Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01693
Original file (PD-2014-01693.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX   CASE : PD -20 1 4 - 01 693
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army   BOARD DATE: 201 40805
Separation Date: 20060519


SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (52D / Power Generator Equipment Repair Specialist) medically separated for chronic upper back pain and chronic right (dominant) shoulder pain. The conditions could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent U3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The upper back and shoulder pain condition, characterized as “right chronic shoulder pain, status post open reduction and chronic upper back pain secondary to T3 compression fracture , ” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The I nformal PEB adjudicated “chronic upper back pain and chronic right (dominant) shoulder pain” as unfitting, rated 10% and 10% respectively, citing criteria of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy for the shoulder. The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION : “Would have continued military service without these disabilities, it has been impossible to maintain employment in the civilian workforce since getting out of the service. Have chronic pain which leads to a decreased quality of life.”


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 upper back and right shoulder pain condition is addressed below; and, 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 IPEB – Dated 20060316
 VA - (3 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic Upper Back Pain 5235 10% Degenerative Joint Disease (DJD) Thoracic Spine* 5252*-5010 0% 20060828
DJD Cervical Spine* 5010-5242 0% 20060828
Chronic Right (dominant) Shoulder Pain 5099-5003 10% Healed Right Clavicular Fracture with DJD of the Right Shoulder 5203-5010 10% 20060828
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
 Other x2
Combined: 20%
 Combined: 20%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060828 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS])
* VARD 20080506 combined the DJD of the C-spine and T-spine coded as 5010-5242 and rated at 10%.


ANALYSIS SUMMARY : The Board acknowledges the sentiment expressed in the CI’s application regarding the significant impact that his service-incurred condition has had on his current earning ability and quality of life. It is a fact, however, that the Disability Evaluation System ( DES ) has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions resulting in medical separation. This role and authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) . The Board utilizes D VA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations; and, DoDI 6040.44 defines a 12 - month interval for special consideration to post-separation evidence. The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6044.40, however, resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the time of separation. Post-separation evidence therefore is probative only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the disability and fitness implications at the time of separation.

Chronic Upper Back Pain Condition . The CI was injured in an all-terrain vehicle in February 2004 and sustained injuries to his right shoulder and upper back. He was initially diagnosed with a muscle strain . His back pain continued and the battalion aid station doctor ordered a magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI ) , which showed a compression wedge fracture of T3 . The c hiropractor noted that the back pain worsened with most daily activities of living and was relieved with medication. The CI fell approximately 35 feet down a ravine while hiking in April and reinjured his back and neck. He was seen in p rimary c are and was noted to have pain in the right trapezius and mid thoracic area. The examiner diagnosed cervical strain and, referred him to a c hiropractor and gave him a temporary p rofile for 2 weeks with restrictions of no running, jumping arching, no lifting over 20 pounds and physical training. A thoracic spine MRI showed subtle anterior wedge deformities of T3 and T5 vertebral bodies, right para - cen t ral disc protrusion at T4-5, left para - cen t ral disc pr otrusion at T5-6 and mild multi- level degenerative disc changes. The CI was seen by n eurosurgery who noted that the CI was deployed on Morphine and Percocet and was able to perform his duties on these narcotics for pain control. The physical exam findings were normal strength in the upper and lower extremities and 1+ reflexes throughout. The examiner opined that there were no neurosurgical indications at that time. A repeat t horacic spine MRI showed a chronic anterior wedge compression fracture of T3 with mild exaggeration of thoracic kyphosis due to this anterior compression and T2-T3 anterior bridging osteophytes , signifying mild spondylosis. The CI was sent to physical therapy ( PT ) for a range-of-motion ( ROM ) exam for the MEB. The PT physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below . The Family Practice examiner documented that the CI reported upper back tenderness to palpation ( TTP ) and middle diffuse TT P, f orward bends with mild pain and rotation of upper back wa s painful. The physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below . The MEB n arrative s ummary (NARSUM) exam approximately 3.5 months prior to separation documented that the CI continued with chronic mechanical back pain , which was alleviated with a transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation ( TENS ) unit and was undergoing a MEB evaluation in neurosurgery for his back condition. This exam focused solely on the shoulder condition. The CI was given a permanent U3 p rofile for chronic right shoulder pain, chronic upper back pain (T3 compression fracture) . Based on the CI’s continued upper back pain, the p ain m anagement examiner administered a trigger point injection and administered a second trigger point injection in April . The pain management examiner ordered a TENS unit for pain control. The p ain m anagement examiner administered a thoracic block for possible facet mediated pain. The p ain m anagement examiner documented that the CI reported pain was aggravated by lying on his back, twisting and returning to upright after bending. The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam documented mid - line mid - back pain started gradually and was present on awakening and was made worse with sitting, with standing, stooping, bending and turning. The CI reported aching, sticking pain with physical activity and pressure on the back when he was recumbent. The functional impairment was a diminished ability to lift, carry or work above the head. The C&P physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below . A thoracic spine X -ray demonstrated mild to moderate degenerative narrowing of the intervertebral disc spaces and mild degenerative changes of the facets.

There was a single range - of - motion (ROM) evaluation in evidence, with documentation of additional ratable criteria, which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation; as summarized in the chart below.
Thoracolumbar ROM (Degrees)
PT for MEB 4 Mos. Pre-Sep
 VA C&P 3.5 Mos. Pre-Sep
Flexion (90⁰ Normal)
“full”
 90
Combined (240⁰)
240
Comment
 Slightly limited side-bending with mechanical limits No radiating pain on movement; No muscle; spasm; Non tender; neg. straight leg raise bilat.
§4.71a Rating
 0% 0%
invalid font number 31502
invalid font number 31502 The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB coded the invalid font number 31502 c invalid font number 31502 hronic invalid font number 31502 u invalid font number 31502 pper invalid font number 31502 b invalid font number 31502 ack invalid font number 31502 p invalid font number 31502 ain condition as 5235 invalid font number 31502 ( invalid font number 31502 v invalid font number 31502 ertebral fracture or dislocation invalid font number 31502 ) invalid font number 31502 and rated at invalid font number 31502 1 invalid font number 31502 0%. The VA invalid font number 31502 applied the combination code of invalid font number 31502 52 invalid font number 31502 4 invalid font number 31502 2 invalid font number 31502 ( invalid font number 31502 degenerative arthritis of the spine invalid font number 31502 ) invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 with 5010 invalid font number 31502 ( invalid font number 31502 a invalid font number 31502 rthritis due to trauma invalid font number 31502 ) invalid font number 31502 substantiated by X-ray findings invalid font number 31502 , for the DJD invalid font number 31502 t invalid font number 31502 horacic invalid font number 31502 s invalid font number 31502 pine condition invalid font number 31502 . The VARD invalid font number 31502 dated invalid font number 31502 6 May invalid font number 31502 2008 invalid font number 31502 , invalid font number 31502 combined the DJD of the C-spine and T-spine and rated invalid font number 31502 them invalid font number 31502 at 0%. invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 The next VAR invalid font number 31502 D invalid font number 31502 that considered those two conditions increased that rating to 10% effective the day after separation. The PEB’s 5235 code and the VA’s 5242 code are rated based on ROM measurement IAW t invalid font number 31502 he invalid font number 31502 g invalid font number 31502 eneral invalid font number 31502 r invalid font number 31502 ating invalid font number 31502 f invalid font number 31502 ormula for invalid font number 31502 d invalid font number 31502 iseases and invalid font number 31502 i invalid font number 31502 njuries of the invalid font number 31502 s invalid font number 31502 pine invalid font number 31502 . That formula also invalid font number 31502 considers the CI’s 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.” invalid font number 31502 Both invalid font number 31502 exams proximate to separation document non-compensable ROM measurement invalid font number 31502 s invalid font number 31502 of the thoracolumbar spine invalid font number 31502 . The service treatment records provide satisfactory evidence for invalid font number 31502 the application of VASRD §4.59 ( invalid font number 31502 pa invalid font number 31502 inful invalid font number 31502 m invalid font number 31502 otion invalid font number 31502 ) invalid font number 31502 which is consist invalid font number 31502 ent invalid font number 31502 with a 10% rating invalid font number 31502 . invalid font number 31502 The Board reviewed the 10% rating criteria invalid font number 31502 under the spine formula and agreed that the CI invalid font number 31502 also invalid font number 31502 met those criteria. invalid font number 31502 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 invalid font number 31502 c invalid font number 31502 hronic invalid font number 31502 u invalid font number 31502 pper invalid font number 31502 b invalid font number 31502 ack invalid font number 31502 p invalid font number 31502 ain condition.
 invalid font number 31502
Chronic Right (dominant) Shoulder Pain: The CI was injured in an all-terrain vehicle in February 2004 and sustained injuries to his right collar bone and shoulder. He was subsequently treated in a non-operative manner with a sling and ROM exercises for the following 8 months. This non - operative treatment resulted in a hypertrophic nonunion of the right clavicle. The CI underwent a n op en reduction internal fixation with autologous bone graft from the left tibia on 15 March 2005. The CI was followed by o rthopedics for post-operative follow-up and noted to have a malunion of the clavicle with constant pain. He underwent a right stellate ganglion block on 21 April 2005 for pain reduction. The right clavicle healed ; however the orthopedic hardware caused pain over the prominence and the hardware was removed on 7 July 2007 . The p ain clinic examiner documented severe incisional pain over the right shoulder scar and treated with a steroid injection into the right shoulder. The o rthopedist documented contin ued moderate pain with activity and directly over the fracture site with physical exam findings of tenderness across the acromion and proximal hum er us and focal tenderness over the mid third of the clavicle and incision. The examiner noted that the CI wanted to deploy and was able to do his job. The PT noted that the shoulder was stable and he was able to do his MOS and deploy. The CI was seen in p ain m anagement prior to deploying for pain medications due to the chronic clavicle and shoulder pain. The CI was sent to PT for a ROM exam for the MEB exam. The PT physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below . The MEB consultation exam approximately 3 months prior to separation documented that the CI had been given a P2 profile to allow him to deploy despite the fact that he continued to have chronic right shoulder pain, specifically with cross-arm abduction as well as overhead maneuvering. The CI was functionally impaired in that he was unable to provide maintenance and upkeep of generators as part of his MOS duties. The MEB consultation physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below. The MEB NARSUM exam , approximately 3 months prior to separation , offered no new evidence. The CI was given a permanent U3 p rofile for chronic right shoulder pain, chronic upper back pain (T3 compression fracture) . The C&P exam documented constant aching, sticking, pain that radiated from the right shoulder down to the arm el i cited by physical activity and resting on the right side. The CI had incapacitating episodes as often as tw o times per year for 21 days. The functional impairment was that he could not work with arms overhead for an extended length of time. The C&P physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below .

There were two 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 Shoulder ROM
 PT exam 4 Mos. Pre-Sep MEB 3 Mos. Pre-Sep VA C&P 3.50 Mo. Post-Sep
Flexion (0-180⁰)
 145 - 180
Abduction (0-180⁰)
 145 - 160
Comments
Right hand dominant
 Pos. painful motion Focal tenderness to palpation over distal clavicle; Pain exacerbated with cross-body adduction and overhead activity above 120 degrees focused at clavicle ; normal strength; stable shoulder Pos. painful motion; repetitive use-limited joint function by 10 degrees; no weakness, tenderness or guarding of movement
§4.71a Rating
 10% 10% 10%

invalid font number 31502 The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB coded the invalid font number 31502 c invalid font number 31502 hronic invalid font number 31502 r invalid font number 31502 ight invalid font number 31502 s invalid font number 31502 houlder invalid font number 31502 p invalid font number 31502 ain invalid font number 31502 condition invalid font number 31502 as 5099 analogous to 5003 invalid font number 31502 as invalid font number 31502 a invalid font number 31502 rthritis, degenerative (hypertrophic or osteoarthritis) and rated at 10% and applied the invalid font number 31502 USAPDA invalid font number 31502 pain policy. invalid font number 31502 The VA coded the invalid font number 31502 h invalid font number 31502 ealed invalid font number 31502 r invalid font number 31502 ight invalid font number 31502 c invalid font number 31502 lavicular invalid font number 31502 f invalid font number 31502 racture with DJD of the invalid font number 31502 r invalid font number 31502 ight invalid font number 31502 s invalid font number 31502 houlder condition as 5203 invalid font number 31502 ( invalid font number 31502 impairment of the invalid font number 31502 c invalid font number 31502 lavicle or scapula invalid font number 31502 due to m invalid font number 31502 alunion invalid font number 31502 ) invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 with 5010 invalid font number 31502 ( invalid font number 31502 a invalid font number 31502 rthritis due to trauma invalid font number 31502 ) invalid font number 31502 and rated at 10%. invalid font number 31502 All exams proximate to separation document pain limited motion with non-compensable ROM measurements invalid font number 31502 of the right shoulder invalid font number 31502 . VASRD §4.71a specifies for 5003 that “satisfactory evidence of painful motion constitutes limitation of motion and specifies application of a 10% rating “for each major joint or group of minor joints affected by limitation of motion invalid font number 31502 . invalid font number 31502 ” The Board considered assigning a rating for malunion of clavicle with arthritis due to trauma as did the VA; however, this would not result in a rating greater than 10% as invalid font number 31502 a invalid font number 31502 rthritis due to trauma is also rated under code 5003. The Board also determined that no alternate coding/rating schema would provide 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 c hronic r ight (dominant) s houlder p ain 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. As discussed above, PEB reliance on the USAPDA pain policy for rating the c hronic r ight (dominant) s houlder p ain condition was operant in this case and the condition was adjudicated independently of that policy by the Board. In the matter of the c hronic u pper b ack p ain condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. In the matter of the c hronic ri ght (dominant) s houlder p ain 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 : 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 20 140410 , w/atchs
Exhib it 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 , AR20150006239 (PD201401693)

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 01246

    Original file (PD2013 01246.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated “right, dominant, shoulder pain… ,” “right hip pain,” and “bilateral heel pain and right ankle pain” as unfitting, rated 10%, 0% and 0% (respectively), citing criteria of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Right Shoulder Pain…5099-500310%Right Shoulder Arthritis5010-520110%20091125Right Hip Pain…5099-50030%Right Hip Bursitis5024-525210%Bilateral Heel Pain and Right Ankle Pain…52840%Stress Fracture,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02524

    Original file (PD-2013-02524.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam approximately 6.5 months after separation documented that the CI had constant daily neck pain rated at 7/10, neck stiffness occurred with turning the neck to any side with radiation down both upper extremities with feelings of hand weakness during an acute exacerbation. invalid font number 31502 RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows; and, that the discharge with severance pay be...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01419

    Original file (PD-2013-01419.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pre-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Pain (Right Shoulder) w/Posterior Instability 5099-500310%Right Shoulder Posterior Instability s/p Reconstructive Surgery 520220%20040217Chronic LBP5299-523710%LBP5237Not Service Connected (NSC)20040217Other x 0Other x0 Combined: 20%Rating: 20%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20040518 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) ANALYSIS SUMMARY :IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board’s authority is limited to making...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01649

    Original file (PD2012 01649.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.For a rating recommendation IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board must apply the 2002 VASRD coding and rating standards for the spine. BOARD FINDINGS : 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 chronic mid and upper back pain condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00805

    Original file (PD2013 00805.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s charge with respect to the MH conditions referred for review that were determined to be not unfitting by the PEB is an assessment of the appropriateness of the PEB’s fitness adjudication. The MH condition was reviewed and considered by the Board . Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00749

    Original file (PD-2014-00749.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Separation Date: 20051117 Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Neck & Shoulder Pain due to Myofascial Pain Syndrome & C7 Facet Degeneration523710%Cervical Strain w/Myofascial Pain Syndrome5323-523710%20060228Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 2 Rating: 10%Combined Rating: 20%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060427 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) invalid font number 31502 Chronic Neck and Shoulder Pain Condition. The CI was evaluated by...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 01186

    Original file (PD 2013 01186.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Additionally, members agreed that the chronic low back pain and left shoulder pain conditions, as isolated conditions, would have rendered the CI incapable of continued service within his MOS and therefore each is separately unfitting and merits a separate rating. Physical Disability Board of Review Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual was separated by reason of permanent disability retirement effective the date of the original medical...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 01187

    Original file (PD 2013 01187.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Post Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Left Shoulder Pain5099-50030%Left Shoulder Pain, History of Dislocation5202-502410%Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x7 Rating: 0%Combined Rating: 40%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060921 (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 determinations. Chronic Left Shoulder Pain Condition . ...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01366

    Original file (PD-2013-01366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Left Shoulder Pain5099-500310%Residuals of Remote Left Shoulder Injury; S/P Reconstruction520120%20100420Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 520100420 Combined: 10%Combined: 20%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20100614 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) ANALYSIS SUMMARY :The Board notes the earliest VA evaluation was over 5 years after the date of separation. DoDI 6040.44 provides for consideration of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01982

    Original file (PD 2014 01982.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 VA 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. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment...