Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02101
Original file (PD-2014-02101.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  CASE: PD-2014-02101
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20141022
SEPARATION DATE: 20071108


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty PV1/E-1 (11B10/Infantryman) medically separated for hammertoe deformity. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty. He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The hammertoe condition, characterized as “right foot pain with contractures toes 2-3-4-5, spasm toe #1, and metatarsalgia 2-3” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The Informal PEB adjudicated “hammertoe deformity right foot with hammering evident 2-5 toes” 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: “PLEASE CONSIDER ALL CONDITIONS”


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 hammertoe condition is addressed below; no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. Any condition 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 20071023
 VA* - Did not have Service Treatment Records (STR) for review
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Hammertoe Deformity Right Foot 5282 10% Hammertoes, Right Foot, with Great Toe Muscle Spasm and Metatarsalgia 5282 0% “Failed to Report”
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 3
Combined/Rating: 10%
 Combined: 0%
* Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 80902 (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. 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.

Hammertoe Deformity, Right Foot Condition. The CI developed right foot pain 12 weeks into basic training in January 2007. There was no acute injury and he was evaluated with plain film X-ray of the right foot (which were normal) and a bone scan. The bone scan performed on 22 January 2007 showed stress fracture of distal left and right femurs, left tibia medially and left mid-foot without stress changes of the right foot. He began exercises for stretching, walking but was not able to run to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test requirement. On 10 April 2007, the CI was evaluated by a podiatrist who noted contractures of right 2-3-4-5 toes with chronic arthralgia and pain. X-ray and nuclear medicine scans were normal and he was given orthotics with plantar metatarsal pad. Re-evaluation weeks later documented pain was down from 4-7/10 to only 2/10; but the CI continued with chronic right foot pain with contractions of the toes that did not resolve in spite of physical therapy efforts to stretch and rehabilitate. The narrative summary prepared one and a half months prior to separation noted that X-rays on 21 June 2007 of tibia and fibular were negative. Repeat bone scan performed on 28 June 2007 showed a normal exam with no increased activity. Electromyography was performed on the right foot and was normal; that ruled out a neurological cause of the contractures; however, the CI continued with efforts to improve in his running, but was unable to progress due to the right foot pain with metatarsalgia and contractures. The physical exam of the right foot revealed a normal ankle, skin and pulses. There were contractures of toes 2-5 with “upward drawing of the digits” and moderate to severe tenderness to palpation. The great toe turned in and down and was minimally tender to palpation.

The CI “failed to report” for the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam scheduled after his discharge from service and the VA did not have any service or private treatment records for review. He did present for a C&P exam performed 6 years after separation that resulted in a VA rating of 10% for his hammer toes condition effective 13 September 2013. The CI was given 30 days convalescence and treated with rest and pain management. Repeat X-rays of each foot and leg were normal on 6 March 2007.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB and VA both applied VASRD code 5282 (hammer toe), which is copied below for the reader’s convenience:

5282 Hammer toe:
All toes, unilateral without claw foot ................. 10
Single toes ............................................................ 0

The PEB granted a 10% evaluation (consisted with the highest rating possible under 5282) while the VA initially granted a 0% evaluation because the CI failed to report for the C&P exam and there were no service or private treatment records for the VA to review. The 0% rating was increased to 10% over 6 years after separation when the CI presented for a C&P examination. The evidence supports that the CI had hammer toe deformities of toes 2-5 on his right foot with an abnormal great toe also; which is appropriately rated at 10% as granted by the PEB. 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 hammer toe 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 hammer toe 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: 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 2014-02101, 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 , AR20150008210 (PD201402101)

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-2014-01943

    Original file (PD-2014-01943.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The knee and foot conditions, characterized as “internal derangement of the left knee” and “hammer toes,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.The MEB also identified and forwarded one other condition (hyperlipidemia), as medically acceptable.The Informal PEB adjudicated “tricompartment arthritis left knee”and “left digit 3 and 4 hammer toes, symptomatic” as unfitting, rated 0% and 0%, with likely application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA)...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00128

    Original file (PD2013 00128.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VA, in its rating decision of 7 October 2003, utilized code 5242, degenerative arthritis of the spine, as per the current VASRD rating guidelines in effect at that time.The VA rating decision dated 29 July 2003, 2 months proximate to the date of separation, rated the CI’s condition at 0%, based upon an examination that revealed neither painful nor limited motion. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02563

    Original file (PD-2013-02563.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Right Foot/Lower ExtremityCondition (Heel Spur, Plantar Fasciitis, Hammer Toe,Achilles and Gastroc-Soleus Tendinitis) .The service treatment record (STR) contains a routine exam entry from 1997 (same year as enlistment) documenting hallux valgus (bunion deformity of the big toe); and, a clinic note from the same year noting a 4-month history of bilateral foot pain. The PEB rated the right foot condition analogously under 5279 (metatarsalgia) which provides for a maximum rating of 10%, under...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01065

    Original file (PD2011-01065.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board evaluates DVA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness decisions and rating determinations for disability at the time of separation. Back Condition. Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554(a), I approve the enclosed recommendation of the Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) pertaining to the individual named in the subject line...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01894

    Original file (PD2012 01894.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CI CONTENTION : “Medical Board combined Right and Left conditions as one and left off pes planus from diagnostic evaluation. All members agreed, however, that separate ratings (unilateral or bilateral) under separate codes was not compliant with VASRD §4.14 (avoidance of pyramiding), which specifies that “the evaluation of the same manifestation under different diagnoses are to be avoided.” Specifically a separate compensable rating for pes planus, as contended by the CI and conferred by...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00925

    Original file (PD2010-00925.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Hammer Toe Deformities52820%Bilateral Pes Planus w/ Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis S/P Bilateral Hammer Toe Repair of 2 nd , 3 rd and 4 th Toes527610%20070103Moderate Flat FootCat II↓No Additional MEB/PEB Entries↓Thoracolumbar Strain; DDD L5-S1523720%20070103Right Shoulder Strain5299- 502410%20070103Left Shoulder Strain5299-502410%20070103GERD and Hiatal Hernia734610%20070103Tinnitus626010%200701030% x 2 / Not Service Connected x 120070103...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00728

    Original file (PD-2014-00728.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20031218 The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150010577 (PD201400728)I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) recommendation and record of proceedings...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01640

    Original file (PD-2013-01640.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Pain, Left Ankle0%Left Ankle Strain5299-528420%20051110+20050610recordsBunion, Right Foot5280---%Hallux Valgus, Right Great Toe52800%20051110Other x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 12 RATING: 0%RATING: 60% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20060501(most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) Chronic Pain, Left Ankle Condition . The records noted normal feet on the CI’s entry exam (see above) and right foot pain had onset...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01176

    Original file (PD2010-01176.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the chronic right foot pain due to Morton’s neuroma condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Although there were examination findings of hallux valgus and hammer toes (single toes) there were no symptoms or impairment attributed to these abnormalities that would warrant rating under VASRD codes 5280 or 5282, and, if rated using these codes, would not attain a minimum...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00342

    Original file (PD2012-00342.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (2) is limited to those conditions which were determined by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued military service; or, when requested by the CI, those condition(s) “identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB.” The Board determined that only the left foot hammer toe condition is within its purview in this case. The single unfitting condition was the painful, persistent left hammer toe condition after surgical correction. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C....