Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01882
Original file (PD 2014 01882.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX      CASE: PD -20 1 4 - 0 1882
BRANCH OF SERVICE: NAVY   BOARD DATE: 2014 926
Separation Date: 20030519


SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty P03/E-4 (HM3/General Duty Corpsman) medically separated for a right knee condition. The right knee condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Rating or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was placed on limited duty (LIMDU) status and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The right knee condition, characterized by the MEB as “tricompartmental chondromalacia of the right knee,” “lateral meniscus tear” and “left knee neuroma” (Board believes this to be an error and should have been right knee), were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW SECNAVINST 1850.4E. The Informal PEB adjudicated “tricompartmental chondromalacia of the right knee” as unfitting, rated at 10%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The remaining conditions, right knee neuroma and lateral meniscus tear, surgically treated were determined to be Category II conditions . The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION : “Back, neuropathy, knees, migraines , reproductive organ, depression, left shoulder, corn, congestive heart failure, decre ased hearing were listed. ”


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 right knee condition is addressed below; and, no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. The contended back, neuropathy, migraines, reproductive organ, depression, left shoulder, corn, congestive heart failure and decreased hearing conditions were not identified by the MEB or PEB, and thus are not 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 Naval Records. 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.

invalid font number 31502
RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20030212
 VA - (21 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Tricompartmental Chondromalacia, Rt. Knee 5299-5003 10% Status Post (s/p) Repair, Lateral Meniscal Tear with Osteoarthritis, Rt. Knee 5260 10% 20050216
Lateral Meniscus Tear, Surgically Treated Category II
Rt. Knee Neuroma, Surgically Treated Category II No VA Entry
No Additional MEB/PEB Conditions
 Other x9
Rating: 10%
 Combined: 50%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20050426 (most proxi mate to date of separation )

ANALYSIS SUMMARY : The PEB adjudicated the lateral meniscus tear, surgically treated and right knee neuroma surgically treated conditions as Category II conditions . These conditions will be discussed below under the unfitting condition.

Tricompartmental Chondromalacia, Right Knee Condition . There were three goniometric range - of - motion (ROM) evaluations in evidence, with documentation of additional ratable criteria, which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation; as summarized in the chart below :

Right Knee ROM(Degrees) MEB ~ 4. 5 Mo. Pre-Sep Ortho ~ 4. 5 Mo. Pre-Sep VA C&P ~ 1. 5 yrs . Post-Sep
Flexion (140 Normal) 120 100 115
Extension (0 Normal) 0 0 0
Comment Pos. antalgic gait & j oint line tenderness ; Stable ligaments; Pos. pain with patellar grind Tenderness t o p alpation ( TTP) below lateral joint line Normal gait; Pos. painful motion & effusion ; No instability; No Deluca criteria
§4.71a Rating 10 % 10 % 10 %
invalid font number 31502
The CI injured his right knee in December 2000 when he slipped from a step aboard ship and hyperextended his knee. He was seen in p rimary c are for persistent anterior-lateral joint line pain and stiffness. There were physical exam findings of a small effusion , tenderness of the medial joint line and a positive Apley’s test ( meniscal tear on the medial side ) . The right knee magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI ) showed a bucket handle tear of the lateral meniscus and a probable fibroma of the distal femur. The o rthopedist noted that an effusion, positive Apley’s and tenderness along the lateral joint line. The CI continued to follow by PT for strengthening exercises. He was placed on 30 day LIMDU status on 11 June 2001 thru 11 July 2001, for his right knee meniscal tear condition . The o rthopedist noted TTP to the lateral joint line, a positive McMur ray’s sign lateral meniscus tear and ROM limited to 120 degrees with pain. On 30 April 2002 t he CI underwent an arthroscopy, chondroplasty and partial lateral meniscectomy of the right knee. He resumed PT however he continued to have antalgic gait, pain and constant swelling and the use of crutches for ambulation.

The CI was placed on a second LIMDU status on 2 May 2002 (for 8 months ), post-operative procedure . The MRI of the right knee obtained in August 2002 , showed new transverse tears of the lateral meniscus. The o rthopedist noted a loss of flexion motion of 15 degrees to 20 degrees, TTP anterior lateral and medial menisci and knee popping with maneuvers. The CI underwent a second arthroscopy with a removal of a small neuroma in October 2002.

The MEB n arrative s ummary (NARSUM) exam ( approximately 4 months prior to separation ), noted constant right knee pain despite having two arthroscopic surgeries. The Board makes note that on the NARSUM under diagnoses the phrase “left knee” was penciled out and right knee was written in. The orthopedist provider noted that the CI had chronic pain with flexion. The physical exam findings are summarized in the chart above. The CI was scheduled for a series of right- knee steroid injections which were started in February 2003 . The MEB NARSUM physical exam ination findings are summarized in the chart above.

The non-medical assessment noted that the CI had to take frequent breaks and was incapable of prolonged standing or moderate walking and required use of a cane for short walks. The condition interfered with the performance of his MOS duties and therefore the CI consider non- deployable.

The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam ( approximately a year after separation ) , documented that the CI required a cane because his knee was “swollen , locked and had constant pain all day, every day. ” He reported an inability to kneel, run, walk fast , squat, crawl or run upstairs. He was also unable to sit for any significant length of time during a flare in cold weather. The VA C&P physical exam findings are summarized in the chart above.

The Board direct ed attenti on to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence . The PEB coded the t ricompartmental c hondromalacia, r ight k nee condition as code 5299 analogous to 5003 ( a rthritis, degenerative hypertrophic or osteoarthritis ) and rated at 10%. The VA coded the status post r epair l ateral m eniscal t ear with o steoarthritis of the r ight k nee as code 5260 ( limitation of leg flexion ) and rated at 10% ( f lexion limited to 45 degrees ) . All exams performed proximate to separation documented pain-limited motion. No exam indicated instability, current meniscal injury, or limited ROM to a compensable level without application of §4.59 (p ainful motion ) . VASRD §4.71a specifies for use of code 5003 , satisfactory evidence of painful motion and specifies a 10% rating for each major joint or group of minor joints affected by limitation of motion. The Board considered coding the right knee condition using codes 52 59 and 52 60 ; however , these coding schemes would not result in a higher rating. 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 t ricompartmental c hondromalacia, r ight k nee 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 t ricompartmental c hondromalacia, r ight k nee condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. In the matter of the l ateral m eniscus t ear, s urgically t reated and r ight k nee n euroma s urgically t reated contended 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, therefore, recommends that there be no re - characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination .

invalid font number 31502
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20 140415 , w/atchs
Exhib it B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans ’ Affairs Treatment Record











XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
Physical Disability Board of Review




MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY COUNCIL OF REVIEW
BOARDS

Subj: PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS

Ref: (a) DoDI 6040.44
(b) CORB ltr dtd 8 Apr 15

In accordance with reference (a), I have reviewed the cases forwarded by reference (b), and, for the reasons provided in their forwarding memorandums, approve the recommendations of the PDBR that the following individual’s records not be corrected to reflect a change in either characterization of separation or in the disability rating previously assigned by the Department of the Navy’s Physical Evaluation Board:

- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN



                                                      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                            Assistant General Counsel
                                                      (Manpower & Reserve Affairs)

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01299

    Original file (PD-2013-01299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Bilateral Knee Pain due to Chondromalacia5099-500320%Chondromalacia Patella L Knee526120%20050311Chondromalacia Patella, R Knee526120%20050311Other X 0 (Not in Scope)Other x020050314 Combined: 20%Combined: 40%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20050412 (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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01965

    Original file (PD-2013-01965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The rating for the unfitting s/p left ACL reconstruction condition is addressed below; no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. Members deliberated if this negatively impacted their ability to render a fair assessment and agreed that the available evidence was sufficiently probative; evidence presumed not accomplished would not materially affect the Board’s final recommendation.The PEB coded the left knee Grade II chondromalacia patellae s/pleft...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01851

    Original file (PD-2013-01851.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was placed on limited duty (LIMDU) and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Persistent Right Knee Pain5099-500310%Right Knee Meniscus Tear52590%20060309Other x0 (Not in Scope)Other x8 20060309 Combined: 10%Combined: 40%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20051109 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) ANALYSIS SUMMARY : The Board makes note that some of the CI’s contended conditions are derived from VA...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01982

    Original file (PD2012 01982.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The left knee condition, characterized as “ left knee pain and osteoarthritis, status post (s/p) arthroscopic debridement” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR40-501. The PEB adjudicated “ tricompartmental osteoarthritis left knee with meniscal tear/degeneration” as unfitting, rated 10%citing criteria of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The PEB adjudicated the three other conditions, obesity, hypertension, and allergic rhinosinusitis as...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01198

    Original file (PD2012 01198.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    invalid font number 31502 Physical therapy measured right knee ROM at 5 to 125 degrees in early November 2001. invalid font number 31502 At that time, invalid font number 31502 the CI underwent a right knee invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 diagnostic arthroscopy, partial synovectomy invalid font number 31502 , invalid font number 31502 an invalid font number 31502 d mechanical knee chondroplasty and the MEB was placed on hold. invalid font number 31502 A C&P invalid font...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01635

    Original file (PD 2012 01635.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the Board concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the any of the left knee conditions, so no additional disability ratings can be recommended.The Board next considered the CI’s right knee condition for its rating recommendation. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01856

    Original file (PD2012 01856.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is insufficient evidence to support a finding of not unfitting for either knee.Therefore, it is reasonably justified that the CI be found unfit for continued military service in her MOS due to her left and right anterior knee pain with patellar crepitus and patellar apprehension condition. However, there is no evidence of any further examination in the record. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual was separated by reason of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00858

    Original file (PD2012-00858.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The conditions forwarded to the PEB were left knee medial meniscus tear and left knee patellar chondromalacia. The PEB adjudicated the left knee condition as not unfitting and recommended the CI was “Fit to Continue on Active Duty.” The CI requested a Records Review Panel reconsideration of his case and filed a 2 page statement outlining why “the findings are not compatible with the evidence provided and the condition I currently have.” The Records Review Panel agreed with the CI...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00142

    Original file (PD2009-00142.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Formal PEB concurred and he was then separated with a 20% disability for 5299-5257 Chronic left knee pain, status post repair of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) with tearing of posterior horn of lateral meniscus and tricompartmental degenerative change using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Ratings Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Air Force and Department of Defense regulations. Using an evaluation completed two months after the time of separation from the Air Force, the Veterans...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00376

    Original file (PD 2014 00376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The rating for the unfitting right knee is addressed below; no additional conditions (the contended left knee, arthritis, nerve damage, GERD and hiatal hernia) are not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. The examiner opined that theCI’s history of prior knee surgery was most likely exacerbated by the fall.The MEB NARSUM physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below.The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam performed on 3 August 2005,10 months after separation,...