Neck / cervical spine Board decisions

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for cervical muscle spasm and chronic chest pain are not well grounded. The evidence does not establish a nexus between these conditions and his military service.

The veteran's claims for higher initial ratings and service connection were denied. The RO assigned the appropriate disability ratings based on the severity of his service-connected conditions, but did not grant any additional benefits.

The veteran's claims for service connection and increased ratings were denied. The Board found no new and material evidence to reopen the claim for psychiatric disability, denied service connection for residuals of a right ankle injury, denied increased ratings for traumatic arthritis of the cervical spine and bronchitis, and denied an increased rating for residuals of a fracture of the right wrist.

The RO granted service connection and assigned evaluations for various shoulder, cervical spine, lumbar spine, knee, and toe conditions. The appellant's claims were not well-grounded for residuals of head injury.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current cervical conditions, including sprain/strain, myofascitis, degenerative disc disease, and osteoarthritis, are related to a trauma suffered in an aircraft accident during active service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for increased evaluations of his service-connected disabilities have been denied. The left hip, cervical spine, and lumbosacral spine conditions are currently evaluated at non-compensable levels.

The Board found that the veteran's back and neck disorder is not related to his service, while his lung disorder was attributed to smoking rather than asbestos exposure. The claim for both conditions was denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection and higher evaluations for various disabilities, including lumbar, cervical, thoracic spine disorders, essential tremors of both hands, and patellofemoral pain syndrome in both knees. The appeals were based on a direct relationship to service without any presumption or secondary theory.

The veteran's PTSD is rated at 10 percent, and service connection for hypertension, irritable bowel syndrome, gastroesophageal reflux, cervical muscle strain, muscle tension headaches, and lumbar muscle strain are granted as secondary to his PTSD.

The Board found that the veteran's current cervical spine disability is not service-connected and denied his claims for increased evaluation.

The Board has granted increased evaluations for the veteran's headaches and whiplash injury to the cervical spine, with a 30 percent evaluation for headaches and a 20 percent evaluation for the cervical spine.

The Board denied service connection for cervical vertebrae conditions, including a chronic right cervical muscle strain. The decision was based on the lack of evidence linking these conditions to service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for secondary service connection for bilateral shoulder disability and an increased rating for cervical spine disability, finding that her claims were not well grounded.

The Board denied claims for service connection for cervical spine, thoracic spine, and shoulder disorders due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to the veteran's military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's chronic neck disability and hearing loss are not service-connected due to a lack of evidence showing a link between these conditions and his military service.

The Board denied service connection for a dental condition due to trauma, granted a 20% rating for cervical spine disorder, and denied a higher rating for lichen planus.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings for his cervical spine and low back disabilities were denied. His claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability was also addressed, but not resolved in this decision.

The veteran's appeal was dismissed because his Substantive Appeal did not contain any allegations of errors of fact or law regarding the June 1997 rating decision.

The veteran's claims for service connection and increased evaluations were denied as his conditions did not meet the criteria for a well-grounded claim, and the current ratings are appropriate based on the evidence of record.

The Board denied service connection for arthritis of the cervical and lumbar spine, but granted a 100% evaluation for PTSD effective January 12, 1998. The appellant's claim for an increased rating prior to that date was not fully addressed.