Back / lumbar spine Board decisions

The Veteran's service-connected low back disorder is rated at 40 percent effective November 27, 2009. The burn scars of the left thigh are not assigned a separate rating.

The Board found that the Veteran's arthritis of the lumbar and cervical spine is not shown to be causally related to an in-service injury, and such may not be presumed. As a result, service connection for these conditions was denied.

The Board is remanding the case for further development, including obtaining service records and Social Security Administration (SSA) records.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for low back disability was granted, with a 20 percent rating effective March 18, 2005.

The Board has remanded the claim for an increased rating of a low back disability due to insufficient notice and need for additional development.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including PTSD, did not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation prior to December 5, 2007. Effective from that date, the RO granted TDIU.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to inadequate examination report and need for an opinion regarding the relationship of the Veteran's diagnosed sacroiliitis to his reported in-service back injury.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current cervical and lumbar spine disabilities are not related to his service, and thus denied both claims.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have current bilateral hearing loss disability for VA compensation purposes and therefore, service connection for this condition is denied. The claims of service connection for a right shoulder disorder and a low back disorder are also denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's lumbar spine and left knee disabilities are related to her active service, with symptoms dating back to her time in the military.

The Veteran's claims of service connection for back and left ankle disabilities are being remanded due to the need for additional medical examinations.

The Board found that there was no evidence of a low back disability during service, and the Veteran's current low back pain is not shown to be related to service. The degenerative changes and disc disease of the lumbosacral spine were first diagnosed after service beyond the one-year presumptive period for chronic diseases.

The Veteran's claims for increased evaluations and service connection were denied. The Veteran's degenerative disc disease, onychomycosis of the great toenails, and lichen planus are not considered to be related to service or any incident therein. A productive cough was also not found to be incurred in service.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for coronary artery disease and lumbar spine spondylolisthesis were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under the applicable diagnostic codes.

The Board denied service connection for PTSD, a low back disorder other than partial lumbarization and spina bifida occulta at S1, and prostate cancer. The Veteran's personality disorder was not considered a disease within the meaning of legislation providing compensation.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim for service connection for hypertension. The Veteran's current left knee and low back disabilities are found to be related to his military service.

The Veteran's low back disability does not result in incapacitating episodes having a duration of at least four weeks but less than six weeks during the past twelve months or forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine less than 30 degrees. Therefore, his claim for an increased rating is denied.

The Board denied service connection for various chronic conditions, including shoulder, cervical spine, lumbar spine, knee, and foot disorders. The decision was based on the lack of evidence linking these conditions to service.

The Veteran's low back disability was not in a stabilized condition at the time of his discharge from inactive duty training in March 1989, and thus he is not entitled to a prestabilization rating.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining private treatment records and scheduling a VA examination to determine the impact of service-connected disabilities on employment.