Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) Board decisions

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his service, specifically his exposure to noise during combat in World War II.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's death.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus disabilities are so severe that they prevent him from obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to consider his claims for an increased evaluation for PTSD and TDIU.

The Board has reopened the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and granted it. The Veteran's tinnitus was also found to be incurred during active service.

The Board has remanded the case for a supplemental opinion to address findings in the service treatment records related to left ear pain and subsequent fever and swelling of the left parotid gland, as well as the Veteran's reports of having hearing loss at the time of a 1959 hearing test.

The Board finds in favor of the Veteran on all three issues: bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and a back disability. The evidence supports a finding that these conditions were incurred during service.

The Board has remanded the case due to the Veteran's incarceration, and a VA medical professional will be required to review his claims file and provide an opinion regarding whether his current hearing loss and tinnitus are related to service.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus were denied. The Board found that the current evaluations of 0 percent and 10 percent, respectively, are appropriate given the audiometric results.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no evidence of a nexus between his current conditions and his active service.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities require the regular aid and attendance of another person to perform activities of daily living and protect him from daily life hazards.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to his service, specifically his period of active duty for training in 1990. The evidence does not support a finding that these conditions were incurred or aggravated during this period.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that his current hearing loss is causally related to his military service.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to inadequate medical evidence regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are at least as likely as not related to his military service, including exposure to noise during active duty. As such, these conditions have been granted service connection.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, right shoulder pain, skin condition of the head and arms (including as due to herbicide exposure), hearing loss, and tinnitus were all denied. The Board found that there was no evidence of a current disability in service or within one year post-service, and that any current conditions are not related to service.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that there is no medical evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has granted service connection for hearing loss in the right ear and tinnitus, finding that there is sufficient evidence to support these claims based on continuity of symptoms since service.

The Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus are found to be incurred in service, but the claim for inner ear damage is denied as there is no evidence of current disability.

The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. The Board finds that a remand is necessary to obtain updated medical opinions regarding the etiology of these conditions.