Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Nod, SOC and form 9 done - resulted in C&P

Rate this question


toomnyhats

Question

I am 60% for neurogenic bladder, 10% for tinnitus.  I'm a C3 Quad ASIA C due to a pre-existing condition of narrow cervical spinal canal.  First attempt for spine connection failed.  Requested De Novo Review..same results. Filed NOD and Form 9.  Then sent in a great IMO from a very reputable specialist.  This, along with a letter from my VA SCI physician seems to have triggered a C&P exam for neck and back.  

The exact services ordered were:  DBQ MUSC Neck (Cervical Spine)(1), DBQ MUSC Back (Thoracolumbar Spine)(1), DBQ Medical Opinion - MED: MUSC Back (Thoracolumbar Spine)(1), Med - Medical Records/Cfile Review - FILL FIRST (1), CPT 99205 - Level 5 E/M, new patient (60 minutes) (1), CPT 99090 - Analysis of clinical data stored in computer (Claim File) (1)

The physician seemed very thorough but throughout the exam/interview, she said several times that the VA had connected my cervical spine.  I wasn't quite sure how to take that.  Then I really looked at the services ordered above and noticed that they ordered a Medical opinion on my thoracolumbar spine but not on my cervical spine.

Is it a leap to think she might be right and the reason they didn't order a Medical opinion on the cervical spine is that they only needed the exam (ROM measurements, function, etc) for assigning ratings?

Any opinions greatly appreciated!

 

Edited by toomnyhats

100% P&T Effective Date 11/15/2015

10/30/1990   0% hematoma-abdominal wall with numbness and dysesthesia  

11/30/2015   60% Neurogenic bladder, 10% Tinnitus  

11/15/2015   20%  degenerative arthritis, spinal stenosis, and incomplete paraplegia due to spinal cord injury C5-6 from ruptured disc, s/p cervical

       Secondaries:  100% loss of use of the lower extremities, 30% radiculopathy - left upper extremity, 70%  loss of use of the right upper extremity

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 2
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

2 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

I dont think anyone can answer this without access to your CFile at this time. The RO may have enough info to SC your cervical spine, but needs info on the Thoracolumbar and a medical opinion. If the Examiner gave a neg report on that, you may not get SC on it, but you can still get an IMO/IME to contradict a negative opinion. When your Ebenefits acct shows that your in prep for notification, it will be too late to submit any more info, so dont wait if you dont already have an IMO on the NEXUS for what they want opinions on.

CPT 99090 is just review of records, so they do want a thorough check done by the examiner regarding your medical records.

CPT 99205 is A comprehensive history; A comprehensive examination; Medical decision making of high complexity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Thanks pwrslm!  I was wondering what the CPT codes were.  Being a C3 quad ASIA C, makes the cervical neck issue the biggie.  That is what was most addressed in my VA docs letter along with my IMO.  Both agreed that it was more likely than not related to service.  The IMO didn't get submitted until after the form 9 so that obviously triggered another review and subsequent C&P.  The doc said at least 3 times that the VA had already connected my cervical neck which might explain why they didn't ask for a medical opinion on it (since they have two already).  If we can connect cervical spine...secondaries will cascade explosively given all the surgeries and complications I've had.

toomnyhats

100% P&T Effective Date 11/15/2015

10/30/1990   0% hematoma-abdominal wall with numbness and dysesthesia  

11/30/2015   60% Neurogenic bladder, 10% Tinnitus  

11/15/2015   20%  degenerative arthritis, spinal stenosis, and incomplete paraplegia due to spinal cord injury C5-6 from ruptured disc, s/p cervical

       Secondaries:  100% loss of use of the lower extremities, 30% radiculopathy - left upper extremity, 70%  loss of use of the right upper extremity

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • kidva earned a badge
      First Post
    • kidva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Lebro earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • spazbototto earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Paul Gretza earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Our picks

    • These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 0 replies
    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use