Ryguy

Back in March, I applied for an increase for Pes Planus with Plantar Fascititis, Bilateral Feet. I was already rated 30 percent for the last 8 years. My claim was processed under "Fully Developed Claims Program.. My letter states: The evaluation of my current condition is continued at 30 percent disabling. We have assiged a 30 percent evaluation for your pes planus with plantar fascitiis, bilateral feet based on, Pain on manipulation,, accentuated, Pain on use, accentuated. Additionaal symptoms include: Inward bowing of the tendo achillis, Pain on manipulation of the feet, Pain on use of the feet- Weight bearing line over medial to great toe. A higher evaluation of 50 percent is not warranted for acquired flat foot unless the evidence shows bilateral involvement with pronounced symptoms. My question is, should i ask for "Indward bowling of the tendo achillis" secondary to pes planus with plantar fascitis, Bilateral Feet? Or just leave it alone, I'm just a little confused as to what more pronounced symptoms do they want. I can barely walk" Any help will be appreciated.

Thanks to all the HADIT Elders and members for all of their knowledge. I have been dealing with a service connection denial since January 2007. In June 2015 the BVA Granted service connection for my upper back and neck. My file was forwarded to my local Regional Office for a Rating Decision. The same day that my employer terminated me (last week), a decision was made on my claim. Although I haven't got the rating decision, my VSO representative could see I was granted 20 percent, and its being retro active to the January 2007, she did state it needed approval due to the amount of the retro, but I should receive the information within 8-10 days. Once again thanks to everyone who assisted along with long journey!!

Ok, i was able to log in. but it doesn't tell you any information after the file has been sent back to the local VARO. Maybe the 1800 number can see stuff that I cannot see. Thanks much for the tip tho. It was much appreciated..

How accurate is Ebenefits? I have a claim that i've been fighting since 2007, and finally the BVA granted to the service connection on June 19, 2015. Then my file was forwarded to the Chicago VARO, I called the 1-800 number today for VA, and was told that my claim was completed on July 14, 2015, and that I would receive notice of the decision within 30 days. When i look on Ebenefits, I have my same rating and my AB8 letter is the same, and all of my current disaiblities are the same previously rated. Is Ebenefits accurate or should this have been from July 14, 2015, if i was getting a rating on the service connection or any retro pay? Just a little anxious here, can someone shed some light. Check your appeal status site is down until Septermber 30, 2015

wow, did they ever say why it took 3 years? also was this recently that it took 3 years, thats scary, i've litterally just lost all of my excitement aftering hearing this!!

Thanks Pete on my letter it states that this is an appeal from the local VARO's decision from March 2008 and April 2009

ohhh wow. I keep reading that a lot of people have problems with the retro. I didn't think i'd have a problem when my letter from the BVA clearly states "This case is before the BVA on appeal from March 2008 and April 2009 ratings by VARO in Chicago? Thanks a lot Pete for the insight

So I've been fighting the va since March, 2008 trying to get upper back and neck service connection, and finally today I got notification from BVA that the ORDER: Service Connection for a cervical spine disability is granted, subject to the laws and regulations governing the payment of monetary benefits. The first page stated that my records are being returned to the Department of Veteran Affairs office having jurifidiction over this matter. My question is: Are the records being reviewed for a rating? or would I have to have another examination in order to get a rating? I just had a c&p exam for a remand in March of 2015. Someone please give me some insight on this, as i'm a little confused.

Broncovet, please help me understand this , I was just awarded 400.00 retro last week (estimate) dollars from a rating I was awarded from in March, 2015. This rating took me from 70 to 80 percent. So are you saying if I got 20 percent on the BVA's appeal rating, they would back-pay me from March 2008 (the date I originally filed the claim to March 2015, when my last increase was given? Thanks for helping me figure this out!!!

I checked my mail today, and low and behold THE BOARD OF VETERAN APPEALS has come through for me!!!! I am currently service connected for lumbosacral disability, but was trying to get service connection for upper back and neck (cervical spine). It says ORDERS: Service connection for cervical spine disability is granted, subject to the laws and regulations governing the payment of monetary benefits. My question is this, this claim goes back to 2008, just the other day I was granted 20 percent for bilateral chronic ankle sprain, which increased my rating from 70% to 80%. If my new percentage for "cervical spine disability" doesn't increase my rating to 90%-100%, am I still qualified for retro pay? It says my file was forwarded back to the VA office having jurisdiction over this matter., I'm assuming this is where i'll get the rating, am i correct? THANKS TO EVERYONE WHO HELPED ME!!!

Gastone I just tried googling past years claims appeals but I've never came up with anything. I would have a large lump sum because this appeal dates back to 2007, and that's over 8 years. dr bash is just a name you used ? Or is this a real physician? I may have to go this route

So I had a c&p exam in January and the rater needed clarification from the Physician Assistant . So I guess today the PA wrote in the notes that spinal stenosis occurs more often in ages of 50 years of age or older per the Mayo Clinic and in younger people such as myself it's more often a genetic issue. But when I go to mayo climics website it says one of the major causes of spinal stenosis is car accidents which is what I was In . What's the best way for me to intercept this misinformation the pa has given the rater ?? I'm in a AMC remand for cervical spine issues by the way, so if I don't like the Varo decision I can still take this back to the Bva

Thanks Gastone, so basically it's my right to be there ?

Ohhh wow , congrats on secondary , this makes me feela little hopeful with my situation

So here's the short of my story. I am service connected for lower back issues, but my appeal for upper back/neck issues was remanded back to my local varo. I had a c&p exam on Jan 9, 2015 with a physician assistant, she addressed all the issues in her report, which basically said I never complained about upper back and neck issues until 4+ years after the accident, the examiner DIDN'T meet the request of the Bva of stating whether this upper back/neck issue is secondary to my lower back issues. Two weeks ago i received a c&p exam appt letter stating I need another exam, once I spoke to compensation and pension and my va rep. I was told this appt is one that I'm not needed at, and that this was an administrative appt. for opinion/clarification only in regards to my claim and the veteran isn't needed for this. Also compensation and pension said this letter was sent to me in error Has anyone ever heard of this ??

Navy04, could you tell me or direct me to a link that explains what I would need to do right now to change this to secondary/aggravation. My veteran service representative is so hard to get ahold of, and I think my clock is ticking before this gets in the hands of the veteran service rater. Also can I even do this as secondary while i'm in the middle of a Remand that was sent back to the VA Regional Office

Berta, it does say for direct service connection, . I'll research a physician for a spine evaluation right now. Can i switch it from direct service connection to secondary/aggravation? And i have xrays from 2003 from where i was gonna go to a chiropractor, that the examiner didn't even take into consideration, which were one year later after the military. So with an IMO, does the DBQ also have to be filled out? or just a letter?

Yes, i have a battle buddy statement on file from someone who is still in the military, and they were at the hospital with me when the injury occured

These are the results from my C and P Exam I had on Saturday. Any ideas, I was sent back to the local VARO, from a Remand, and this is the C and P Examination requested by the Veterans Law Judge. I'm assuming I will just get denied again from the way this is reading, any thoughts or ideas will be appreciated. I was praying for secondary or aggravation disability because my neck problems are real!! Here goes my exam..... Medical Opinion Disability Benefits Questionnaire Name of patient/Veteran: Indicate method used to obtain medical information to complete this document: [ ] Review of available records (without in-person or video telehealth examination) using the Acceptable Clinical Evidence (ACE) process because the existing medical evidence provided sufficient information on which to prepare the DBQ and such an examination will likely provide no additional relevant evidence. [ ] Review of available records in conjunction with a telephone interview with the Veteran (without in-person or telehealth examination) using the ACE process because the existing medical evidence supplemented with a telephone interview provided sufficient information on which to prepare the DBQ and such an examination would likely provide no additional relevant evidence. [ ] Examination via approved video telehealth [X] In-person examination Evidence review --------------- Was the Veteran's VA claims file reviewed? Yes If yes, list any records that were reviewed but were not included in the Veteran's VA claims file: VA TREATMENT RECORDS VISTA WEB VBMS MEDICAL OPINION SUMMARY ----------------------- RESTATEMENT OF REQUESTED OPINION: a. Opinion from general remarks: BASED ON THEW EVALUATION OF THE VETERAN AND THE REVIEW OF THE MEDICAL HISTORY, THE EXAMINER MUST EXPRESS AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER IT AS AT LEAST AS LIKELY AS NOT THAT THE VETERAN HAS ANY CURRENT CERVICAL SPINE DISABILITY THAT IS DUE TO THE MARCH 2001 MVA OR ANY OTHER INCIDENT OF SERVICE. THIS INCLUDES WHETHER THE VETERAN'S CURRENT NECK DISABILITY HAD IT'S ONSET DURING SRVICE AND /OR WHETHER IT IS LIKELY OR NOT THAT THE VETERAN'S CURRENT DEGENERATIVE ARTHRITIS OF THE CERVICAL SPINE/ IVD SYNDROME IS A PROGRESSION OF THE VETERAN'S REPORTS THAT HIS NECK PAIN BEGAN AT E TIME OF THE MARCH 2001 MVA. b. Indicate type of exam for which opinion has been requested: CERVICAL SPINE TYPE OF MEDICAL OPINION PROVIDED: [ MEDICAL OPINION FOR DIRECT SERVICE CONNECTION ] b. The condition claimed was less likely than not (less than 50% probability) incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event or illness. c. Rationale: ALL OF THIS VETERAN'S STRs AS WELL AS VA TREATMENT RECORDS WERE REVIEWED. UNFORTUNATELY, STRs ARE SILENT FOR A COMPLAINT OF NECK PAIN IN SERVICE BY THIS VETERAN. IT WAS NOT UNTIL A PROGRESS NOTE WRITTEN BY ATTENDING PHYSICIAN IN ATLANTA VA IS NECK PAIN MENTIONED. PROGRESS NOTE 8/2/2006: "6 MONTHS OF NECK PAIN". XRAYS PERFORMED AT THAT TIME WERE READ AS NORMAL CONFIDENTIAL Page 32 of 161 REASON FOR XRAY NOTED IN XRAY REQUEST: "2 WEEKS OF NECK PAIN" THE ETIOLOGY OF THIS VETERAN'S CURRENT CONDITION CANNOT BE DETERMINED IN A COMPENSATION AND PENSION EXAM. REGARDING STATEMENT OF DR SCHEID 12/26/07 STATING VETERAN'S CONDITION IS "SERVICE CONNECTED", THIS IS STRICTLY HIS OPINION WITHOUT BASIS, SINCE HIS PROGRESS NOTE OF 8/26/06 STATES: VETERAN COMPLAINS OF NECK PAIN OF SIX MONTHS DURATION. IT IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR A PCP TO TAKE A VETERAN'S DESCRIPTION OF AN INJURY OR ILNESS AND USE THE TERMS "SERVICE CONNECTED" WITHOUT IT ACTUALLY BEING SERVICE CONNECTED. AS TO DR GUTIERREZ NOTE AT HINES VA DATED 2/2011: NOTE STATES: "1.Continues with this SC condition. On robaxin and tramadol/naproxen. Seems all issue started after MVA when he was in the service. More likely than not that this is sequelae of injury. I referred him to appeal decision by C&P Board since they have access to all files and records." AGAIN,THIS IS A CASE OF A PCP USING THE TERM "SERVICE CONNECTED" WHEN IN FACT THE CONDITION IS NOT YET SERVICE CONNECTED. DR GUTIERREZ ALSO NOTES THAT C&P HAS ACCESS TO ALL FILES AND RECORDS AND IMPLIED THAT HE, HIMSELF, DOES NOT.HENCE,THEY WERE NOT REVIEWED BY HIM. VETERAN WAS SEPERATED FROM SERVICE IN JULY 2001 AND MADE NO MENTION UNTIL AUGUST 2006 OVER 5 YEARS LATER OF ANY NECK PAIN. THERE IS NO NEXUS FOR SERVICE CONNECTION IN THIS EXAMINER'S OPINION. WHICH IS THE SAME OPINION REACHED ON PREVIOUS OCCASIONS REGARDING VETERAN'S NECK COMPLAINTS. ************************************************************************* /es/ JOANNE H PA LATKO PA-C ORTHO Signed: 01/10/2015 12:30 Date/Time: 10 Jan 2015 @ 0900 Note Title: C&P ORTHO SPINE Location: EDWARD J. HINES JR. HOSPITAL Signed By: LATKO,JOANNE H PA CONFIDENTIAL Page 33 of 161 Co-signed By: LATKO,JOANNE H PA Date/Time Signed: 10 Jan 2015 @ 1227 Note LOCAL TITLE: C&P ORTHO SPINE STANDARD TITLE: ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY C & P EXAMINATION CONSULT DATE OF NOTE: JAN 10, 2015@09:00 ENTRY DATE: JAN 10, 2015@12:27:44 AUTHOR: LATKO,JOANNE H PA EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED Neck (Cervical Spine) Conditions Disability Benefits Questionnaire Name of patient/Veteran: Indicate method used to obtain medical information to complete this document: [ ] Review of available records (without in-person or video telehealth examination) using the Acceptable Clinical Evidence (ACE) process because the existing medical evidence provided sufficient information on which to prepare the DBQ and such an examination will likely provide no additional relevant evidence. [ ] Review of available records in conjunction with a telephone interview with the Veteran (without in-person or telehealth examination) using the ACE process because the existing medical evidence supplemented with a telephone interview provided sufficient information on which to prepare the DBQ and such an examination would likely provide no additional relevant evidence. [ ] Examination via approved video telehealth [X] In-person examination Evidence review --------------- Was the Veteran's VA claims file (hard copy paper C-file) reviewed? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, list any records that were reviewed but were not included in the Veteran's VA claims file: VISTA WEB ATLANTA VA TREATMENT RECORDS HINES VA TREATMENT RECORDS VBMS CONFIDENTIAL Page 34 of 161 If no, check all records reviewed: [ ] Military service treatment records [ ] Military service personnel records [ ] Military enlistment examination [ ] Military separation examination [ ] Military post-deployment questionnaire [ ] Department of Defense Form 214 Separation Documents [ ] Veterans Health Administration medical records (VA treatment records) [ ] Civilian medical records [ ] Interviews with collateral witnesses (family and others who have known the Veteran before and after military service) [ ] No records were reviewed [ ] Other: 1. Diagnosis ------------ Does the Veteran now have or has he/she ever been diagnosed with a cervical spine (neck) condition? [X] Yes [ ] No [ ] Ankylosing spondylitis [ ] Cervical strain [ ] Degenerative arthritis of the spine [X] Intervertebral disc syndrome [ ] Segmental instability [ ] Spinal fusion [X] Spinal stenosis [ ] Spondylolisthesis [ ] Vertebral dislocation [ ] Vertebral fracture [X] Other Diagnosis Diagnosis #1: CHRONIC CERVICAL STRAIN Date of diagnosis: 2012 Diagnosis #2: NECK PAIN PER VA TREATMENT RECORDS Date of diagnosis: 8/2/2006 Diagnosis #3: SPINAL STENOSIS Date of diagnosis: 2012 2. Medical history ------------------ a. Describe the history (including onset and course) of the Veteran's cervical spine (neck) condition (brief summary): VETERAN GIVES HISTORY OF BEING INVOLVRD IN A MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT IN MARCH OF 2001 JUST PRIOR TO BEING DISCHARGED. HE WAS TAKEN TO THE ED AND TREATED FOR BACK PAIN. VETERAN STATES HE NEVER SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT HIS NECK HURT, CONSIDERING EVERYTHING TO BE HIS "BACK". VETERAN STATES NECK CONFIDENTIAL Page 35 of 161 PAIN BECAME BOTHERSOME ABOUT 1-2 YEARS AFTER SEPERATION WITH PAIN AND STIFFNESS. HE NOTED DIFFICULTY GETTING OUT OF BED AND RAISING HIS OFF OF THE PILLOW. CURRENTLY VETERAN IS BEING TRATED AT HINES VA FOR NECK AND BACK PAIN. HE WAS SEEN RECENTLY IN HINES ED FOR HIS NECK BECAUSE HIS HOME MEDICATIONS WERE NOT HOLDING HIM. HE HAS TAKEN A LEAVE OF ABSENCE FROM HIS CUSTOMER SERVICE POSITION ABOUT 65 MOS AGO AND DOEWS NOT ANTICIPATE RETURNING TO WORK. VETERAN FEELS THAT HIS NECK CONDITION WAS EXACERBATED BY HIS WORK AS A COOK IN SERVICE, LIFTING HEAVY POTS AND PANS. VETERAN DESCRIBES OCCASIONAL "ELECTRICAL SHORT" TYPE OF PAIN. HE ALSO NOTES NUMBNESS AND TINGLING DOWN HIS RIGHT ARM WITH TINGLING IN HIS RIGHT THUMB, ALING WITH SHOOTING PAIN WITH SPASM IN HIS NECK. VETERAN SELT TREATS WITH ICE PACKS AND OTHER MODALITIES TO INCREASE HIS COMFORT LEVEL. b. Dominant hand: [ ] Right [X] Left [ ] Ambidextrous c. Does the Veteran report that flare-ups impact the function of the cervical spine (neck)? [ ] Yes [X] No d. Does the Veteran report having any functional loss or functional impairment of the cervical spine (neck) (regardless of repetitive use)? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, document the Veteran's description of functional loss or functional impairment in his or her own words: VETERAN NOTES THAT AT TIMES HIS NECK PAIN IS SEVERE ENOUGH TO PREVENT HIM FROM COOKING. HE LIVES CLOSE BY TO HIS SSISTER AND HER FAMILY AND AT THESE TIMES THEY ARE ABLE TO ASSIST HIM. 3. Range of motion (ROM) and functional limitations --------------------------------------------------- a. Initial range of motion [ ] All Normal [X] Abnormal or outside of normal range [ ] Unable to test (please explain) [ ] Not indicated (please explain) Forward Flexion (0-45): 0 to 20 degrees Extension (0-45): 0 to 20 degrees Right Lateral Flexion (0-45): 0 to 20 degrees Left Lateral Flexion (0-45): 0 to 20 degrees Right Lateral Rotation (0-80): 0 to 50 degrees Left Lateral Rotation (0-80): 0 to 60 degrees CONFIDENTIAL Page 36 of 161 If abnormal, does the range of motion itself contribute to a functional loss? [X] Yes, (please explain) [ ] No If yes, please explain: DIFFICULTY DRIVING AN AUTO AS HE HAS DIFFICULTY TURNING HIS NECK TO SEE BEHIND AND ALONG SIDE OF HIM. Description of pain (select best response): Pain noted on examination and causes functional loss If noted on examination, which ROM exhibited pain (select all that apply)? Forward flexion, Extension, Right lateral flexion, Left lateral flexion, Right lateral rotation, Left lateral rotation Is there evidence of pain with weight bearing? [ ] Yes [X] No Is there objective evidence of localized tenderness or pain on palpation of the joint or associated soft tissue of the cervical spine (neck)? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, describe including location, severity and relationship to condition(s): SPINAL AND PARASPINAL TENDERNESS ON PALPATION WORSE IN RIGHT PARASPINAL RE b. Observed repetitive use Is the Veteran able to perform repetitive use testing with at least three repetitions? [ ] Yes [X] No If no, please provide reason: TOO PAINFUL c. Repeated use over time Is the Veteran being examined immediately after repetitive use over time? [ ] Yes [X] No If the examination is not being cond ucted immediately after repetitive use over time: [ ] The examination supports the Veteran?s statements describing functional loss with repetitive use over time. [ ] The examination contradicts the Veteran?s statements describing functional loss with repetitive use over time. Please explain. [X] The examination neither supports nor contradicts the Veteran?s statements describing functional loss with repetitive use over time. CONFIDENTIAL Page 37 of 161 Does pain, weakness, fatigability or incoordination significantly limit functional ability with repeated use over a period of time? [ ] Yes [ ] No [X] Unable to say w/o mere speculation If unable to say w/o mere speculation, please explain: UNABLE TO PERFORM REPETITIVE MOTION TESTING TODAY d. Flare-ups Is the examination being conducted during a flare-up? [ ] Yes [X] No If no, does the Veteran report flare-ups? [ ] Yes [X] No If the examination is not being conducted during a flare-up: [ ] The examination supports the Veteran?s statements describing functional loss during flare-ups. [ ] The examination contradicts the Veteran?s statements describing functional loss during flare-ups. Please explain. [X] The examination neither supports nor contradicts the Veteran?s statements describing functional loss during flare-ups. Does pain, weakness, fatigability or incoordination significantly limit functional ability with flare-ups? [ ] Yes [ ] No [X] Unable to say w/o mere speculation If unable to say w/o mere speculation, please explain: VETERAN DOES NOT DESCRIBE FLARE UPS e. Guarding and muscle spasm Does the Veteran have localized tenderness, guarding, or muscle spasm of the cervical spine? [X] Yes [ ] No Muscle spasm [ ] None [ ] Resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour [X] Not resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour [ ] Unable to evaluate, describe below: Localized tenderness [ ] None [ ] Resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour [X] Not resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour [ ] Unable to evaluate, describe below: Guarding [ ] None [ ] Resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour [X] Not resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour CONFIDENTIAL Page 38 of 161 [ ] Unable to evaluate, describe below: f. Additional factors contributing to disability In addition to those addressed above, are there additional contributing factors of disability? Please select all that apply and describe: Less movement than normal due to ankylosis, adhesions, etc., Weakened movement due to muscle or peripheral nerve injury, etc. Please describe: LESS MOVEMENT/SLOW MOVEMENT DUE TO PAIN 4. Muscle strength testing -------------------------- a. Rate strength according to the following scale: 0/5 No muscle movement 1/5 Palpable or visible muscle contraction, but no joint movement 2/5 Active movement with gravity eliminated 3/5 Active movement against gravity 4/5 Active movement against some resistance 5/5 Normal strength Elbow flexion: Right: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Left: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Elbow extension Right: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Left: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Wrist flexion: Right: [ ] 5/5 [X] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Left: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Wrist extension: Right: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Left: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Finger Flexion: Right: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Left: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Finger Abduction Right: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 Left: [X] 5/5 [ ] 4/5 [ ] 3/5 [ ] 2/5 [ ] 1/5 [ ] 0/5 b. Does the Veteran have muscle atrophy? [ ] Yes [X] No 5. Reflex exam CONFIDENTIAL Page 39 of 161 -------------- Rate deep tendon reflexes (DTRs) according to the following scale: 0 Absent 1+ Hypoactive 2+ Normal 3+ Hyperactive without clonus 4+ Hyperactive with clonus Biceps: Right: [ ] 0 [ ] 1+ [X] 2+ [ ] 3+ [ ] 4+ Left: [ ] 0 [ ] 1+ [X] 2+ [ ] 3+ [ ] 4+ Triceps: Right: [ ] 0 [ ] 1+ [X] 2+ [ ] 3+ [ ] 4+ Left: [ ] 0 [ ] 1+ [X] 2+ [ ] 3+ [ ] 4+ Brachioradialis: Right: [ ] 0 [ ] 1+ [X] 2+ [ ] 3+ [ ] 4+ Left: [ ] 0 [ ] 1+ [X] 2+ [ ] 3+ [ ] 4+ 6. Sensory exam --------------- Provide results for sensation to light touch (dermatomes) testing: Shoulder area (C5): Right: [ ] Normal [X] Decreased [ ] Absent Left: [X] Normal [ ] Decreased [ ] Absent Inner/outer forearm (C6/T1): Right: [ ] Normal [X] Decreased [ ] Absent Left: [X] Normal [ ] Decreased [ ] Absent Hand/fingers (C6-8): Right: [ ] Normal [X] Decreased [ ] Absent Left: [X] Normal [ ] Decreased [ ] Absent 7. Radiculopathy ----------------- Does the Veteran have radicular pain or any other signs or symptoms due to radiculopathy? [X] Yes [ ] No a. Indicate location and severity of symptoms (check all that apply): Constant pain (may be excruciating at times) Right upper extremity: [X] None [ ] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe Left upper extremity: [X] None [ ] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe Intermittent pain (usually dull) Right upper extremity: [ ] None [ ] Mild [X] Moderate [ ] CONFIDENTIAL Page 40 of 161 Severe Left upper extremity: [ ] None [X] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe Paresthesias and/or dysesthesias Right upper extremity: [ ] None [X] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe Left upper extremity: [ ] None [X] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe Numbness Right upper extremity: [X] None [ ] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe Left upper extremity: [X] None [ ] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe b. Does the Veteran have any other signs or symptoms of radiculopathy? [ ] Yes [X] No c. Indicate nerve roots involved: (check all that apply) No response provided. d. Indicate severity of radiculopathy and side affected: Right: [ ] Not affected [X] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe Left: [ ] Not affected [X] Mild [ ] Moderate [ ] Severe 8. Ankylosis ------------ Is there ankylosis of the spine? [ ] Yes [X] No 9. Other neurologic abnormalities --------------------------------- Does the Veteran have any other neurologic abnormalities related to a cervical spine (neck) condition (such as bowel or bladder problems due to cervical myelopathy)? [ ] Yes [X] No 10. Intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) and episodes requiring bed rest ----------------------------------------------------------------------- a. Does the Veteran have IVDS of the cervical spine? [X] Yes [ ] No b. If yes to question 10a above, has the Veteran had any episodes of acute signs and symptoms due to IVDS that required bed rest prescribed by a physician and treatment by a physician in the past 12 months? [ ] Yes [X] No 11. Assistive devices --------------------- CONFIDENTIAL Page 41 of 161 a. Does the Veteran use any assistive device(s) as a normal mode of locomotion, although occasional locomotion by other methods may be possible? [X] Yes [ ] No Assistive Device: Frequency of use: ----------------- ----------------- [X] Cane(s) [ ] Occasional [X] Regular [ ] Constant [X] Walker [X] Occasional [ ] Regular [ ] Constant b. If the Veteran uses any assistive devices, specify the condition and identify the assistive device used for each condition: USES CANE/WALKER FOR STABILITY 12. Remaining effective function of the extremities ---------------------------------------------------- Due to a cervical spine (neck) condition, is there functional impairment of an extremity such that no effective function remains other than that which would be equally well served by an amputation with prosthesis? (Functions of the upper extremity include grasping, manipulation, etc.; functions of the lower extremity include balance and propulsion, etc.) [ ] Yes, functioning is so diminished that amputation with prosthesis would equally serve the Veteran. [X] No 13. Other pertinent physical findings, complications, conditions, signs, symptoms and scars ----------------------------------------------------------------------- a. Does the Veteran have any other pertinent physical findings, complications, conditions, signs or symptoms related to any conditions listed in the Diagnosis Section above? [ ] Yes [X] No b. Does the Veteran have any scars (surgical or otherwise) related to any conditions or to the treatment of any conditions listed in the Diagnosis Section above? [ ] Yes [X] No 14. Diagnostic testing ---------------------- a. Have imaging studies of the cervical spine been performed and are the results available? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, is arthritis (degenerative joint disease) documented? [X] Yes [ ] No b. Does the Veteran have a vertebral fracture with loss of 50 percent or more of height? [ ] Yes [X] No CONFIDENTIAL Page 42 of 161 c. Are there any other significant diagnostic test findings and/or results? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, provide type of test or procedure, date and results (brief summary): EMG CERVICAL 2/13/11 Conclusion: There is electrophysiologic evidence of right ulnar neuropathy at the elbow based on the nerve conduction study alone. Given the limited nature of the study (without EMG examination), unable to futher localize. MRI CERVICAL SPINE 12/2014 Impression: Straightening of the usual cervical lordosis with very mild kyphosis at C4-5 level. C4-5: Central disc protrusion indents cord with moderate central stenosis. C5-6: R paramedian and central extrusion with downward extension indents cord with mild to moderate central stenosis. No abnormal enhancement in cervical or thoracic central spinal canal. T7-8:R paramedian disc protrusion and L paramedian small disc extrusion with mild central stenosis. XRAY CERVICAL SPINE 2006: NORMAL 15. Functional impact ---------------------- Does the Veteran's cervical spine (neck) condition impact on his or her ability to work? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, describe the impact of each of the Veteran's cervical spine CONFIDENTIAL Page 43 of 161 (neck) conditions, providing one or more examples: MANUAL LABOR WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR THIS VETERAN 16. Remarks, if any: -------------------- VA FORM 21-2705 REQUESTED DBQ BACK, HOWEVER BODY OF REQUEST NOTES CERVICAL SPINE CONDITION. DBQ CHANGED TO NECK (CERVICAL SPINE) Signed By: MELENDY,KAREN L

Im emailing the.ombudsman as we speak

Also Berta, the 2008 and 2011 examinaion was done by the sale doctor im scheduled to see on Jan. 13, is that quitr weird?

Also with the bva ombudsman, would they intercept my c and p examination since this isnt what they are actually requesting, and is it too late to ask for this condition to be aggravated or secondary to the lumbar issues, im service.connected with also

And yes this is my remand

When i look the physician up online, he is a general surgeon and internal medicine physician ( his speciality is thoracic surgery) I have the VFW as my representative. I will handle this asap on Monday. Thanks so much Ms. Berta and Buck.