Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01837
Original file (PD-2013-01837.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX         CASE: PD-2013-01837
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20140529
SEPARATION DATE: 20040905


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty PFC/E-3 (42A/Human Resources Specialist) medically separated for chronic low back pain (LBP) without neurologic abnormality. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The chronic LBP condition was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The Informal PEB adjudicated “chronic low back pain without neurologic abnormality” as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: The CI elaborates no specific contentions and states “BACK.”


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 chronic LBP without neurologic abnormality condition is addressed below; and, no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records.


RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20040610
 VA - (STR)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic Low Back Pain without Neurologic Abnormality 5299-5237 10% Degenerative Disc Disease of the Lumbar Spine at L5 (claimed as chronic low back pain) 5242 10% STR
Other x 0
 Other x 1
Rating: 10%
 Combined Rating: 10%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 41026 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board’s authority is limited to making recommendations on correcting disability determinations. The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, compared to VASRD standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation.

Chronic Low Back Pain without Neurologic Abnormality Condition. In September 2003, the CI sustained a low back injury during a parachute landing. Lumbar X-rays and a CT scan were normal, but a magnetic resonance imaging study showed an annular tear with a broad based disc bulge at L5. Ongoing pain did not respond sufficiently to pain medications, physical therapy (PT) or injections. The CI declined a surgical option.

On 24 March 2004 (5.5 months prior to separation), the narrative summary (NARSUM) noted a complaint of daily, constant back pain even while performing sedentary activities in the office. Exam showed painful motion and paraspinous muscle spasm. There was no mention of gait or spinal contour. An outpatient physiatrist (PM&R) on 14 February 2005 (5 months after separation) noted lumbar muscle spasm, but no abnormal gait or posture and no guarded movement. At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam performed on 6 July 2005 (10 months after separation), the CI reported his LBP had worsened. Prolonged sitting and standing, or walking more than 10 minutes caused the pain to worsen. He sometimes used a cane and required assistance to get dressed due to back pain. He claimed an inability to work due to his pain. Examination showed a normal gait and normal spinal contour. The goniometric range-of-motion (ROM) evaluations in evidence which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation, with documentation of additional ratable criteria, are summarized in the chart below.

Thoracolumbar ROM
(Degrees)		 PT ~5 Mos. Pre-Sep PM&R ~ 5 Mos. Post-Sep VA C&P ~ 10 Mo. Post-Sep
Flexion (90 Normal) 90 (100) 65 50
Extension (30) 25 Not given 20 (22)
R Lat Flexion (30) 30 30 30
L Lat Flexion (30) 20 30 30
R Rotation (30) 30 (35) Not given 30
L Rotation (30) 30 30
Combined (240) 225 > 125 190
Comment +Painful motion +Tenderness +Painful motion
§4.71a Rating 10% 10% 20%

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB cited combined ROM as justification for a 10% rating under an analogous 5237 code (lumbosacral strain). Using the service examination findings, the VA initially assigned a 10% rating under the 5242 code (degenerative arthritis of the spine). However, based on the C&P exam 10 months after separation, the VA later increased the rating to 20% (effective 9 months after separation) due to lumbar flexion greater than 30 degrees but not greater than 60 degrees. The Board agreed that the respective ratings by the PEB and the VA were appropriate given the available ROM data. The Board notes though that muscle spasm was observed by the NARSUM examiner; but additional VASRD criteria possibly supporting the next higher 20% rating, namely an abnormal gait or spinal contour resulting from that spasm, were not addressed in the exam. The PM&R exam, performed 6 months after separation, also noted some spasm, but reported normal gait and posture. The Board considered that the NARSUM and PM&R exams were closer to the time of separation and therefore were assigned higher probative value than the later C&P exam. The NARSUM exam justified a 10% rating for combined ROM, while the PM&R exam warranted 10% for flexion. The Board also considered rating intervertebral disc disease under the alternative formula for incapacitating episodes, but could not find sufficient evidence which would meet the 10% criteria under that formula. 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 PEB adjudication for the chronic LBP without neurologic abnormality 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 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 chronic LBP without neurologic abnormality condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.


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


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20131008, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record




                 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
Physical Disability Board of Review


 SAMR-RB                                                                         


MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency
(AHRC-DO), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22202-3557


 SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150001033 (PD201301837)

I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) recommendation and record of proceedings pertaining to the subject individual. Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554a, I accept the Board’s recommendation and hereby deny the individual’s application.
This decision is final. The individual concerned, counsel (if any), and any Members of Congress who have shown interest in this application have been notified of this decision by mail.

BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY:




Encl                                                  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                                      Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
                                                      (Review Boards)
                                                     
CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02025

    Original file (PD-2014-02025.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 Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The increased rating appeared to be based on a C&P exam performed on 4 April 2006.In assigning probative value to the examinations in evidence, the Board noted that: (1) the MEB NARSUM exam relied on an inclinometer to...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00116

    Original file (PD2009-00116.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    VA initial rating used the Service treatment records with limited range of motion, with limited ROM, with flexion 45/45, extension 20/45, rotation 40/80 on the right and 30/80 on the left with painful motion shown. The VA rated the knee at 10% based on Service treatment records showing limited range of motion, with flexion to 130/140˚. Commander's memo specifically noted neck and back pain as unfitting and did not include any duty limitations due to CI's right knee.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD2014 00906

    Original file (PD2014 00906.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VARD also noted the absence of radicular findings and no recording of ROM (the CI refused testing).The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.The PEB rated the condition for ROM limited by pain, coded 5237, and assigned a rating of 0%.The VA rated the condition under code 5242, 10% for muscle spasm.Under the applicable spine rules, a rating of 10% requires cervical spine flexion of greater than 30 degrees but less than 40 degrees or a combined...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00002

    Original file (PD2009-00002.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Both exams were rated 10% using 5292 Spine, limitation of motion of lumbar; slight. In addition to pain-limited ROM, the CI's LBP demonstrated a positive FABER's, abnormal imaging, radicular pain to both hips, tenderness on all exams, and daily use of medication including cyclobenzaprine for PM symptoms and to assist in sleep. Rated for limitation of range of motion AND PAIN (MODERATE)529220%Combined20%________________________________________________________________

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01530

    Original file (PD 2014 01530.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-SepFlexion (90 Normal)“Guarding occurring at 10⁰ off vertical” (with pain)90(70) 68/66/6880Combined (240)Unk/incomplete--240220230Comment“otherwise deferred”; painful motion; tendernessNo painful motion; normal gait; normal peripheral nerve examTender;painful motion“ Pain from 80-90⁰ flexion” §4.71a Rating10%-40%0% (VA NSC)10%10% (VA 10%)The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01560

    Original file (PD-2013-01560.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The condition, characterized as “chronic low back pain,” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The examiner stated, “He could full forward bend, side bend 25 degrees right and left [normal 30], extend 20 degrees [normal 30].” The medical records documented lower extremity peripheral nerve sensory deficits attributed to the CI’s diabetes. Following this exam, as noted above, the VA granted service-connection for the back condition with a 10% rating effective...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02323

    Original file (PD-2013-02323.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Cervical spine MRI on 20 January 2005 noted lower cervical spine disc herniation with spinal stenosis and general degenerative disc disease.As noted above, a note in the STR indicated “EMG/NCS-no evidence of radiculopathy.”Notes in the STR near the date of separation noted continued neck pain with intact ROM and normal strength and sensation.At the MEB examination on 27 May 2004, (approximately 5 months prior to separation)the CI reported neck pain. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00364

    Original file (PD2010-00364.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board evaluates DVA evidence proximate to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness decisions and rating determinations for disability at the time of separation. Service Treatment Record I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 01136

    Original file (PD 2013 01136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is also noted that the 30 degrees flexion from the NARSUM is incongruent with the recorded ROM in other planes, and would expected to be associated with other exam findings not noted (spasm, guarding, and abnormal contour).Finally, the imprecise language used by the NARSUM examiner in describing his ROM measurements must be considered somewhat of a probative value detractor with regard to VASRD §4.46 (accurate measurement).After protracted deliberation in consideration of all of these...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01761

    Original file (PD-2014-01761.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The narrative summary (NARSUM) on 8 November 2005 (5 months prior to separation) reported that there was no improvement in the “low back pain with right leg radiculopathy.” Physical exam showed no evidence of non-physiologic pain.Goniometric range-of-motion (ROM) testing...