01636
The left shoulder, neck and bilateral feet, characterized by the MEB as “left shoulder impingement syndrome,” “adhesive capsulitis of the left shoulder,” “cervical spondylolysis,” “cervical stenosis” and “bilateral plantar fasciitis,” wereforwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01319
Chronic neck pain continued and she was referred for a MEB.At the MEB examination (3 months prior to separation), the CI reported“spasms in her neck and flares in her neck pain,” with “herniated discs in my neck which are irreparable.”She reported that “load bearing equipment and Kevlar headgear worsen her neck pain.”The Report of Medical History (DD Form 2807) for the MEB reported the presence of herniated discs with “no surgery.”The MEB physical exam noted surgical scars on the right palm...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00175
The medical bases for the separation were neck and shoulder conditions. In either case the Board must apply separate codes and ratings in its recommendation, since compensable ratings for each condition are achieved IAW VASRD §4.71a. Right Shoulder Condition .
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00206
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. RATING COMPARISON : Service IPEB – Dated 20071129VA -Based on Service Treatment Records(STR)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Congenital Malformation523820%*Cervical Spondylosis w/DDD and Findings of...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00249
The medical basis for the separation was a back condition. A subsequent neurology follow-up note stated, ‘SM does not feel HA’s interfere significantly with duty, though acknowledges that he would be unable to use weapons if he should develop a significant HA with associated visual dysfunction.’ A month later a civilian consultant note stated, ‘Symptoms are now described as moderate to debilitating; when he is afflicted with the most severe symptoms he is incapacitated.’ Specifically, AR...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00459
After the surgery she gradually improved but still had persistent recurrent flare-ups of severe spasm and pain of the left upper back, left posterior neck that radiated to her left occiput and down her left arm. The Board considered the following conditions and unanimously concluded that none should be considered unfitting: Left Upper Extremity Radiculopathy; Lumbosacral Spine, Degenerative Joint and Disc Disease; S/P Hysterectomy; S/P Cholecystectomy; Postoperative Scar, Anterior Cervical...