Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00793
Original file (PD2013 00793.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX          CASE : PD13 00 793
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army   BOARD DATE: 201 4 0214
Separation Date: 20070307


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty CPT/O-3 (19A/Armor Officer) medically separated for low back pain (LBP). He noticed increasing back pain while deployed to Iraq in 2005 which became increasingly severe after his return. The increased severity included numbness in his right leg and the CI underwent surgery in mid-2006. Surgery led to significant but temporary improvement and later treatment included electronic stimulation and steroid injections. Despite this treatment the low back condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or physical fitness standards, so he was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The low back condition, characterized as “LBP with radicular symptoms” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The MEB also identified and forwarded six other conditions (see rating chart below) for PEB adjudication. The PEB adjudicated “chronic low back pain” as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION : “The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) found me unfit for service for chronic low back pain with atraumatic onset and motion limited by pain. The PEB lists VA code 5237 from the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The PEB assessed a 10% disability rating for the unfitting condition which appears to be inconsistent with VASRD General Rating Formula for Diseases and lnjuries of the Spine. The 10% rating assessed by the PEB would be appropriate for forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine greater the 60 degrees but not greater than 85°. The physical examination, performed by E-- R--, MD documented in the Narrative Summary (NARSUM) (page 5), states forward flexion to only approximately 15 degrees. The VASRD prescribes a rating of 40% for forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine of 30 degrees or less. The PEB states imaging is normal; however, imaging studies documented in NARSUM on page 3 for 21 Sep 2006 state (post-surgery): MRI of the lumbar spine with and without contrast. Impression: "L5-Sl right paracentral disk protrusion causing moderate spinal canal narrowing at this level and moderate to severe right neural foraminal narrowing at this level." The PEB did not separately rate radicular pain because the condition is not separately unfitting; however, radicular pain contributes the severity of the unfitting condition and contributes to painful motion and the limitation of forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine. The radicular pain contributes to the unfitting condition and should be rated in accordance with AR 635-40, Section 4-19f (6) (b). The radicular pain should be rate as prescribed in the VASRD. I request the review board consider: 1) the appropriate application of the VASRD rating for VA code 5237 based on the forward flexion of thoracolumbar spine documented in the NARSUM, 2) the rating of radicular pain as contributing to the unfitting condition in accordance with AR 635-40, Section 4-19f (6) (b), and 3) review all conditions identified but determined not to be unfitting by the PEB (see page 7 of NARSUM).”


 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 condition is addressed below. Likewise, the conditions listed as MEB diagnoses 2-7 (see rating comparison chart) are addressed below. 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 :
invalid font number 31502
Service PEB – Dated 20070119
 VA – no VA records*
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic LBP… 5299-5237 10%
S1 Radiculopathy… Not Unfitting
S1 Sensory Neural Loss…
Loss of Achilles’ Tendon Reflex…
Chronic Back Pain Rated in Condition 1
Gastro esophageal reflux disease (GERD) Not Unfitting
Possibly Mildly Elevated Blood Pressures
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
Combined: 10%
 Combined: unknown %
*CI did not consent to release VA records for review .


ANALYSIS SUMMARY : IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board’s authority is limited to making recommendations on correcting disability determinations. The Board reviews medical records and other available evidence to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, using VASRD standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation, and to review fitness determinations within its scope (as elaborated above) consistent with performance-based criteria in evidence at separation. The Board notes the CI did not consent to the release of his VA records for review; this lack of potentially probative VA evidence significantly impacts the Boards usual process for making evidence-based recommendations. In keeping with standard Board procedure, the Board carefully reviewed the entire file for evidence from the period preceding separation on which to base its recommendation.

Chronic LBP Condition . The CI had two fall s while deployed to Iraq in 2005-2006 and wore individual body armor (IBA) extensively during deployment . Upon bec o m ing an Executive O fficer in August 2005 , the CI chang ed to largely desk-bound duties a nd his LBP slowly worsened . T he CI was seen in October 2005 (while still deployed) for pain radiating from the lower back to both knees which worsened as the day progressed . T his radicular pain ha d been present for 4 weeks , with intermittent LBP for a year and a half. The physical exam was n ormal, but the examiner diagnosed possible radiculopathy due to deep paraspinous involvement. The CI continued to experience chronic LBP after his return in February 2006, though a lumbar spine X- ray performed in that month ( in the U.S. ) was normal. A p hysical t herapist (PT) in that same month noted abnormal lumbar spine motion, muscle spasms, antalgic gait decreased sensation, but motor exam was normal. A magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI ) performed in April 2006 showed a large right paracentral disc herniation at L5-S1 imp in g ing on the S1 nerve root. A n eurosurge ry exam in June 2006 noted constant burning , s harp to dull shooting pain radiat ing to the right hip down to the knee. Physical exam findings were abnormal ; thoracolumbar motion with pain, flexion and extension in st anding maneuver during movement. There were abnormal sensory findings but the motor exam was norm al. The diagnosis was lumbar radiculopathy, herniated disc L5-S1 and lumbago. The CI underwent a right - sided minimally invasive lumbar microdiscectomy, hemilaminectomy and foraminotomy with medial facetectomy . Post operatively, the CI continued to report LBP extending to the right hip with sharp shooting pain radiating down the right lower extre mity, exacerbated with twisting or bending, as well as flexion with muscle spasms . A lumbar spine MRI showed a L5 - S1 right paracentral disc protrusion casing , moderate spinal canal narrowing , and moderate to severe tight neural foraminal narrowing. The thoracic spine was normal. The CI was referred to the p ain c linic for constant burning pain in the right low back and posterolateral thigh. Physical exam findings included tenderness to palpation (TTP) of the right side of the lumbar spine, TTP in the iliolumbar region, limited lumbar spine range-of-motion ( ROM ) , pain with flexion and extension and pain wi th lateral flexion to the right, though motor and sensory exams were normal. The examiner administered the first epidural steroid injection (ESI) in a series of three injections scheduled for pain resolution. The CI w as given a permanent L3 Profile for LBP and right leg pain with specific restrictions of no IBA, no forced PT and no sit-ups or push-ups. App roximately 3 weeks after the fir st ESI, a PT note documented “Lumbosacral spine did not demonstrate full range of motion flex approx. 45 deg . , but sit s in apparent comfort. A sitting root test was negative.” An electromyogram (EMG) on 9 November 2006 indicat e d no lumbar radiculopathy or entrapment neuropathy. The c ommander’s s tatement noted th e medic al condition interfered with MOS duty performance. A second ESI was performed 14 November 2006. The MEB n arrative s ummary (NARSUM) exam ( 3 months prior to separation , with findings summarized in chart below ) indicated the ESI injections provided a week pain relief; the pain was constant, aggravated by driving, sexual activity or any rapid activity such as running. There was occasional right leg weakness due to pain , and sleeping required lying on his right side , w ith hips squared and a pillow between his legs to decrease pain . The examiner considered long term pain relief unlikely and the lasting effect of ESI unclear . The examiner specifically documented Achilles reflexes were 2+ (normal) bilaterally. The CI underwent a third ESI on 5 December 2006. The CI did not consent to the release of his VA records ; the two ROM evaluations in evidence ( with documentation of additional ratable criteria) which the Board considered for its rating recommendation, are summarized in the chart below.

Thoracolumbar ROM(Degrees) PT 4.0 Mo. Pre-Sep NARSUM 3.3 Mo. Pre-Sep
Flexion (90 Normal) 45 15
Extension (30) 25 5
R Lat Flexion (30) 30 “full”
L Lat Flexion (30) 30 “full”
R Rotation (30) 30 -
L Rotation (30) 30 -
Combined (240) 190 -
Comment Normal g ait; decreased sensation lateral right foot; N o muscle spasms; Normal ankle reflex but less brisk on left Normal g ait; Pos. painful motion ; no evidence muscle atrophy; Normal heel/toe walk; Right foot sensation minimally decreased; Normal foot strength & reflexes bilaterally; no muscle atrophy
invalid font number 31502
The Board directs attenti on to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence . The PEB applied the analogous VASRD code 5299-5237, l umbosacral strain and rated the LBP condition 10% for “tenderness.” The g eneral r ating f ormula for d iseases and i njuries of the s pine includes pain symptoms “With or without symptoms such as pain (whether or not it radiates), stiffness or aching in the area of the spine affected by residuals of injury or disease . ” The VASRD rating formula is primarily based on ROM measurements for assigning a rating percentage , along with the passage “…muscle spasm, guarding, or localized tenderness not resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour…” for application of the 10% rating . Review of all documents in evidence revealed two ROM based physical examinations (one from PT and the other from the NARSUM ) performed within 3 weeks of each other, approximately 4 months prior to separation. The PT exam 3 weeks prior to the NARSUM documents a lumbar spine flexion of 45 degrees , while the NARSUM exam documented a lumbar spine flexion of 15 degrees. Both exams documented pain limited lumbar spine motion. There is a disparity between these examinations with implications for the Board's rating recommendation. The Board deliberated the probative value of these conflicting evaluations, and carefully reviewed the entire file for corroborating evidence from the period preceding separation . The NARSUM exam was 3 weeks closer to the CI’s date of separation but was not a s comprehensive as the PT exam . The PT exam contained ROM measurements for all ax e s of thoracolumbar motion, while the NARSUM exam did not. The PT exam ROM measurements consisted of the average of three different measurements in each plane of motion , the NARSUM did not. An earlier PT note ( 6 weeks prior to the NARSUM ) documented lumbosacral spine flexion of “…approximately 45 deg.” The re were no additional examinations with ROM measurements dated after the NARSUM. Due to its more detailed information and corroborating evidence , Board deliberation s determine d the PT exam to be mo re probative than the NARSUM exam. The Board considered whether additional rating could be recommende d under a peripheral nerve code for the associated sci atic radiculopathy . Firm Board precedence requires a functional impairment linked to fitness to support a recommendation for addition of a peripheral nerve rating to disability in spine cases. The pain component of a radiculopathy is subsumed under the general spine rating as noted above and IAW §4.71a. The sensory component in this case has no functional implication, and no motor weakness or muscle atrophy was documented . An EMG performed demonstrated no evidence of lumbar radiculopathy or entrapment neuropathy. There is no evidence of a separately ratable functional impairment (with fitness implications) from the residual radiculopathy, so the Board cannot support a recommendation of “unfitting” for an additional disability rating on this basis. The Board considered the criteria for a 40% rating forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine 30 degrees or less as documented in the NARSUM and the 20% rating for forward flexion of the lumber spine of 45 degrees as documented in the more probative PT exam. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a disability rating of 20% for the chronic LBP condition.

Contended PEB Conditions. The contended conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB were S1 radiculopathy, S1 sensory neural loss, loss of Achilles tendon reflex, GERD and elevated blood pressures. The Board’s first charge with respect to these conditions is an assessment of the appropriateness of the PEB’s fitness adjudications. 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 contended S1 radiculopathy, S1 sensory neural loss, loss of Achilles tendon reflex conditions were discussed in the chronic LBP section above and were not found to be separately unfitting. Neither the GERD condition nor the elevated blood pressure condition was profiled. They were not implicated in the c ommander’s s tatement and were not judged t o fail retention standards. Both were reviewed by the a ction o fficer and considered by the Board. There was no ind ication from the record that either of these conditions 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 GERD and elevated blood pressures condition s , so no additional disability ratings can be 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. In the matter of the c hronic LBP condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 20%, coded 5299-5237 IAW VASRD §4.71a. In the matter of the contended S1 radiculopathy, S1 sensory neural loss, loss of Achilles tendon reflex, GERD and elevated blood pressures conditions, the Board unanimously recommends no change from the PEB determinations as not unfitting. 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
Chronic Low Back Pain 5299-5237 20%
COMBINED 20%
invalid font number 31502

The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20 130606 , w/atchs
Exhib it B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans ’ Affairs Treatment Record








                          
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX , DAF
President
Physical Disability Board of Review

SFMR-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 , AR20140009377 (PD201300793)
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
                                                      (Army Review Boards)

CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00213

    Original file (PD-2014-00213.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. Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic LBP523710%Lumbosacral Intervertebral Disc Syndrome524310%20070227S1 Radiculopathy Left Lower Extremity5243-852010%20070227Other x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 0 RATING: 10%RATING: 20% *Derived from VA Rating...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02326

    Original file (PD-2014-02326.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Formal MEB PT goniometric range-of-motion (ROM) testing of the thoracolumbar spine was performed on 15 December 2006 (approximately 5 months prior to separation) and documented forward flexion of 20 degrees (normal 90) and combined ROM of 120 degrees (normal 240). The PEB disability description indicated the rating was based on tenderness and ROM limited by pain, but did not specify ROM values or detail which ROM exam was used for rating. Additionally, the CI had continuing and recurring...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02308

    Original file (PD-2013-02308.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He rated his pain at 4/10. Deluca criteria§4.71a Rating10%* (PEB 10%)10% (VA 10%) invalid font number 31502 *IAW VASRD §4.59, Painful motion invalid font number 31502 The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.The PEB coded the chronic LBP secondary to L5-S1 HNP without neurologic deficit condition 5243 (Intervertebral Disc Syndrome) and rated at 10%. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00823

    Original file (PD2011-00823.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However both the NARSUM and the treatment record document the radicular pain and weakness continued at the same level of severity after the second surgery and at least until the time of the MEB NARSUM in April 2006. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record VASRD CODE RATING 20% 10% 30% 5243 8620 COMBINED XXXXXXXXXXXXX, DAF President Physical Disability Board of Review 6 PD1100823 SFMR‐RB MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00987

    Original file (PD-2012-00987.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CASE NUMBER: PD1200987 BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY BOARD DATE: 20130320 SEPARATION DATE: 20070601 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SSG/E-6 (63M/Bradley Systems Mechanic) medically separated for a lumbar spine condition. Subsequently, the CI had a C&P exam in December 2006, at which time the L-Spine flexion was...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 00218

    Original file (PD 2013 00218.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The CI was referred to physical therapy (PT) for S1 radiculopathy with physical exam findings of antalgic gait, L5-S1 pain, and positive straight leg raise on the right. By precedent, the Board threshold for a “moderate” peripheral nerve rating requires some functionally significant motor and/or sensory impairment.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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01336

    Original file (PD-2012-01336.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pre -Separation) – All Effective Date 20030416 Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Back Pain & Loss of Motion 5293-5299- 5292 20% S/p Laminectomy L4-5, L5-S1 5293-5292 40% 20030205 .No Additional MEB/PEB Entries. At the MEB exam, the NARSUM, 24 October 2002, noted “gradual improvement of pain,” but with “persistent difficulties with bending, stooping, lifting and running.” The MEB physical exam noted that the “general physical examination is within normal limits.” The NARSUM...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01816

    Original file (PD-2013-01816.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander’s statement noted that the CI’s back condition precluded him from performing critical field tasks, his condition further interfered with his MOS duties and adversely affected his unit’s readiness.The MEB narrative summary (NARSUM) exam approximately 5 monthsprior to separation documented that the CI was seen in the ER on 3 October 2003 and given intravenous morphine for acute LBP and that he still had occasional moderate LBP. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00698

    Original file (PD2013 00698.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    ; No muscle spasm invalid font number 31502 Also noted in evidence was a VA PT exam dated 13 months after separation that documented “Trunk ROM is limited 50% flexion, lateral flexion left and 25% rotation left. The VA coded the lumbar spine DDD, scoliosis and strain condition as 5242, degenerative arthritis of the spine, rated at 20% based on a forward flexion of 40 degrees.The general rating formula for diseases and injuries of the spine considers the CI’s pain symptoms “With or without...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00463

    Original file (PD 2014 00463.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The left knee condition was not considered by the PEB. The pain was rated at 9 out of 10. The MEB NARSUM examiner documented chronic left knee pain that was medically managed.