Citation Nr: 21021865 Decision Date: 04/14/21 Archive Date: 04/14/21 DOCKET NO. 17-25 326 DATE: April 14, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected patellofemoral pain syndrome of the left knee is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected patellofemoral pain syndrome of the right knee is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral shoulder pain is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from September 1990 to October 1999. 1. Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected patellofemoral pain syndrome of the left knee is remanded. 2. Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected patellofemoral pain syndrome of the right knee is remanded. The Veteran contends that his bilateral knee condition has worsened since his last VA examination in May 2015. See August 2019 Statement In Support of Claim. Additionally, the May 2015 examination is inadequate as it is not in compliance with the holdings set forth in Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26 (2017) and Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158, 168 (2016). As such, remand is required to afford the Veteran a contemporaneous examination to ascertain the current severity of his knee disabilities. 3. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral shoulder pain is remanded. The Veteran appeals the denial of service connection for bilateral shoulder pain. According to statements made by the Veteran, he asserts that the “knots” in his shoulder that causes his pain is due to being prescribed Accutane during service. See December 2020 Hearing Transcript; August 2019 Statement In Support of Claim. In support of his contention, the Veteran submitted an article from the Mayo Clinic which stated that the side effects for Isotretinoin include bone or joint pain. The Board finds that VA’s duty to obtain an opinion has been triggered and a medical examination is warranted. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Identify and obtain any pertinent, outstanding VA and private treatment records and associate them with the claims record. 2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for an examination to ascertain the current severity of his left and right knee disability. The examiner must test the Veteran’s active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. The examiner is asked to describe whether pain, weakness, fatigue and/or incoordination significantly limits functional ability during flares or repetitive use, and if so, the examiner must estimate range of motion during flares or repetitive use. The examiner should have the Veteran describe and/or demonstrate the extent of motion loss during flares or repetitive use and provide the extent of motion loss described in terms of degrees. If there is no pain and/or no limitation of function, such facts must be noted in the report. The examiner should comment as to whether there is any medical reason to accept or reject the Veteran’s description of reduced range of motion during flares or repetitive use. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms and functional impairments due to the disability alone and discuss the effect of the Veteran’s disability 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 and after repeated use over time, 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). 3. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to ascertain the nature and etiology of his bilateral shoulder condition. The examiner should opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that any diagnosed bilateral shoulder disability had its onset in or is otherwise etiologically related to service. The examiner should note that the Veteran asserts that his bilateral shoulder disability is related to the “knots” and/or “cysts” located on his shoulder, and not his rotator cuff shoulder strain. The examiner is specifically requested to discuss whether there is any medical reason to accept or reject the Veteran’s belie that his bilateral shoulder pain is due to being prescribed Accutane during service. In rendering this opinion, the examiner should consider the Mayo Clinic article submitted by the Veteran in August 17, 2015. A complete, well-reasoned rationale must be provided for any opinion offered. The examiner must reconcile any opinion with the lay statements and testimony of the Veteran. 4. Thereafter, readjudicate the remanded issues on appeal. If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. T. MAINELLI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Adeleke, Tomi The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.