Citation Nr: 18152091 Decision Date: 11/20/18 Archive Date: 11/20/18 DOCKET NO. 16-41 568 DATE: November 20, 2018 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for residuals of a left knee sprain is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for residuals of a right ankle fracture is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for fissure in ano, residual of a perianal abscess is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for a skin disability diagnosed as atopic dermatitis and recurrent herpes simplex is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy of the right upper extremity is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1984 to September 1998 with an additional five years, eleven months and twenty-eight days of active service. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2013 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio. A remand is necessary to ensure adequate examinations for all issues on appeal. The most recent VA examinations were conducted over five years ago in September 2013. Further, with regard to the knee and ankle claims, the reports do not comply with the requirements in Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158, 168 (2016). The examinations do not contain passive range of motion measurements or pain on weight-bearing testing. Regarding the Veteran’s fissure in ano, in his notice of disagreement, the Veteran implied that the examiantion conducted in September 2013 did not fully address his symptoms. Specifically he stated that his symptoms are constant, which is greater than that which was reported in the examination. Thus, a new examination is appropriate. Concerning the Veteran’s skin disability, his disability includes both dermatitis and herpes simplex. However, the examination conducted in September 2013 only addressed dermatitis. As such, a remand is necessary to address all skin disabilities on appeal. Finally, the Board finds issue with the September 2013 examination of his right upper extremity radiculopathy. Particularly, the examiner stated that the Veteran does not have peripheral neuropathy, but does have cervical radiculopathy. However, the examiner appears to have completed the peripheral nerve examination form based exclusively on peripheral neuropathy, which the Veteran does not have, and therefore, no symptoms were reported. While a spine examination conducted at the same time addressed some symptoms of radicular pain, it did not provide a full description of those symptoms as separate from a cervical spine disability. In his notice of disagreement, the Veteran asserts that his radiculopathy affects more than just his right upper extremity, but also radiates down his back and into his right leg. This was not discussed in sufficient detail in the most recent examination for the Board to fully address the claim. Thus, a new examination should be conducted. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Include in the claims file any outstanding VA medical evidence. 2. Invite the Veteran to submit any additional evidence in support of his claim. 3. Schedule an examination to determine the severity of right ankle and left knee disabilities. The examiner must test the Veteran’s active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. The examiner must also attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms and functional impairments due to his right ankle and left knee disabilities alone and discuss the effect of the Veteran’s right ankle and left knee disabilities on any occupational functioning and activities of daily living. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement, or an opinion regarding flare-ups, symptoms, or functional impairment without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). 4. Schedule an examination to determine the severity of service-connected right upper extremity cervical radiculopathy. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran’s disability under the rating criteria. The examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms and functional impairments due to cervical radiculopathy alone and discuss the effect of the Veteran’s cervical radiculopathy on any occupational functioning and activities of daily living. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement, or an opinion regarding flare-ups, symptoms, or functional impairment without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). 5. Schedule an examination to determine the severity of service-connected atopic dermatitis and recurrent herpes simplex. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran’s disability under the rating criteria. The examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, particularly of his recurrent herpes simplex. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms due to his service-connected skin disabilities and discuss the effect of the Veteran’s skin disabilities on any occupational functioning and activities of daily living. If it is not possible to provide an opinion regarding flare-ups or symptoms without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). (Continued on the next page)   6. Schedule an examination to determine the severity of service-connected fissure in ano. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the disability under the rating criteria. The examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups of his fissure in ano. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms due to his service-connected fissure in ano and discuss the effect of the Veteran’s rectal disability on any occupational functioning and activities of daily living. If it is not possible to provide an opinion regarding flare-ups or symptoms without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). CHRISTOPHER MCENTEE Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Pryce, Associate Counsel