Osteoarthritis (degenerative arthritis) Board decisions

The VA denied an increased evaluation for the veteran's service-connected degenerative arthritis of the lumbosacral spine, currently rated at 20 percent.

The veteran's right ankle disorder has been reasonably shown to produce marked limited motion, but not ankylosis. The RO determined that a 20 percent disability rating was warranted for the residuals of a right ankle sprain with degenerative arthritis.

The Board has determined that the veteran's residuals of a gunshot wound to the right leg with fracture of the tibia and arthritis of the right ankle with limitation of motion warrant a 40 percent disability rating, while his osteoarthritis of the left knee warrants a 20 percent disability rating.

The veteran's right knee disability, characterized by persistent pain, instability, and arthritis, has resulted in a pronounced functional impairment warranting a 40 percent rating.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the veteran's claim for service connection for multiple disabilities of the spine, including degenerative disc disease, osteoarthritis, disc herniation, and sciatica. The Board also found that these conditions are causally related to service.

The veteran's claim for a permanent and total disability rating for pension purposes was denied because he failed to appear for VA examinations scheduled in December 1998 and April 2000, and there is no evidence of record showing that his disabilities render him permanently and totally disabled.

The Board has determined that the veteran's low back disability, which includes pronounced symptoms of intervertebral disc syndrome and degenerative arthritis, warrants a 20 percent evaluation.

The veteran's disabilities do not render her unable to care for her daily personal needs without assistance from others, or unable to protect herself from the hazards and dangers of daily living on a regular basis. The RO denied entitlement to special monthly pension by reason of being in need of regular aid and attendance or on account of being housebound.

The Board has remanded the case due to new legal requirements and the need for additional development of evidence.

The Board found that the veteran's hypertension and degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine were not incurred or aggravated by his military service.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for thoracic spine degenerative arthritis, right knee degenerative arthritis, and left knee degenerative arthritis. The issues of entitlement to a compensable rating for thoracic spine degenerative arthritis have been addressed.

The veteran's mallet finger deformity of the right index, ring, and little fingers is currently rated as 10 percent disabling. His postoperative residuals of a right knee injury are also rated at 10 percent since December 15, 1999. The appeals for service connection for cardiovascular disability, head injury, and arthritis have been denied.

The Board denied an increased evaluation for osteoarthritis of the left ankle, finding that it did not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent at any time during the appeal period.

The Board granted service connection for a left ankle strain secondary to the appellant's service-connected fractures of the left tibia and fibula. The claim for increased evaluations was denied, but the TDIU claim was granted.

The veteran's service-connected right thigh disability and PTSD are rated appropriately, with the right thigh receiving a 10% rating and PTSD receiving a 50% rating from May 21, 1991. The peptic ulcer disease is not addressed in this decision.

The veteran's appeal is for a higher rating for his service-connected right knee disability, which has been rated at 30 percent. The RO needs to obtain more recent medical records and schedule the veteran for an orthopedic evaluation to determine if he should be entitled to a higher rating.

The VA determined that the appellant's right knee disability, which includes arthritis and some instability, does not warrant a rating higher than 20 percent.

The Board dismissed the appellant's appeal due to a defective substantive appeal.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of the appeal prior to a decision being made.