Prepare For Bva Hearing

[paulcolrain]

2004 i was released from service. same year i claimed low back and bilateral hip strain. i had a c+p exam and doc said (diagnosed ) i had bilateral hip strain and lumbar strain. 2005 i was denied both the reason given was , no service treatment records could be found at all for my time in service if service treatment records are later found my claims will be re-open. i dint appeal this at the time i just waited for them to find the records.

december 2009 the VA found my records and granted me 10% for lumbar strain but, did nothing about my hips. 6 months later i sent a NOD stating that this is a claim that proceeded a denial because of service treatment records and because the records were later found then all my claims should have been re-open. they agreed but said we still are denying you for hips because your service treatment records didnt change our opinion about your hips. nothing in your record states anything about hips.. i got a copy of my c-file and yes there it was,,, service treatment records for my hips in fact in service doctors also stated that i had bilateral hip strain BUT said it existed prior to service.

i submitted this paper and they gave me a c+p exam. the doc stated nothing is wrong with my hips and that i had an existing history for a left hip diagnoses. during this time i was being seen at the VAMC and receiving treatment for my hips and lower back and radiculopathy. in fact , just 1 week after this c+p exam a vamc report shows my evaluation for my hips and range of motion to be with pain and a diagnoses of bilaterl hip strain. again i get denied because no doctor said it was do to service. then in 2011 i sent a primary care letter stating that i my bilateral hip pain could very well be related to service because of multiple rigors of life during service such as running and PT. Again this wasnt good enough, they stated i needed new evidence to re-open my claim and the doctor letter wasnt good enough because he didnt do a eval even though he was my primary also his letter didnt cite anything from my service records. i then got another letter from him after he read a few reports during service and he sent a new letter stating that he wishes to ammend the letter he already sent,,, it is now clear that the rigors of active duty are more likely than not created the issues with my current hip problems and stated the ortho reports from my service treatment records. so, i have a lot of records that rebut all the ro problems but they still deny and now i have a BVA hearing in D.C. on the 2nd week of may...

can anyone ask me some questions so that i can prepare for this hearing ,,,, questions that they would ask or some problems that you see i might face...

1) Injury in service, 2)injury now. 3) Nexus or IMO.

My 1 is (pain in hips and lower back during and after Physical Fitness Training

My 2 is (treatment records and diagnosis of bilateral hip pain on movement diagnosis hip strain.

My 3 is (service treatment records sating pain on movement diagnoses of hip strain. Also Dr. letter saying that the rigors of Physical Fitness during service such as running marching (multiple non-specific traumas to hips and back) more likely than not due to his service because of treatment records start with service and state pain with PT hips and back profile needed…

Edited March 20, 2015 by paulcolrain

[paulcolrain]

i have a new fear.. though i believe that physical training in service is what created the injury. the muscles the ligaments in my hips got injured because of numuris non- specific traumas to my hips/

i was always relying on continuity of symptomology. 1)inservice diagnose 2) post service diagnose.

now with this walker the bva is deciding this :

If there is no evidence of a chronic condition during service or an applicable presumptive period, then a showing of continuity of symptomatology after service may serve as an alternative method of establishing a service connection claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b) (2014). Continuity of symptomatology may be established if a claimant can demonstrate (1) that a condition was noted during service; (2) evidence of post- service continuity of the same symptomatology and (3) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of a nexus between the present disability and the post-service symptomatology. Evidence of a chronic condition must be medical, unless it relates to a condition to which lay observation is competent. If service connection is established by continuity of symptomatology, there must be medical evidence that relates a current condition to that symptomatology. Continuity of symptomatology applies only to those conditions explicitly recognized as chronic. 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) (2014); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

[paulcolrain]

this is a great article for me i think it shows nexus plus it backs up my primary care doctor saying activity as a solider contributed.........

Epidemiology of injuries associated with physical training among young men in the army. JONES, BRUCE H.; COWAN, DAVID N.; TOMLISON, J. PITT; ROBINSON, JOHN R.; POLLY, DAVID W.; FRYKMAN, PETER N.

Abstract

JONES, B. H., D. N. COWAN, J. P. TOMLINSON, J. R. ROBINSON, D. W. POLLY, and P. N. FRYKMAN. Epidemiology of injuries associated with physical training among young men in the army. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 197-203, 1993. It is widely acknowledged that musculoskeletal injuries occur as a result of vigorous physical activity and exercise, but little quantitative documentation exists on the incidence of or risk factors for these injuries. This study was conducted to assess the incidence, types, and risk factors for training-related injuries among young men undergoing Army infantry basic training. Prior to training we evaluated 303 men (median age 19 yr), utilizing questionnaires and measurements of physical fitness. Subjects were followed over 12 wk of training. Physical training was documented on a daily basis, and injuries were ascertained by review of medical records for every trainee. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses of the data. Cumulative incidence of subjects with one or more lower extremity training related injury was 37% (80% of all injuries). The most common injuries were muscle strains, sprains, and overuse knee conditions. A number of risk factors were identified, including: older age, smoking, previous injury (sprained ankles), low levels of previous occupational and physical activity, low frequency of running before entry into the Army, flexibility (both high and low), low physical fitness on entry, and unit training (high running mileage).

©1993The American College of Sports Medicine

[GLW]

I suggest you consider a VA lawyer. You may be surprised what a good one will do with those notes. I was.

[FormerMember]

A nexus mentions you, your injury in the service and it's relationship to your injury now. An abstract such as the one above, if it doesn't list you specifically, is useless. It merely describes what might happen and what happened to some other Vets.

Also, sorry to say that unless you are pursuing Agent Orange presumptive claims, you cannot achieve continuity of chronicity using 3.303(b). Walker v. Shinseki struck that one down. You must use 3.303(a) instead.Big difference. If you are not as well-versed on this as you appear, a VA attorney may be a really good idea. You don't want to screw this up.

[paulcolrain]

thank you ASK_NOD . this is why im airing out my thoughts so that i can get the criticism. it will help me a lot im sure.

[paulcolrain]

i posted the way the bva sees walker so that i can share my thoughts on the fact i have continuity of symptoms but for what i reade the bva and the va doesnt care unless the issue is listed in the list of chronic diseases. this is a horrible situation for vets. its like , if the vet had a back spasm in service and actually blew out a vertibrea but in service doc gave them asprin and profiled bed rest but no mri was done..( in service non wil ever be done ) then if it states that later 5 years veteran gets problems without arthritis showing on his xray he will be denied for chronicit but maybe he can still get direct anyway it would simply because pain in back isnt said as a chronic disease listed///// my personal non legal view is because of veterans getting ex-poser to herbiceds then created this walker case to shut down the claims.... ,, Who came up with this list and how did it became the only legal list ?????? to me thats a great question the SCOUSA should take on... just on merit to make sure the list creator wasnt bias.

Edited March 25, 2015 by paulcolrain