Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02132
Original file (PD-2013-02132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX          CASE: PD-2013-02132
BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY           BOARD DATE: 20140527
SEPARATION DATE: 20050526


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4 (96B/ Intelligence Analyst) medically separated for a chronic left knee condition. 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 MEB characterized his condition as left knee retro-patellar pain syndrome (RPPS). The MEB also identified and forwarded “panic attacks” but determined this condition to have existed prior to service (EPTS). Both conditions were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for adjudication. The Informal PEB adjudicated the left knee condition as “chronic left knee pain and decreased motion” unfitting and rated it at 20%. The mental health condition was determined to be EPTS and was not rated. The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “My range of motion and physical activity has been significantly reduced due to my service-connected disability. I am no longer able to run for distances greater than 0.5 mile due to extreme pain. In the workplace, I have to constantly ascend and descend staircases which also causes pain. This has increased since my original separation from service in 2005. Both knees now have a continuous “pop” when I walk.”


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 left knee condition is addressed below; no additional conditions are within the Board’s defined DoDI 6040.44 purview. 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 20050513
 VA - (Exam ~ 11 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic Left Knee Pain and Decreased Motion 5258-5261 20% Patellofemoral Syndrome, Left Knee 5260 10% 20060420
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 4 20060420
Combined: 20%
 Combined: 10%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 60519 (most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Disability Evaluation System (DES) is responsible for maintaining a fit and vital fighting force. While the DES considers all of the member's medical conditions, compensation can only be offered for those medical conditions that cut short a member’s career, and then only to the degree of severity present at the time of separation. The DES has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions resulting in medical separation nor for conditions determined to be service-connected by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB. However, the DVA, operating under a different set of laws (Title 38, United States Code), is empowered to compensate all service-connected conditions and to periodically re-evaluate said conditions for the purpose of adjusting the Veteran’s disability rating should the degree of impairment vary over time. The Board’s role is confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, compared to the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards, based on severity at the time of separation.

Chronic Left Knee Condition. The CI presented in mid-August 2004 with a one-day history of pain after running. He was noted to have a normal examination including full range-of-motion (ROM). Conservative management was not successful. On 29 October 2004, he was evaluated in primary care and found to have a bilaterally positive patellar grind test, consistent with RPPS, and lateral (outside) joint line tenderness on the left, suspicious for a tear of the lateral meniscus. The examination was otherwise unremarkable including ROM which was 0-135 degrees bilaterally. Knee X-rays were normal. When seen 2 weeks later in physical therapy, his gait and ROM (0-140 degrees) were normal. The diagnosis of bilateral RPPS was continued. The CI was seen in orthopedics on 3 January 2005 and noted to have near normal ROM (0-130 degrees bilaterally), stable ligaments, a normal gait, positive patellar grind (a provocative test for RPPS) and positive testing for a left lateral meniscal tear (LMT). A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) accomplished on 25 February 2005 was suspicious for a medial meniscal tear (MMT) of the left knee. At the MEB examination on 28 February 2005, the CI reported a left knee injury. The examiner noted a positive patellar grind and signs of left lateral meniscal irritation. A follow-up orthopedic consult on 4 March 2005, 2.5 months prior to separation, noted a positive grind and the CI was thought to have a LMT on the left clinically (not seen on MRI) and to not have clinical evidence for the possible MMT observed on MRI. The CI was issued a L3 profile for bilateral knee pain; an MEB had been initiated for the panic disorder. The narrative summary was dated 20 April 2005, but referenced the physical examination conducted on 28 February 2005. The examiner noted that the CI requested an MEB during an orthopedic evaluation on 4 March 2005 as he was being “chaptered” for the panic disorder. It also referenced a note from the orthopedic clinic to the MEB stating that the CI had declined surgery secondary to his psychological diagnosis and concern that he would not be able to endure it. The ROM was noted to be 15-115 degrees, lacking 15 degrees of extension and 25 degrees of flexion and consistent on repetition. He was noted to be wearing a knee immobilizer. His knee was stable; signs of meniscal irritation persisted. The left RPPS condition was determined to fail retention standards. The panic attack disorder was determined to be EPTS (existed prior to service) and to meet retention criteria. The MEB considered the same diagnoses and made the same determination. The PEB on 13 May 2005, 2 weeks prior to separation, determined that the chronic left knee pain was unfitting and rated it at 20% for loss of extension (15 degrees) using the codes 5258 and 5261, dislocation of the meniscus and limitation of extension, respectively. At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination performed on 20 April 2006, almost 11 months after separation, the CI reported pain that “comes and goes.” He denied locking, but noted that it occasionally gave way. He used no aids for ambulation, but occasionally wore a brace. On examination, he had full extension and flexion limited to 110 degrees. The knee was stable without tenderness or signs of meniscal irritation. The goniometric 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.



Left Knee ROM
(Degrees)		 Ortho ~2 Mo. Pre-Sep MEB ~1 Mo. Pre-Sep VA C&P ~11 Mo. Post-Sep
Flexion (140 Normal) 130 15-115 110
Extension (0 Normal) 0 Lacks 15 of full ext 0
Comment Nml Gait; stable Wearing knee immobilizer Examination benign otherwise
§4.71a Rating 10% 20% 10 %

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. All ROM measurements except that done for the MEB, documented normal extension and flexion which ranged from normal to 30 degrees less than full, a loss which is non-compensable. The loss of extension was not supported at any other examination. The examination and MRI were not consistent with each other regarding the presence of a meniscal injury and the VA C&P examination was negative for signs of meniscal irritation. The Board found no route to support a rating higher than 10%, less than the 20% rating adjudicated by the PEB. However, the Board does not recommend a rating less than that adjudicated by the PEB. Therefore, 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 left knee 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 left knee 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 re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20131028, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record








                                   
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150002605 (PD201302132)

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00648

    Original file (PD2013 00648.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    There was evidence of degenerative changes on X-rays of both knees and, by report in the C&P, evidence of meniscal tears bilaterally on MRI. The profile was for bilateral knee pain, although the commander noted that the CI was limited secondary to pain in his right knee. The CI had positive DeLuca findings for both knees on the VA C&P examination, an abnormal gait secondary to left knee pain on the NARSUM examination and was noted by his commander to have duty restrictions secondary to...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01423

    Original file (PD-2012-01423.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    (2) is limited to those conditions which were determined by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued military service; or, when requested by the CI, those condition(s) “identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB.” The ratings for unfitting conditions (in this case, profound mixed hearing loss, right ear and chronic bilateral knee pain) will be reviewed in all cases. The VARD reported that the rating of both knees was based on the complaints of bilateral knee pain and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00344

    Original file (PD-2014-00344.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20060405 Left Knee Condition . By the time of separation, the CI’s condition had improved such that he had a full ROM, albeit that knee pain persisted in spite of treatment.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01479

    Original file (PD2013 01479.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the MEB examination on 2 June 2006 the CI reported bilateral knee pain. The MEB physical examiner also noted normal ROM, stable knees, and painful patellar compression. RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02045

    Original file (PD-2013-02045.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    No additional conditions(such as hypertension or tachycardia) are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a disability rating of 30% for the Asthma 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01921

    Original file (PD-2012-01921.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB also identified and forwarded history of cellulitis, left knee, chronic bilateral hip pain secondary to bilateral iliotibial band friction syndrome, chronic mechanical low back pain, mild (less than a centimeter) left shorter than right limb length discrepancy, and mild bilateral pes planus conditions.The PEBadjudicated “left patellofemoral pain with secondary chronic left knee pain” as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01525

    Original file (PD2012 01525.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Left Knee . The Board noted that there was no pain on ROM testing on either the MEB or C&P examinations; however, both examinations made reference to tenderness about the patella and noted pain with activity implying painful motion. 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.As...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00803

    Original file (PD2012-00803.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    Bilateral Knee Pain . The knee pain condition was coded 5099-5003 and rated at 0%. Accordingly, the Board recommends a separate disability rating for each knee.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01228

    Original file (PD2012 01228.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The MEB forwarded bilateral retropatellarpain syndrome (RPPS)and lateral patellar compression syndrome condition to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Retropatellar Pain Syndrome S/PArthroscopic Release with only Moderate Improvement5099-50030%Right Knee Patellar Compression Syndrome w/History of Arthroscopic Lateral Release5299-526210%20020429Left Knee Patellar Compression Syndrome w/History of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02209

    Original file (PD-2013-02209.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered that the evidence in record supports that the CI had painful, limited ROM with imaging evidence of DJD following right knee injury and surgery, without significant instability. Left knee examination was the same as the right, except no effusion was present and physical therapy noted ROM of 0 degrees-130 degrees, without painful motion.At the VA C&P exam performed a week after separation the CI reported problems in the left knee due to compensation for his right knee. ...