Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02481
Original file (PD-2013-02481.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX         CASE: PD-2013-02481
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20141030
SEPARATION DATE: 20041026


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E-6 (Combat Medical Specialist) medically separated for neck and back pain with degenerative disc disease (DDD). He was issued a permanent U3/L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The low back pain (LBP) with DDD and chronic neck pain conditions, characterized as medically unacceptable, were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The MEB also identified and forwarded flexible pes planus (flat feet). The Informal PEB adjudicated the neck and back pain with DDD as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.39. The pes planus wa s determined to be not unfitting. The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “One of the reasons is that I did not get to have a physical done when I left the military. It was scheduled in Germany, and then my orders were changed having me leave Germany before the scheduled appointment. When I called to reschedule the hospital in Lanstuhl said that they could not get it any earlier but to not worry I would get an exam from the VA when I returned to the states. When I got the results of the rating it stated that I was a no show for the appointment. I did not know that I could argue that point then and just accepted it. Another issue is the fact that not all of my issues during my time in service were recorded, as I was a medic most issues were just dealt with by our PA and no paperwork done since injuries were not popular in the Infantry. One of which was the damage to my right knee which was not noted because of happening during training. A final reasoning on a re-look of my medical issues is that I was awarded 10% for back pain, however what I have is a spinal cord injury. It is causing further issues than the loss of feeling in my left thigh. I also lose feeling in both legs and feet very easily, and also have pressure placed on my spine in the cervical area as was not noted until and MRl (which seems to have disappeared) here at the ST Louis VA. It is causing headaches and loss of feeling in my arms and hands. I fear I am destined for a wheel chair as these continue to progress, and was handed a short straw for the responsibility of the Army in the damage.”[sic]


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 low back and neck conditions are addressed below along with the contended not unfitting foot condition. The contended legs, headaches, arms and hands conditions were not identified by the MEB or PEB; and, thus are not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. The Board acknowledges the CI’s information regarding the significant impairment with which his medical conditions continue to burden him. The Board also acknowledges the CI’s contention that suggests a higher rating should have been granted for other medical conditions.




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 Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation; and, to review those fitness determinations within its scope (as elaborated above) consistent with performance-based criteria in evidence at separation. The Board has neither the jurisdiction nor authority to scrutinize or render opinions in reference to the CI’s statements in the application regarding suspected Disability Evaluation System (DES) improprieties in the processing of his case.


 RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20040701
 VA* - (~2 Mos. Pre-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Neck & Back pain w/ DDD 5237 10% Thoracic & Lumbar Spine DDD 5237 10% 20040907
Neck Pain 5237 NSC 20040907
No Separate MEB/PEB Adjudication
 LLE Neuropathy 8520 10% 20040907
Flexible Pes Planus Not Unfitting Bilateral Pes Planus 5276 NSC 20040907
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 5
Combined: 10%
 Combined: 20%
*Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 200 41110 (most proximate to date of separation (DOS))


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The PEB combined the neck and back conditions as a single unfitting condition coded to 5237 and rated 10%. The approach by the PEB reflected its judgment that the constellation of conditions was unfitting, and there was no need for separate fitness adjudications or implied adjudication that each condition was separately unfitting. The Board’s initial charge in this case was therefore directed at determining if the PEB’s approach of combining conditions under a single rating was justified in lieu of separate ratings. When considering a separate rating for each condition, the Board considers each unbundled condition to be reasonably justified as separately unfitting unless a preponderance of evidence indicates the condition would not cause the member to be referred into the DES or be found unfit because of physical disability.

Back Pain with DDD Condition. The service treatment record (STR) shows the CI had sudden onset of LBP in March 1999 while performing sit-ups. Medical imaging (thoracic, lumbar and lumbosacral spine X-rays, and thoracic magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) was unremarkable. A 26 April 2001 thoracic spine MRI showed a small L5-S1 right disc protrusion without nerve root impingement. A 22 May 2001 whole body bone scan showed no pathological uptake in the spine. At the 9 June 2003 neurology consult, the CI complained of a 6-month history of numbness and tingling over the left lateral thigh and a burning pain with prolonged standing. The gait, strength and reflexes were normal. Left lateral thigh hyperalgesia (abnormal pain sensitivity) was present, but sensation was intact in all other areas. Tapping elicited paresthesia (abnormal sensation) over the distribution of the left lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (a peripheral nerve ) . The neurologist diagnosed a left latera l femoral cutaneous neuropathy (injury, disease, irritation , or dysfunction causing peripheral nerve pathology ) . N erve root irritation (radiculopathy) was not diagnosed and no further neurolog ic evaluation was recommend ed. In the 4 June 2004 MEB narrative summary (NARSUM) by orthopedic surgery, the CI complained of LBP with left anterior thigh pain, tingling and numbness . The LBP was increased with activity . Conservative management was unsuccessful and surgery was not recommended . R adiculopathy was not present. There was paravertebral muscle spasm with motion, but t he gait and contour were normal . The CI could bend forward with fingertips 40 cm from floor. Lying, however, the CI could bring the knees to the chest, and the chin to the knees, with low back discomfort. Lateral bend, rotation and hyperextension were limited at the extremes. Provocative tests to elicit sciatic nerve compression were negative.
The neurological exam was essentially normal except for the decreased sensation on the left anterior lateral thigh. The diagnosis was listed as LBP with DDD. A lumbar spine X-ray was normal. The CI did report for the 7 September 2004 range-of-motion (ROM) evaluation, but did not report for the scheduled VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination and requested that his records be evaluated without it.
The back 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)		 NARSUM 4.8 Mos. Pre-Sep Outpatient 4. 7 Mos. Pre-Sep VA C&P 1.6 Mos. Pre-S ep
Flexion (90 Normal) Fingertips ~40 cm of floor 75 90
Combined (240) -- 210 w/ 3 reps 205
Comment 40 cm is greater than 60 degrees, but less than 90 Lumbosacral not Thoracolumbar spine Goniometer utilized
§4.71a Rating 10 % 10 % 10%

The Board first considered whether the back pain condition was separately unfitting for continued military service. Chronic back pain was implicated in the permanent physical profile, commander’s statement and the MEB determined it to be medically unacceptable. All Board members agreed that the back pain condition was the primary condition interfering with the CI’s ability to perform the military mission and that it was separately unfitting. The Board then considered its rating recommendation for the back pain condition. The PEB and VA rated the neck and back pain with DDD condition as lumbosacral or cervical strain (5237) at 10%. No route to a higher rating was found. Board members agreed that, although muscle spasm was in evidence on the NARSUM examination, there was no evidence for an abnormal gait or contour secondary to the spasm to support a 20% rating. The Board considered if an unfitting neuropathy was present at separation, but there was no evidence that motor weakness or sensory loss impaired duty sufficiently to be separately unfitting and warranting an additional disability rating. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence, and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends that the back pain with DDD condition be found separately unfitting, coded 5237, and rated at a 10% disability.

Neck Pain with DDD Condition. The STR reports a history of a whiplash injury in 1989. Scattered encounters by multiple providers (emergency department staff, primary care physician, orthopedic surgeon, orthopedic physician assistant and physical therapist), provided limited and conflicting information regarding neck complaints, associated symptoms and exam findings. Complaints were variable and included intermittent neck pain with associated headaches, shoulder pain, and left arm, hand, and finger numbness. Symptoms were increased with wearing a helmet and overhead work. Examinations and imaging were unremarkable. The 9 June 2003 neurology consult contained no neck-specific complaint or diagnosis. A spinal cord MRI on 3 December 2003 showed a left disk bulge at C5-6 which contacted the anterior spinal cord and the left C6 nerve root. The orthopedic surgeon opined that the neck condition may be medically unacceptable as the CI had difficulty wearing the helmet, web gear and load-bearing equipment for prolonged periods. The 7 June 2004 cervical spine X-ray was essentially normal. The neck ROM evaluations in evidence which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation, with documentation of additional ratable criteria, are charted below.

Cervical ROM
(Degrees) 		NARSUM 4.8 Mo s . Pre-Sep PT 4. 0 Mos . Pre-Sep VA C&P 1.6 Mo s . Pre-Sep
Flex (45 Normal) At UE FROM 45 454
Combined (340) “ --- 325 after 5 reps
Comment FROM --- Goniometer utilized
§4.71a Rating 0% 10 % 10 %

The Board first considered whether the neck pain condition was separately unfitting for continued military service. Chronic neck pain was implicated in the permanent physical profile and MEB, but not in the commander’s statement. The Board noted that the orthopedic surgeon determined that the condition was medically unacceptable due to interference with the wear of a helmet and protective gear.
The Board noted the evidence reasonably supported a conclusion that the neck pain condition alone would have interfered with his military duties and was separately unfitting. The Board then considered its rating recommendation. The PEB rated the unfitting neck and back pain at 10% using the 5237 code. The VA denied service - connection for neck pain. The ROM on the VA C&P examination supported a 10% rating. No route to a higher rating was found . Therefore, the Board recommends that the neck pain condition be found separately unfitting, coded 5237, and rated at a 10% disability.


Contended PEB Conditions. The Board’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB’s determination that the bilateral pes planus (flat foot) condition was not unfitting. The Board’s threshold for countering fitness determinations is higher than the VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt) standard used for its rating recommendations, but remains adherent to the DoDI 6040.44 “fair and equitable” standard. The MEB listed flexible pes planus as medically acceptable and existing prior to service. The STR remained silent regarding foot complaints since 1994. Foot pain was not implicated in the permanent profile or commander’s statement. The contended bilateral pes planus condition was reviewed and considered by the Board. There was no performance based evidence from the record that this condition significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the bilateral pes planus condition and so no additional disability rating is recommended.


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. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends that the neck and back conditions be found separately unfitting and each rated 10% and coded 5237 IAW VASRD §4.71a. In the matter of the contended bilateral pes planus condition, 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 recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows, effective as of the date of his prior medical separation:

UNFITTING CONDITION VASRD CODE RATING
Back pain with DDD condition 5237 10%
Neck pain with DDD condition 5237 10%
COMBINED 20%



The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20131118, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans Affairs Treatment Record


                                   
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
DoD 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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150008382 (PD201302481)


1. 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 to modify the individual’s disability rating to 20% without recharacterization of the individual’s separation. This decision is final.

2. I direct that all the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected accordingly no later than 120 days from the date of this memorandum.

3. I request that a copy of the corrections and any related correspondence be provided to the individual concerned, counsel (if any), any Members of Congress who have shown interest, and to the Army Review Boards Agency with a copy of this memorandum without enclosures.

BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY:




Encl              XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                           Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
                           (Review Boards)

CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01622

    Original file (PD2012 01622.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 back, neck and bilateral foot pain conditions are addressed below;no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. In the matter of the bilateral foot pain condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00476

    Original file (PD2011-00476.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty member; E-6/SSG (11B/Infantryman) medically separated for a neck (cervical) and back (lumbar) condition. The PEB adjudicated the chronic neck pain condition and chronic LBP condition as unfitting, rated each 10% for a combined rating of 20%, with application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. The ROM’s for the C-spine met the 10%...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01911

    Original file (PD-2013-01911.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The VA rated under a peripheral nerve code 8520 (sciatic nerve) at 40% (moderately severe) citing pain and numbness to both extremities; in addition to lumbar disc protrusion for 10% under code 5242 (degenerative arthritis).Board members first agreed that sufficient evidence of painful motion was present to justify the rating of 10%, as well as the presence of localized tenderness not resulting in abnormal gait or spinal contour IAW §4.59 and §4.71a.Next, members acknowledged the ROM values...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01245

    Original file (PD-2012-01245.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NARSUM documented a normal neurological examination and ROM. The conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB and that were also contended by the CI are right foot pain secondary to pes planus, plantar fasciitis, and fractured 4th phalanx, right shoulder bursitis, bilateral knee osteoarthritis, and DDD of the cervical spine. An MRI of the left knee on 8 May 2006 (2 months prior to separation) was normal.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00386

    Original file (PD2011-00386.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated the lumbar condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with presumptive application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. The MEB exam followed a pre-separation VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam performed two months earlier; at which the CI had related significantly more severe pain with bilateral radiation, and more significant physical limitations. In the matter of the pes planus with plantar fasciitis condition, the Board unanimously recommends...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01985

    Original file (PD-2014-01985.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to the VASRD rules for rating the spine in effect at the time of separation thoracic and lumbar spine conditions coded IAW §4.71a are provided a single disability rating and thus the thoracic DDD and the lumbago (listed by the PEB as separate conditions) are subsumed in the §4.71a rating that follows. Since the disability due only to the left foot cannot be isolated by the clinical evidence or from the fitness implications of the bilateral condition, the Board consensus was that...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00800

    Original file (PD 2012 00800.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was medically separated with a 10% disability rating. The PEB rated the CI chronic LBP 10% under code 5299-5237 (lumbosacral strain) citing the ROM examination from the 21 July 2003 reported in the MEB NARSUM showing flexion greater than 60 degrees. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: UNFITTING CONDITION VASRD CODE RATING Chronic Low Back Pain, Secondary to Degenerative...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00557

    Original file (PD2011-00557.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated the cervical spine and OSA conditions as unfitting; assigning a disability rating of 10% to the cervical condition citing criteria of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD); and, 0% to the OSA condition referencing Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.39. Other PEB Conditions . The other conditions forwarded by the MEB and adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB were lumbar spondylosis (pain dating to same fall as for the cervical...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01673

    Original file (PD-2014-01673.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    SEPARATION DATE: 20061219 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. Neck Pain and Headaches Condition .

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02204

    Original file (PD-2013-02204.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. At the MEB physical examination dated 8 May 2006, the examiner recorded the CI’s history of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar pain since 2002with tingling and numbness of both legs and feet intermittently and noted no...