Citation Nr: 18150656 Decision Date: 11/15/18 Archive Date: 11/15/18 DOCKET NO. 15-06 739 DATE: November 15, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hand dermatitis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service from May 2001 to March 2003. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2014 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at the RO in ¬¬¬July 2018. A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in September 2014 in connection with his claim. However, at the July 2018 hearing, the Veteran testified that he was currently taking an oral systemic steroid for the condition, which suggests that the disability may have worsened. VA’s General Counsel has indicated that, when a claimant asserts that the severity of a disability has increased since the most recent rating examination, an additional examination is appropriate. VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (April 7, 1995); see also Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994). Therefore, the Board finds that an additional VA examination is needed to ascertain the current severity and manifestations of his service-connected dermatitis. The Veteran also testified at the July 2018 hearing that he receives treatment for his skin disorder through VA and that such records show the prescription and use of oral medication for the dermatitis. However, the most recent VA medical records associated with the claims file are dated in September 2014 and do not document such a prescription. Therefore, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) should secure any outstanding VA treatment records. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should obtain any outstanding VA medical records, to include medical records dated since September 2014, and associate them with the claims file. 2. The AOJ should provide the Veteran with a notice letter in connection with his claim. The letter should advise him of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim, the division of responsibilities in obtaining the evidence, and how disability rating and effective dates are determined 3. After the above development has been completed, the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination to determine the severity and manifestation of his service-connected bilateral hand dermatitis. Any and all studies, tests, and evaluations deemed necessary by the examiner should be performed. The examiner is requested to review all pertinent records associated with the claims file. The examiner should note that the Veteran is competent to attest to matters of which he has first-hand knowledge, including observable symptomatology. If there is a medical basis to support or doubt the history provided by the appellant, the examiner should provide a fully reasoned explanation. The examiner should report all signs and symptoms necessary for rating the Veteran’s disability. In particular, he or she should specify the location and extent of the disability in terms of percentage of the body affected, percentage of exposed areas affected, and the frequency that systemic therapy, such as corticosteroids or immunosuppressive drugs, has been required during the past 12 months. The medications used to treat the disease should be identified and characterized as topical, corticosteroid, or immunosuppressive. With regard to any topical treatments used by the Veteran during the course of the relevant time period, the examiner should discuss whether any such medications are systemic therapies, in that they affected the body as a whole. A clear rationale for all opinions would be helpful and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. Because it is important “that each disability be viewed in relation to its history [,]” 38 C.F.R. § 4.1, copies of all pertinent records in the appellant’s claims file, or in the alternative, the claims file, must be made available to the examiner for review. 4. After completing these actions, the AOJ should conduct any other development as may be indicated by a response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs. J.W. ZISSIMOS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD B. Rideout-Davidson, Counsel