PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him so helpless as to need regular aid and attendance or permanently and substantially confined to his immediate premises, thus SMC based on aid and attendance or housebound status is denied.

The Veteran's appeal was denied for increased ratings for PTSD and coronary artery disease. The TDIU claim is also pending.

The Veteran's PTSD is granted as service-connected, with no specific exposure basis provided and no rating assigned.

The Veteran requested to withdraw his appeal seeking a disability rating greater than 70 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder. The Board dismissed the appeal as a result.

The Board has decided that an effective date of February 5, 1996 for the grant of service connection for PTSD is granted. The issue of a rating in excess of 30 percent for PTSD is remanded.

The Veteran's PTSD, left shoulder tenosynovitis, right shoulder tenosynovitis, lumbosacral strain, and diverticulitis have been rated at their maximum allowable levels. The Veteran’s right hand dermatitis has not met the criteria for a compensable rating.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional evidence and examination regarding the Veteran's psychiatric disorders, including PTSD.

The Veteran's claim for reimbursement of medical expenses received from Randolph County Emergency Squad was denied because the claim was not submitted within the required 90-day period after the emergency treatment.

The Veteran's initial claim for a higher rating for PTSD with MDD was granted, and he is now receiving a 70 percent evaluation.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD was granted with an effective date of January 25, 2013. The decision also remanded the issues regarding increased evaluation for PTSD and TDIU.

The Veteran's claims for increased PTSD rating and TDIU prior to March 27, 2012 are being remanded due to lack of compliance with previous remand directives and the need for a new examination.

The Board denied service connection for PTSD as there was no credible evidence of an in-service stressor event, and the Veteran's descriptions were found to be not credible.

The Board has remanded the cases for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and arranging for orthopedic and psychiatric examinations to assess the current severity of the Veteran's left knee disability and PTSD. The readjudication should consider whether a temporary total rating is required following any surgery and address potential separate compensable ratings.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for PTSD was denied as the February 1994 rating decision denying service connection for a chronic acquired psychiatric disorder is final, and there is no evidence of an expressed or implied intent to file a claim prior to May 23, 2011.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus type II, renal artery stenosis, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (heart disease), and PTSD are denied. The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for lumbosacral strain, radiculopathy of the left lower extremity, and radiculopathy of the right lower extremity are remanded. The Veteran's claim for TDIU is also remanded.

The Veteran's claim of service connection for tinnitus has been reopened and granted. The initial evaluation for PTSD is increased to 70 percent, effective February 21, 2012. The Veteran also received a grant of TDIU.

The Board has remanded the cases for further development and examination, including obtaining Social Security Administration records and scheduling VA examinations to assess the severity of the Veteran's right hand injury and PTSD.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a psychiatric disability related to service and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to incomplete records and further examination, as well as a formal TDIU application.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's PTSD aggravates his OSA. Additional evidence and a new examination are needed.