Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01510
Original file (PD 2012 01510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX     cASE: PD-2012-01510
BRANCH OF SERVICE: AIR FORCE     BOARD DATE: 20150305
DATE OF PLACEMENT ONTO TDRL: 20001104
DATE OF REMOVAL FROM TDRL: 20020918


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty A1C/E-3 (2T031/Traffic Management Apprentice) medically separated for fibromyalgia (FM). This condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Air Force Specialty. He was issued a P4 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The MEB forwarded “chronic pain syndrome, possible fibromyalgia syndrome” to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AFI 48-123. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated “fibromyalgia like syndrome associated with stress related chronic pain syndrome” as unfitting, rated 10%, referencing application of DOD and Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) guidelines. The CI appealed to the Formal PEB (FPEB) who found “fibromyalgia currently refractory to medication” unfitting, rated 40% and placed the CI on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) effective on 4 November 2000. Approximately 18 months later, the TDRL IPEB determined the FM condition remained unfitting, rated 20%. The CI appealed to the FPEB and Secretary Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC), which affirmed the PEB findings and rating and the CI was removed from the TDRL and medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “I meet all the criteria for the max rating. I was denied due to resons [sic] why any condition may or may not be worsened not because I do not meet the standards for the higher rating. The Air Force’s own doctor stated the severity of my affliction in his statement to the board. As for my weight causing my simptoms [sic] to be worsened, I have lost over 70 lbs since my appearance before the board and it has done nothing to alleviate my symptoms. I see this as further proof that my denial was based on guess work rather than the facts at hand. Although stress does cause an increase in some of my symptoms, I do not suffer from an extreme amount of stress. This reason was given based on a statement given by my psychotherapist and was taken out of context. She simply stated that stress increases the pain of fibromyalgia patients. This is a well known fact and does not mean stress causes these symptoms. I believe I meet all the standards established for the maximum rating and to second guess doctors and come up with theories as to what would make me better is wrong.”


SCOPE OF REVIEW: The Board’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44, Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e.(2). It is limited to those conditions determined by the PEB to be unfitting for continued military service and those conditions identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB when specifically requested by the CI. The rating for the unfitting FM condition is addressed below. No additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. Any condition or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, may remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records.

IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board’s authority is limited to assessing the fairness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections, where appropriate. The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to the 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 :
SAF Memo – 20020918
 VA Rating Decision* - 20011001
TDRL Placement – 20001104
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Proximate
Condition
 TDRL Placement TDRL Removal TDRL Placement TDRL Removal
Fibromyalgia 5025 40% 20% Fibromyalgia 5025 40% 40%
Other x 0
 Other x 0
RATING: 40% → 20%
 RATING: 40%
* Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 11001 (most proximate to date of separation ( DOS ) )


ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Fibromyalgia. The evidence present for review supports that the CI began complaining of frontal headaches and diffuse joint pains in November 1999. He was initially evaluated with X-rays of the sinus and lumbar spine, and a head CT scan, which were all normal. His headaches and joint pains continued and were refractory to medications; and, he was given a tentative diagnosis of Lyme’s disease and treated with antibiotics. He was evaluated by a neurologist, internist, and a rheumatologist. Because body bone scan results were normal, the rheumatologist made a tentative diagnosis of FM due to the recent onset of symptoms and the CI was referred to an FM patient education seminar. A comprehensive rheumatology evaluation in August 2000 contained the following statements:

“He has continued to have severe progressive widespread body pain and aching, worse in his lower back, hips and knees. It has interfered with his walking and activities. He had to use a cane for ambulation. He has been unable to get pain relief nor sleep and he has been quite fatigued. He has continued to have severe headaches, as well as diffuse irritable symptoms of his body with GI complaints, nausea and trouble concentrating. His lab test, x-rays, bone scans have been negative. He has been diagnosed with severe fibromyalgia.”

The narrative summary (NARSUM) prepared approximately 2 months prior to TDRL entry contained the following statements:

“Currently, his symptoms have changed little from those on his initial presentation. He reports severe daily pain in multiple areas, persistent headache and extreme fatigue. He is virtually unable to exert himself without a notable worsening of his symptoms. He has not been to work since December, stating that even sitting at a desk and working will significantly exacerbate his symptoms.”

The physical exam revealed a slightly overweight male in moderate distress secondary to pain. His neck was supple with a full range-of-motion (ROM) and distinct points of tenderness at base of occiput and trapezius, bilaterally. His abdomen had normal bowel sounds, was soft and non-tender. The extremity exam revealed subjective tenderness along most joints without warmth, erythema or effusion. The final diagnosis was chronic pain syndrome, possible FM syndrome.

The Board directed its attention to its TDRL entry rating recommendation based on the above evidence. In August 2000, the FPEB placed the CI on the TDRL with the diagnosis of “Fibromyalgia, currently refractory to medication” rated at 40%. The rating criteria are copied below for the reader’s convenience:

5025 Fibromyalgia (fibrositis, primary fibromyalgia syndrome): With widespread musculoskeletal pain and tender points, with or without associated fatigue, sleep disturbance, stiffness, paresthesias, headache, irritable bowel symptoms, depression, anxiety, or Raynaud’s-like symptoms:

That are constant, or nearly so, and refractory to therapy ................................................... 40

That are episodic, with exacerbations often precipitated by environmental or emotional stress or by overexertion, but that are present more than one-third of the time .............................. 20

That require continuous medication for control …................................................................ 10

Upon review of the VASRD criteria, the Board noted that the 40% rating is the highest rating available for FM and was supported by the evidence present for review. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the FPEB adjudication at TDRL placement for the FM condition.

The Board next considered the following evidence for its rating recommendation at removal from the TDRL. The CI had a VA Compensation and Pension exam performed 8 months after placement on the TDRL and 16 months prior to TDRL removal. At that time, “He states it changed who I was. He stays home most of the time, limits all activities, and cannot work.” Also noted was the following:

“He has constant headaches. Increased headaches when he has stress. He does have a balance problem, he uses a cane. He is shifting about constantly in his chair because of pain. He takes his medication which helps somewhat, but not completely. He has loose stools after eating. His joints always hurt, 8 on a scale of 0 to 10.”

The physical exam was significant for a well-developed and well-nourished white male in no apparent distress. His neck was supple. His abdominal exam was normal. The musculoskeletal exam revealed normal strength, reflexes and pulses without any other abnormalities noted. The TDRL NARSUM was accomplished 5 months prior to TDRL removal and was performed by a rheumatologist who included the following statements:

“With his current medications, he still complains of non-restorative sleep, though he does report it is somewhat better than previously. Despite this, he continues to complain of severe fatigue and has diffuse pain in his muscles and joints that he characterizes as a steady burn. The pain is variable on the joints and they ache, burn or stab. He reports morning stiffness of 1 to 2 hours. He reports much difficulty with walking outdoors on flat ground, bending down to pick up clothing from the floor and getting in and out of a car. His symptoms have remained stable. On questions that measure helplessness, he scores quite high.”

The physical exam revealed he dressed and undressed with moderate difficulty, but had more problems bending over to take his socks off and on. Examination of the abdomen was unremarkable. The joints had no synovitis and the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spines disclose a full ROM without pain. His strength was normal in all extremities and deep tendon reflexes were brisk. He had tender points involving the bilateral occiput, neck, anterior chest, scapula, lumbar regions, greater trochanteric area and medial knees. The NARSUM also contained the following pertinent entry:

The patient presented also a statement from his psychotherapist, a psychologist, [Dr.’s name] dated February 13, 2002, diagnosing stress related physiologic response affecting fibromyalgia and depression. No evidence of personality disorder, access through chronic pain syndrome to fibromyalgia and comments that the CI "…responds well to psychotherapeutic modalities which include psychotherapy, progressive muscle relaxation and autogenic training and induction to assist in alleviation of chronic pain.”

The Rheumatologist’s impression was:

“The patient continues to suffer from severe fibromyalgia with all manifestations and associated symptoms. Specifically, he manifest the widespread pain, neurocognitive deficits, sleep disturbance, profound fatigue, physical examination findings of the characteristic tender points. Further, he has associated irritable bowel syndrome, chronic headaches and has subsequently developed a depression which appeared to be associated with the fibromyalgia. His prognosis for recovery in the near term few years is poor. His condition has appeared to reach a present level of stability and I do not anticipate that it will change.”

A memo form the CI’s treating rheumatologist to the VA dated 16 July 2002 (3 months prior to TDRL exit) contained the following statements:

“The patient suffers from severe fibromyalgia, knee osteoarthritis and degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. The patient needs an assistive device in which to ambulate. The patient has secondary depression related to his disease. The patient’s signs and symptoms increase with stress.”

Additionally noted were the following excerpts from several VA exams completed between 2 and 8 months after TDRL removal:

Two months after TDRL exit: “Reports benefit from tx and states that he is approx. 75% better. Also, cold weather increases his fibromyalgia symptoms. Overall he would say that he is fairly stable and coping ok.”

Four months after TDRL exit: “Pt also keeps busy taking his 1962 Buick to car shows in the summertime, when he is feeling well enough to do so.”

Six months after TDRL exit: “His fibromyalgia is still the same with pain off and on. He is stable since he is on Paxil, Elavil, and wanted to stop his Seroquel and try Ambien instead for sleep.”

The Board directed its attention to its final rating recommendation at TDRL removal based on the above evidence. FPEB’s adjudication of the FM condition rated it 20% at TDRL removal and separated the CI with severance pay. SAFPC reviewed and upheld the FPEB findings. The Board reviewed the SAFPC memo during its deliberations. The VA rated the FM condition at 40% approximately 9 months after TDRL placement and 12 months prior to TDRL removal. The VA continued the 40% rating for the FM condition on subsequent VARDs. Board deliberations settled on 20% vs 40% rating recommendation. While the CI did have all manifestations of FM, the majority of the evidence proximate to TDRL removal supports that his symptoms had improved somewhat and where more episodic in nature. Two months after TDRL removal it was documented that the CI benefited from treatment and he was “approx. 75% better.” Also noted was that at times he felt well enough to show his classic car at car shows and that “his fibromyalgia is still the same with pain off and on.” Considering the totality of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), Board members agreed that a permanent disability rating of 20% for the FM condition was appropriately adjudicated at TDRL removal.


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 Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication. The Board did not surmise from the record or PEB ruling in this case that any prerogatives outside the VASRD were exercised. In the matter of the FM condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the FPEB adjudication at TDRL placement or removal. There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.


RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20120813, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans Affairs Treatment Record




                          
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
Physical Disability Board of Review

SAF/MRB
Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXXX:

 Reference your application submitted under the provisions of DoDI 6040.44 (Title 10 U.S.C. § 1554a), PDBR Case Number PD-2012-01510.
After careful consideration of your application and treatment records, the Physical Disability Board of Review determined that the rating assigned at the time of final disposition of your disability evaluation system processing was appropriate. Accordingly, the Board recommended no re-characterization or modification of your separation.

I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board. I concur with that finding and their conclusion that re-characterization of your separation is not warranted. Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that your application be denied.

                                                                Sincerely,






 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
Attachment:
Record of Proceedings

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01707

    Original file (PD2012 01707.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the FM (which considered the LBP and depression to be an integral part of FM and not independently unfitting) as unfitting, rated 20%, with application of the Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.39.The remaining condition, OSA, was determined to be not unfitting and therefore not rated. There was normal ROM in all joints with pain.Neurological exam was normal.The Board noted the PEB to combine the depression and LBP conditionsand...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00633

    Original file (PD2011-00633.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    Fibromyalgia Condition : The CI had a well documented history of joint pains in the service treatment record (STR) dating back to 1980’s. The Board agreed absentee work notes would have reinforced this rating criteria but after due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a change in the TDRL entry rating decision to 30% and a permanent separation rating of 30% for the migraine headache condition. The Board therefore...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01443

    Original file (PD2012 01443.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    TheIPEBadjudicated “fibromyalgia syndrome”as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions (small annular tear and major depressive disorder [MDD])were determined to be Category III conditions (not separately unfitting and do not contribute to the unfitting condition). The FPEB determined the rating for FM met the criteria for a 20% rating, the small annular tear to be a Category II condition...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01382

    Original file (PD-2013-01382.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    If the Board judges that two or more conditions are reasonably justified as separately unfitting, then each separate condition must be rated IAW the VASRD §4.71a. Accordingly, the Board does not recommend a separate disability rating for the functional bowel symptoms. Right Hip Pain .

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00262

    Original file (PD2009-00262.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the progress note dated 1 May 2008, the rheumatologist stated his fatigue, chronic back pain, non-restorative sleep pattern, and muscle skeletal pain suggests fibrositis but he didn’t meet the ACR criteria for fibromyalgia because he did not have 11/18 trigger points positive. Pain was rated 8.5/10. On 23 April 2010, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) took action in your case by accepting the recommendation of the PDBR that no change be made to the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00583

    Original file (PD2013 00583.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The InformalPEB adjudicated fibromyalgia as unfitting rated 10%with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI appealed to the Formal PEB (FPEB) whoupon review increased the rating to 20%. Fibromyalgia Condition . The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above and considered whether the evidence of the service treatment records (STR) supported a higher 40% rating at...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01221

    Original file (PD2010-01221.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    CI CONTENTION : CI states “Please review all addendums from PEB and MEB.” She lists 8 exhibits in her contention summarized as right foot, asthma, left knee, chronic pain syndrome and depression and a component of fibromyalgia syndrome with her VA ratings. Although the pain in the knee was adjudged as not being “painful motion,” this was considered as a pain symptom under the CI’s primary unfitting fibromyalgia condition. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00484

    Original file (PD2012-00484.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY CASE NUMBER: PD1200484 SEPARATION DATE: 20040831 BOARD DATE: 20130116 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty 1LT/O‐2 (31A/Military Police) medically separated for fibromyalgia. The CI accepted the FPEB findings and was medically separated with a 20% disability rating. 2 PD1200484 RECOMMENDATION:...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01532

    Original file (PD-2013-01532.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A significant component of the Board’s decision regarding the PEB’s final memorandum concerning their adjudication of this case is whether there was a separately unfitting and ratable psychiatric condition at service separation.Fibromyalgia is described in the VASRD as widespread musculoskeletal pain and tender points with or without fatigue, sleep disturbance, stiffness, paresthesia, headache, irritable bowel symptoms, depression, anxiety, or Raynaud’s like symptoms.The VASRD does not...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02050

    Original file (PD-2013-02050.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Post-Separation) Fibromyalgia Condition . 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 Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at...