Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2016

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain updated VA treatment records, conduct new orthopedic and psychiatric examinations, and adjudicate the TDIU claim.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development of his claims, including obtaining updated VA and private treatment records, as well as new examinations to assess the severity of his hemorrhoids, scars, and back disability.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining additional medical records.

The Veteran's claim for a temporary total rating based on surgical treatment necessitating convalescence following her spinal fusion surgery in January 2003 is denied as the claim was filed more than one year after the surgery and post-surgical convalescence ended.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine was denied as his disability did not meet the criteria for a higher evaluation.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for a lumbar spine disability and finds that new and material evidence has been submitted. The case is remanded for further development.

The Veteran's tinnitus had onset in service and the Board finds that it is at least as likely as not related to his military service. The other issues on appeal are addressed in the REMAND portion of the decision.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim of service connection for a back disability and granted it. The issue of entitlement to TDIU is also addressed on remand.

The Board has granted service connection for left ear hearing loss. The Veteran's foot and knee disabilities, as well as his lumbar spine disability, are not currently addressed in this decision.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities have resulted in the loss of use of both lower extremities, precluding locomotion without the aid of a left leg brace and right prosthetic leg or wheelchair. The Board has awarded specially adapted housing due to these conditions.

The Board has determined that the severance of service connection for a low back disability was improper and restored the original grant.

The Board found that the Veteran's left leg disability, to include her left knee, did not originate in service or within a year of service and is not otherwise etiologically related to her active service.

The Veteran's left shoulder disorder is not currently diagnosed. The Board finds that the evidence does not support service connection for her thoracolumbar spine, cervical spine, or right shoulder disorders as secondary to her service-connected plantar fasciitis.

The Veteran's claims for increased evaluations and service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional examinations, records review, and clarification of certain issues.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed in order to properly adjudicate the Veteran's claims, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and providing a new examination for his back disability and headaches. The issues of service connection for migraine headaches, PTSD, and TDIU are all being remanded.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to the RO so that he can have a video conference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at his local VA office.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims to reopen his service connection for low back, head, and neck disabilities due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine is being remanded due to insufficient examination findings and additional development is needed.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for low back disability and bilateral hearing loss disability, finding that new evidence did not establish a current disability or link it to service.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a low back disorder and bilateral hearing loss, as well as his claim for TDIU. The evidence did not support a nexus between the Veteran's current disabilities and his military service.