Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01245
Original file (PD-2014-01245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX        CASE: PD-2014-01245
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army         BOARD DATE: 20141015
SEPARATION DATE: 20090704


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4 (11B/Infantryman) medically separated for a right wrist condition. The right wrist 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 U3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The wrist condition characterized as “right wrist pain” was the only condition forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The Informal PEB adjudicated “right wrist pain” as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: The CI writes: “Pain in the wrist and back are getting worse. Range of motion in wrist is worse since rating was issued and strength in wrist has gotten worse as well. It is also getting harder to work with my hands for long periods of time. Hand locks up and lots of pain if worked to long.”


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 wrist condition is addressed below; and, no additional conditions, including the contended back condition, 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 20090527
 VA - (2 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Right Wrist Pain 5099-5010 10% Arthritis of the R Wrist w/Residual Surgical Scar 5010-5215 10% 20090908
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 1 20090908
Combined: 10%
 Combined: 20%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 90923 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board acknowledges the CI’s information regarding the significant impairment with which his service-connected condition continues to burden him; but, must emphasize that the Disability Evaluation System has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions resulting in medical separation. That role and authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs, operating under a different set of laws.

Right Wrist Pain. This right hand dominant CI sustained fractures of the distal right arm (radius bone) and one proximate right wrist bone (scaphoid ) with possible injury to a major nerve supplying the motor muscles of the hand (median nerve) on 17 June 2008. These fractures were operatively repaired with plates and screws (hardware). Post-operatively the CI developed pain with use in the wrist. On post-operative evaluation performed on 27 June 2008, the injury to the median nerve was reported to have “resolved.” The CI underwent a second operation in July 2008, for removal of the scaphoid screw. At this time sensory and motor exams of the hand were normal and the scaphoid bone was determined to be healed. Multiple subsequent X-rays from this time through the time of separation from the military revealed good healing of the fracture sites without malunion, arthritic changes or hardware difficulty. On orthopedic evaluation performed on 2 October 2008, the CI reported “stiffness of the wrist.” Motor and neurologic evaluations of the hand were normal and operative sites were healing well. On occupational therapy (OT) evaluation performed on 11 December 2008, the CI reported wrist pain with lifting heavy objects and with gripping. Evaluation revealed full range-of-motion (ROM) of the hands. ROM of the right wrist was dorsiflexion (DF-palm down, hand flexed toward the ceiling) of 68 degrees, plantar flexion (PF-palms down, hand flexed toward the floor) of 64 degrees (Normal: 70/80 degrees), and slight reduction in rotation of the wrist to the right and left (ulnar and radial deviation). Grip strength was noted to be decreased in both hands, the right worse than the left. The CI was, however, able to perform 10 pushups with pain of 3/10. On orthopedic evaluation performed on 12 January 2009 stiffness of the wrist with pain on motion of the wrist were reported. A decrease in active ROM with pain, but with normal motor and sensory evaluations was reported. On 19 February 2009, a repeat OT evaluation, ROM of the hand was again noted to be “full.” ROM of the right wrist was unchanged and grip strength remained decreased in both wrists, right worse than left but significantly improved in the right. No tenderness over the area of the scaphoid bone (“snuff box” sign) was noted. On OT evaluation for the MEB/narrative summary (NARSUM) performed on 8 April 2008, PF of the right wrist was 64 degrees, DF was 61 degrees. Strength testing of the both hands is presented in the chart below.

HAND STRENGTH ( normal for male in pounds )
 OT
3 Months pre separation (20090408)
Right Hand Left Hand
Grip ( R-121; L-105)
 15 50
3-Jaw Pinch( R-27; L-26)
 6 10
Tip Pinch( R-18; L-17)
 7 9
Lateral Pinch( R-26; L-25)
 8 17
Comments
 Grip and Pinch tests increase d right wrist pain.

At the MEB/NARSUM exam on 15 April 2009, 3 months prior to separation, the CI reported continued right wrist pain with use. On examination, “decreased ROM in all planes with discomfort” was reported. Extremity motor and neurologic exams were normal.

Four relevant VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exams were performed on 8 September 2009, 2 months after separation: 1) On the VA C&P General Exam, the CI reported no “hand problems” and no upper extremity symptoms. On neurologic exam right sided motor and sensory findings were normal. 2) On the VA C&P Joints Exam, the CI reported a “good” response to his wrist brace which he used intermittently and occasionally. He noted pain and stiffness of the wrist without weakness or instability and that the condition did not affect the motion of the joint. The CI offered that it was challenging for him to write a lot because his hand starts to hurt. He further noted no difficulties with activities which would require good hand function: feeding, bathing, dressing, toileting and grooming. On ROM examination of the wrist, DF was reduced to 25 degrees and PF to 24 degrees with pain. No joint ankylosis was noted. 3) On the VA C&P spine exam, extensive motor strength evaluation of each individual muscle/muscle groups in the wrist and right hand were reported normal. Neurologic exam of the upper extremity was normal. 4) On the VA C&P scar exam, the CI reported the surgical scar to be non-painful and to provide no limitation to his employment or routine daily activities. On physical exam, the surgical scar on the right wrist was well healed, non-adherent to underlying structures, stable and not painful.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB and VA both rated the wrist condition 10% using different codes: the PEB coded 5099-5010, (Arthritis, due to trauma), citing painful motion IAW §4.59; the VA coded 5010-5215, (Wrist, limitation of motion) citing arthritis with painful motion. The Board unanimously agreed the preponderance of evidence in record supported a rating of 10%, but no higher, for painful motion IAW §4.40. The Board considered a rating under code 5215, (Wrist, limitation of motion). A 10% rating under this code requires dorsiflexion of less than 15 degrees or plantar flexion limited in line with the forearm. The Board unanimously agreed that the preponderance of evidence in record supported no rating under this code. The Board further considered a rating under code 5214, (Wrist, ankylosis), not supported by the evidence in record. The Board noted the possible injury to the median nerve which was reported to be resolved after the initial surgery. However, a second surgery was performed thereafter without mention of this nerve. The Board noted the OT evaluations for the MEB performed in April 2009, demonstrating severe decreased strength in the both hands, the right greater than the left suggesting a possible injury to the median nerve. The Board under took to determine if the hand condition was unfitting for this and subject to rating under code 8515, (Median nerve paralysis) IAW §4.124 (Neuralgia) or under hand muscle codes 5308 (Muscle Group VII) or 5309 (Muscle Group IV), IAW §4.56 (Muscle injury), for possible trauma incurred during the two hand operative procedures. The Board noted the severe reduction in grip strength for both the right and left hand. The record provided no elucidation of why strength was decreased bilaterally in the absence of defined left arm or hand injury. The Board opined that this might represent a new condition (ZB: cervical spine) outside the Board’s scope of review. The Board agreed that the difference in strength between the right and left hands was related to the increasing wrist pain reported for the right hand during grip and pinch testing. The Board agreed that the if the severe reduction in right hand grip strength reported on the April 2009 exam 3 months prior to separation were accurate, it would be reflected in significant clinical dysfunction of the hand. The Board noted the C&P exams, 3 months after separation, where the CI adjured no hand related difficulties and the extensive clinical examination of the individual muscles of the hand and digits which was normal. The Board agreed the preponderance of evidence in the record supported no significant dysfunction of the hand and, thus, gave higher probative valve to the VA C&P evaluation in its decision making. After discussion, the Board unanimously agreed the right hand condition was not unfitting per se and not subject to additional rating. The Board considered a rating under code 7804 (Scars, unstable or painful) IAW §4.118. The Board unanimously agreed that it could not recommend a rating under this code as the surgical scars were described as well-healed, stable, non-painful and non-adherent to underlying tissue. 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 wrist 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 right wrist condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 10%, coded 5099-5010 IAW VASRD §4.71a. 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 20140219, 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, AR20150007666 (PD201401245)

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01256

    Original file (PD2010-01256.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The NARSUM examiner documented only a two inch surgical scar and referred to the MEB ROMs charted above; but, the physical therapy (PT) examiner specifically tested motor strength with right shoulder flexion and noted a 4/5 loss. The Board considered that, although the probative ROM measurements were non-compensable; the residual occupational and daily activity impairments due to pain and the diminished strength in evidence adequately supported application of either VASRD §4.40 (functional...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00921

    Original file (PD 2012 00921.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board next considered the VA chosen musculoskeletal codes for both the wrist 5215 (limitation of motion of the wrist) rated 10% for painful limitation of motion and the elbow 5213 (impairment of supination and pronation) rated 30% for pain limited motion analogous to the 5010 code (arthritis due to trauma) which is consistent with the VA exam at that time. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), §4.45(f) (the joints) and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01972

    Original file (PD-2013-01972.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Informal PEB adjudicated “median nerve injury, left (dominant) upper extremity consisting primarily of sensory deficit,” and “chronic pain, left arm, s/p humerus fracture”as unfitting, rated 10% and 10% respectively,citing the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain for the arm, and the VA Schedule of Rating Disabilities (VASRD) for the nerve.The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. She was described as an “invaluable asset to any team.” The permanent profile listed...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00360

    Original file (PD2010-00360.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Left Wrist Condition. The Board therefore has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating. In the matter of the right knee pain, right ankle pain, and left knee pain conditions or any other medical conditions eligible for Board consideration, the Board unanimously agrees that it cannot recommend any findings of unfit for additional rating at separation.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01377

    Original file (PD-2013-01377.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 the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Knee501010%20041102Other x2 (Not In Scope)Other x10 RATING: 20%RATING: 30% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060106 (most proximate to date of separation (DOS)) Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Condition . RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00641

    Original file (PD-2014-00641.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 the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. She had what was diagnosed as right CTSmarked by pain and paresthesias with decreased manual dexterity along with problems of lifting and carrying, lack of stamina,and decreased strength.At the time of the VA examination, she was not employed.Temporally remote (more...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02564

    Original file (PD-2014-02564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEWNAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CASE: PD-2014-02564BRANCH OF SERVICE: ArmyBOARD DATE: 20141120 After surgery the fracture healed without malunion or deformity.X-rays obtained in January 2006, revealed the fracture to be “nearly healed with good anatomic alignment.” Post-operatively the CI developed pain in the wrist, weakness of grip and numbness on the back of his hand.On an occupationaltherapy (OT) evaluation on 24 March 2006, range-of-motion...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00654

    Original file (PD2009-00654.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), found unfit for continued Naval service, and separated at 20% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Ratings Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Navy and Department of Defense regulations. The Board also considered the conditions of Right Wrist Scar and Bronchiectasis and unanimously determined that neither condition was unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no disability rating is applied to...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01009

    Original file (PD2011-01009.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Informal Reconsideration PEB adjudicated the pes valgoplanus and secondary plantar fasciitis condition and the right wrist pain condition as unfitting, rated 20% and 0% respectively, with application of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and specified application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy respectively. RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows; and, that the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00492

    Original file (PD-2014-00492.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The pain rating was mild with occasional moderate pain.At the MEB examination dated 12 April 2004, the CI reported numbness of the left hand and elbow with pins and a staple in the left wrist, while the MEB medical exam (DD Form 2808) on 20 April 2004 noted a scar on the left elbow.A permanent U3 profile was issued on 15 April 2004 for the ulnar nerve transposition with limitations of no push-ups, carrying more than 30 pounds, or constructing an individual fighting position.At the VA...