Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02008
Original file (PD-2014-02008.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  CASE: PD-2014-02008
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20140828
SEPARATION DATE: 20050628


SUMMARY OF CASE: The available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty S PC/ E- 4 ( 62B/ Construction Equipment Repairman) medically separated for back pain . The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty, so he was issued a permanent L3/S3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The back condition, characterized as “ chronic low back pain , ” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40 -501 . The MEB also identified and forwarded one other condition ( anxiety disorder) to the PEB . The I nformal PEB adjudicated the back condition as unfitting, rated at 10 % . The remaining condition was determined to be not unfitting . The CI made no appeals and was medically separated .


CI CONTENTION: “Please consider all conditions, including the following mental health, brain injury, back injuries, neck injuries, hand injuries, knee injuries, ankle injuries.”


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 ratings for the unfitting back and anxiety condition are addressed below. The requested brain, neck, hand(s), knee(s) and ankle(s) conditions were not identified by the PEB, and thus are not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. 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 :

Service IPEB – Dated 20050620
 VA - (2.5 Mos. and 3.5 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic Low Back Pain… 5237 10% Low Back Strain with Lumbar Disc Disease; Bilateral Lower Extremity Radiculopathy 5243 10% 20050906
Anxiety Disorder Not Unfitting Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) 9411 NSC* 20051013
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 10 20050906
Rating: 10%
 Combined: 40%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 51207 . *VARD 20070323 awarded 10% rating for service connected PTSD.


ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Back Condition. The narrative summary (NARSUM) noted the CI described his low back pain (LBP) as insidious in onset, after carrying heavy boxes upstairs, in December 2001. Initial evaluation in July 2002 found [muscle] spasms and tenderness on the right paraspinous region. The CI was prescribed anti-inflammatory medications and physical therapy (PT). He showed some improvement that allowed for deployment to Iraq in April 2004, where he was able to perform his duty. A troop medical clinic entry dated 14 October 2004, noted the CI reported he re-injured his back on 10 October 2004. He noted the pain intensity remained constant all day long. He was assessed with LBP. Physical therapy (PT) entry on 1 December 2004, recorded range-of-motion (ROM) forward flexion, on three trials, had an average of 50 degrees. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) dated 2 December 2004, demonstrated normal alignment of the spine without evidence of degenerative joint disease. There was disk bulge at L4-5 without evidence of significant neural compromise, and disk bulge at L5-S1 that demonstrated mild left neural foraminal narrowing. Some arthritic changes were noted in the lower lumbar spine. The NARSUM the neurosurgeon determined the CI had nonsurgical pathology and noted the back condition was mostly muscular (consult not among records).

The profile prohibited lifting greater than 20 pounds; however, the CI could perform sit-ups, walk, swim, and bike for Army Physical Fitness Testing and could participate in unlimited walking, upper and lower body weight training. The MEB NARSUM, dated 11 April 2005 (approximately 2 months prior to separation), noted on physical examination, a slightly antalgic gait secondary to pain. There was no evidence of muscle atrophy or spine abnormalities. There was tenderness to palpation of the spinous processes. The examiner recorded flexion, “down to a length of 33 cm from the floor” (mildly reduced, or normal), normal motor strength and normal neurological examination. The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination on 6 September 2005, noted the CI had multiple episodes of back strain that resulted in the report of LBP with some pains into the legs bilaterally. Physical examination recorded a normal gait, normal appearing spine, with tenderness on palpation, no spasms and no neuromuscular deficits. ROM measured on flexion was 75 degrees. There was pain on flexion at 75 degrees; the examiner noted loss of motion with repetitive use secondary to pain.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the condition 10% for low back pain coded 5237 (lumbar strain), noted mildly restricted ROM. The VA rated 10% code 5243 (intervertebral disc disease and reduced ROM). A higher rating of 20% under code 5237 requires spasms producing abnormal gait, or abnormal curvature of the spine or forward flexion not greater than 60 degrees. The Board agreed there was pain on motion supporting the 10%. The Board noted the ROM that recorded forward flexion of 45-55 degrees was not consistent with the ROM at the VA and at the MEB and was several months prior to separation. All Board members agreed, the preponderance of evidence does not support the higher rating of 20% under ROM code. The Board considered rating under 5243; however, there was no evidence or ratable peripheral nerve impairment in this case, since no motor weakness was present and sensory symptoms had no functional implication. There was no evidence of incapacitating episodes for a higher rating under code 5243. There were no other applicable codes to consider. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the back pain condition.

Contended PEB Conditions. The Board’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB’s determination that the anxiety disorder 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 Board noted there were no available treatment records related to a mental health condition; however, one clinic entry indicated the CI was treated by a civilian provider and had been prescribed medication. All Board members agreed that evidence of the record reflected minimal mental health related symptoms. The CI noted on the MEB physical examination that he had frequent trouble sleeping, but did not have depression or excessive worry and no suicide attempts. The MEB examiner noted “anxiety attacks”, without elaboration. There was no evidence of visits to the emergency room for mental health issues, no report of suicidal or homicidal ideations, violence or legal issues. Although, the condition was profiled, the commander statement stated, the CI “was a good soldier, but physical condition creates a burden for others in his maintenance team and adversely impacts readiness.” The anxiety condition was reviewed by the action officer and considered by the Board. There was no performance based evidence from the record that any 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 contended condition and so no additional disability ratings are 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 chronic low back pain condition, and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. In the matter of the contended anxiety disorder condition, 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 recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20140502, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record










                 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX , AR20150008208 (PD201402008)

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 | CY2014 | PD-2014-01405

    Original file (PD-2014-01405.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    A neurosurgery consultation dated 14 April 2008, noted thata MRI dated 10 April 2008, noted there was mild broad-based disc bulging at L4/5 without nerve root involvement. The Board noted the CI was not evaluated for a MH condition at the VA until 2014. 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00268

    Original file (PD-2014-00268.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam LBP524310%Lumbar Spine Disc Herniation’s524320%20070105Other x 2 (Not In Scope)Other x 3 Combined: 10%Combined: 50%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20070104 ( most proximate to date of separation [DOS]). The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.The PEB rated the LBP condition 10% and the VA rated it 20%, both coded 5243(intervertebral disc syndrome). RECOMMENDATION : The Board,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02365

    Original file (PD-2014-02365.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Radiating Low Back Pain52430%Degenerative Disc Disease, Lumbar Spine524310%20070414Other x0 (Not in Scope)Other x2 (Not in Scope)20070414 Rating: 0%Rating: 10%*Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20070522(most proximate to date of separation) ANALYSIS SUMMARY :The Board notes the earliest VA evaluation was approximately 2 years after the date of separation. DoDI 6040.44 provides for consideration of post-separation...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02260

    Original file (PD-2013-02260.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The examiner also noted that the CI had a normal gait, no muscle spasm and pain rating was recorded as moderate / intermittentIAW the American Medical Association.The MEB’s history and physical examinationdocumenteddecreased ROM of the lumbar spine with tenderness to palpation and decreased sensation in the right lower extremity.The MEB NARSUM physical exam findings were summarized in the chart above.The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination (performed a month post separation),...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00686

    Original file (PD 2012 00686.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Chronic Low Back Pain due to Degenerative Disc Disease and Bertotolli’s Syndrome Condition. The remote from separation, VA exam in November 2006, documented slight pain-limited ROM and the VA continued their 10% rating based on that exam. The exams were about the same time prior to and after separation.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02323

    Original file (PD-2013-02323.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Cervical spine MRI on 20 January 2005 noted lower cervical spine disc herniation with spinal stenosis and general degenerative disc disease.As noted above, a note in the STR indicated “EMG/NCS-no evidence of radiculopathy.”Notes in the STR near the date of separation noted continued neck pain with intact ROM and normal strength and sensation.At the MEB examination on 27 May 2004, (approximately 5 months prior to separation)the CI reported neck pain. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01918

    Original file (PD-2013-01918.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of the PEB rating determinations compared to 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 CI had an L3 profile that recorded a back condition only and restricted all physical activities except...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02289

    Original file (PD-2013-02289.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The MEB only referred “chronic neck pain” and “chronic low back pain” to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The MEB physical examination noted decreased range-of-motion (ROM) of the cervical areas and tenderness with spine palpation.The narrative summary (NARSUM) dated 7 April 2004 noted the CI could not perform the duties of his MOS secondary to chronic low back and neck pain.A permanent profile U3/L3dated 12 May 2004 was issued for neck pain, CTS and a chronic lower back...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01434

    Original file (PD-2013-01434.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronic Low Back Pain Condition . The evidence documents that the CI did have an intervertebral disc syndrome that could be rated based on incapacitating episodes; however, the evidence did not contain any documented episodes of incapacitation that met the VASRD definition, “For purposes of evaluations under diagnostic code 5243, an incapacitating episode is a period of acute signs and symptoms due to intervertebral disc syndrome that requires bed rest prescribed by a physician and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00886

    Original file (PD-2014-00886.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) neurological examination noted that initially the CI had normal lumbar x-rays and was treated with physical therapy. At the VA C&P examinations reviewed, both on the same daya year after separation, the CI’s exam noted muscle spasm and TL ROM of flexion of 40 degrees with pain to 80 degrees and a combined ROM of 225 degreesand normal sensation at the neuro exam, whereas the general exam noted only “pain with motion” with decreased LLE sensation. At the...