Sleep apnea- does the DBQ cover the "medically necessary/required" language?

[chibears3531]

Hey everybody! Long time lurker, first time poster.

My question is regarding the sleep apnea language that specifies that a prescription of a breathing assistance device is "medically necessary" for a 50% rating:

Assuming that a vet is already prescribed a CPAP/APAP by the VA, does the sleep apnea DBQ portion under 2B "IS CONTINUOUS MEDICATION REQUIRED FOR CONTROL OF A SLEEP DISORDER CONDITION?" fulfill that language requirement?

Edited December 6, 2018 by chibears3531

[Buck52]

you will need a nexus from a quailed Dr opine that your secondary is related to your OSA and give a good detail explanation as to why , brokensolider is correct  the medical journals are no help , this has to come from the horses mouth   A qualified sleep Dr  or a good MD.  your best bet is to get an IMO/IME

Thats unfortunate  but that's what most of us had to do.

The raters want to hear from the Dr's them selfs

writing up parts in a Medical Journel is what they call speculation and that's not acceptable.

Edited December 10, 2018 by Buck52

[brokensoldier244th]

The doctor is a already a doctor, unless they are a quack they a re not going to risk their medical licence making up an unsubstantiated diagnosis. If HE/she wants to cite journals he can, but you cant. He/she would have to say that the journals support the same thing found in your medicakl records 

[doc25]

18 hours ago, brokensoldier244th said:

The problem with journals is that they cover the problem generally, as related to the study participants. They won't aid a presumption of service connection or secondary service connection for 'you'. They help in getting you to a place where you can say "hey, this is whats happening to me, too...." but you still have to have a doctor or the C&P doc opine that YOUR SA is service connected or secondary connected to medicines or PTSD or whatever . 

Ok.

I think at the Regional office and DRO level medical literature won't matter. But, on appeal to the BVA, medical literature relevant to the symptoms and condition(s) has helped some, not all veterans; in their case.

You're absolutely correct about the nexus of opinion. It still must be in the evidence to meet all requirements of the caluza factors. 

 

[Berta]

As I have mentioned in the IMO criteria forum- it helps when an IMO/IME doctor bolsters the claim and their medical opinion with some sound Citations and/or excerpts from a good medical text.

I  might have sent some in my cover letter to Dr Bash when he did 2 IMOs for me- but as I recall he used excerpts from his own current medical literature. I did use a major cardio text for my AO IHD claim but I really didnt need it- had enough evidence already.

I hope the IMO you got covers all the bases in the  proper IMO format.

C & P docs use Google to find anything negative to deny a claim with- we can use it too, to support our claims,  but to me, it means FAR more in your behalf when an IMO doctor does that, as part of their IMO......

and VA might ,as someone said , completely disregard anything from the internet if you send it in.

 

 

 

[chibears3531]

15 minutes ago, Berta said:

As I have mentioned in the IMO criteria forum- it helps when an IMO/IME doctor bolsters the claim and their medical opinion with some sound Citations and/or excerpts from a good medical text.

 

 

 

I read a very informative post of yours at the top of IMO criteria forum and I had a question about doctor credentials- does the title of the medical professional come into play often during VA claims?

The reason I ask is because the IMO I have has come from a Family Nurse Practitioner. I just hope that the VA doesn't try to invalidate my IMO's credibility by using say the VA's staff neurologist, for example.

By the way I just want to say thanks to everyone in this thread. You all have been extremely helpful.

[brokensoldier244th]

If the FNP is saying what your diagnosis is already saying you should be fine