We will be submitting comments to the VA
about their proposed changes for Dental and Oral Conditions on your behalf,
just as we did for the Female Reproductive System and The Eyes. Please comment
on this post or contact us through our website and let us know your thoughts. All
comments must be received by September 5th. We’ll then compile all of
your comments in a final report and submit it to the VA.
The VA is required to fully consider every
comment that is submitted before they publish the finalized changes to these
conditions. Because of this, this is a wonderful opportunity for you to get
your voice heard by the people actually making the decisions. Please share your
comments with us and help us change the system to make it more fair for
yourself and all veterans. We can actually make a difference.
The following are the proposed changes to
the ratings for Dental and Oral Conditions. Almost everything has been changed
in one way or another, so I’ll discuss each in order. The indented bits are the
codes as they are now. I’ll then discuss the proposed changes after. If you
click on the code number, it will take you to the discussion of that code on
our site which includes additional definitions and anatomical images.
The VA’s first change is to add a few
explanatory notes to the beginning of this section.
Some dental and oral conditions require
that they be diagnosed via “imaging studies”. The first note specifies that
“imaging studies” means tests like X-rays, CT scans, MRIs, PETs (positron
emission tomography), radionuclide bone scans, and ultrasonographies. While
these tests are specifically listed, the note also states that these are not
the only acceptable tests, just the most common. Any test that can clearly and
fully provide enough data to diagnose the condition and its severity is
acceptable, but proof of these test must be included in the medical evidence in
order for the condition to be fully ratable.
That’s it for the notes. Now on to the
conditions.
____________________________________________________________________________
Code 9900: Osteomyelitis or
osteoradionecrosis of the mandible or maxilla is rated under code 5000, osteomyelitis.
-Proposed- Code 9900: Osteomyelitis,
osteoradionecrosis, or osteonecrosis (a.k.a. “ONJ”) of the
mandible or maxilla is rated under code 5000, osteomyelitis.
The only change to
this code is to add osteonecrosis as a condition that is rated here in addition
to osteomyelitis and osteoradionecrosis. Osteonecrosis of the jaw (a.k.a. ONJ)
is a condition where the gum recedes and exposes the jaw bone (maxilla or
mandible). This decreases the blood flow to the bone, which in turn causes the
bone to weaken and deteriorate. Just as the other two conditions under this
code, it will also be rated as osteomyelitis under code 5000.
____________________________________________________________________________
Code 9901: If the entire mandible is
missing or is completely non-functional, then it is rated 100%.
This code has been
completely ignored in the published changes, so we assume that it is staying
exactly the same, but we can’t be sure. The proposed changes of other sections
haven’t ever simply ignored codes like this. If a code didn’t change, it was
simply listed without changes. In this section, however, this code (and a few
others) are not listed or discussed at all. It’s almost like they never
existed, but they do. Thus, we can’t be sure if they are just staying the same
or have been removed. They aren’t listed as being removed like a few other
codes, so ultimately, we are simply flummoxed. We have no clue what is
happening to these codes, if anything. We will definitely address this lack of
clarity in the comments we submit. For now, however, we think the most logical
assumption is that it isn’t changing at all.
____________________________________________________________________________
Code 9902: If about half of the
mandible is missing and the jaw is unable to move or is limited in its
movement, then it is rated 50%. If the jaw motion is not affected, then it is
rated 30%.
This code is expanded quite a bit in order
to better rate the varying degrees of disability that occur when any amount of
the mandible is missing, not just half, and in instances where the loss can and
can’t be replaced by a prosthesis. Currently, there are two separate codes
(9906 and 9907) that rate any loss of the ramus (the back part of the
mandible), but since the ramus is a part of the mandible, having separate codes
for it doesn’t really make sense. Thus, the VA proposes to remove the two ramus
codes and instead combine all ratings for the entire mandible under just this
one code.
Additionally, the VA recognizes that loss
of the mandible affects many different aspects of the mouth, including the
tongue, the ability to chew, and the ability to swallow, and can cause
significant disfigurement of the face. Because of this, the VA has added higher
ratings than currently allowed to better cover the significant disability that
comes with this condition. Disfigurement can, of course, be rated in addition
to a rating under this code.
The new code 9902 is as follows:
-Proposed- Code 9902: Any partial loss of the mandible, including
the ramus, is rated under this code.
If at least half
or more of the mandible is missing, it is rated 70% if it interferes with the
ability to chew and cannot be replaced by a prosthesis, 50% if it interferes
with the ability to chew but can be replaced by a prosthesis, 40% if it does
not interfere with the ability to chew and cannot be replaced by a prosthesis,
and 30% if it does not interfere with the ability to chew and can be replaced
by a prosthesis.
If less than half
of the mandible is missing, it is rated 70% if it interferes with the ability
to chew and cannot be replaced by a prosthesis, 50% if it interferes with the
ability to chew but can be replaced by a prosthesis, 20% if it does not
interfere with the ability to chew but cannot be replaced by a prosthesis, and
10% if it does not interfere with the ability to chew and can be replaced by a
prosthesis.
___________________________________________________________________________
Code 9903: If the mandible has been
broken and did not heal back together, then it is rated 30% for a severe
limitation and 10% for a moderate limitation.
-Proposed- Code 9903: If the mandible has been broken and did not heal back together correctly (nonunion
or fibrous union), then it is rated 30% if there is abnormal or additional
motion at the point of the break and 10% if there isn’t any additional or
abnormal motion.
This condition
must be clearly shown and diagnosed by an imaging study.
This code was adjusted to more clearly
define the “limitation” caused by nonunion of the bone. The “severe limitation”
and “moderate limitation” terms used in the current code are rather vaguely
defined, and so left up to interpretation. Under the new code, however, the
higher rating will simply be applied any time there is additional or abnormal
motion at the point of the break, and the lower rating will be applied if there
isn’t any abnormal motion at the point of the break.
__________________________________________________________________________
Code 9904: If the mandible has been
broken and did heal, but not correctly so that there is a definite
disfigurement to the bone, then it is rated 20% for severe, 10% for moderate,
and 0% for slight.
-Proposed- Code 9904: If the mandible has been broken and did heal, but not correctly so that
there is a definite disfigurement to the bone (malunion), it is rated under
this code. If the disfigurement causes a large gap between either the front
teeth or the back teeth when the jaw is closed, it is rated 20%. If it causes a
small gap between either the front teeth or the back teeth when the jaw is
closed, it is rated 10%. If it does not cause a gap between the teeth at all,
then it is rated 0%.
Just as with the last code, the rating
requirements for this code are currently not clearly defined. To better
understand a “severe”, “moderate”, and “slight” condition, the VA proposes to
better define the expected disability resulting from a malunion by basing the
rating on the main symptoms, a gap between the front or back teeth when the jaw
is closed that thus interferes with the ability to chew.
___________________________________________________________________________
Code 9905: All other jaw joint
conditions (including TMJ) are rated based on limited motion of the
joint. The jaw can move in two directions: open and closed, and side-to-side.
Only one direction of motion can be rated. If the jaw can’t move side-to-side
or open and close, then only the one that will give the higher rating is used.
If the jaw can’t move side-to-side more than 4
millimeters (mm), then it is rated 10%.
If the jaw can’t open more than 10 mm (about 0.4 of an
inch), then it is rated 40%. If it can open between 11 and 20 mm (about 0.4 to
0.8 of an inch), it is rated 30%. Between 21 and 30 mm (about 0.8 to 1.2
inches) is rated 20%, and between 31 and 40 mm (about 1.2 to 1.6 inches) is
rated 10%.
-Proposed- Code 9905: All other jaw joint conditions
(including temporomandibular disorder, known
as “TMD” and also incorrectly
referred to as “TMJ”) are rated based on limited motion of the joint and
the ability to eat regular or mechanically altered food.
“Mechanically altered foods” include liquid, blended, chopped, pureed,
ground, mashed, soft, and semisolid foods. A physician must record that your
condition requires you to eat only mechanically altered foods in order for it
to be rated. If a medical record does not state this, then it’ll be assumed
that you are able to eat normally.
For limited motion, the jaw can move in two directions: opened and
closed, and side-to-side. Only one direction of motion can be rated. If the jaw
is limited in both directions, then only the one that will give the higher
rating is used.
Only unassisted motion is used to rate limited motion, so even if the
jaw could open further with help, it is only rated on how far it can move
naturally without assistance.
If the jaw can’t move side-to-side more than 4 millimeters (mm),
then it is rated 10%.
If the jaw can’t open more than 10 mm (about 0.4 of an inch), then it is
rated 50% when only able to eat mechanically altered food, and 40% when able to
eat normally.
If it can open between 11 and 20 mm (about 0.4 to 0.8 of an inch), it is
rated 40% when only able to eat mechanically altered food, and 30% when able to
eat normally.
If it can open between 21 and 29 mm (about 0.8 to 1.1 inches), it is
rated 40% when restricted to full liquid and pureed foods only, 30% when
limited to soft and semi-solid foods only, and 20% when able to eat normally.
If it can open between 30 and 34 mm (about 1.2 to 1.3 inches), it is
rated 30% when restricted to full liquid and pureed foods only, 20% when
limited to soft and semi-solid foods only, and 10% when able to eat normally.
The VA proposes quite a few changes to this
code. First, they make a big to-do about the fact that both doctors and
patients alike incorrectly refer to the pain disorder in the joint as TMJ
instead of the correct term TMD. TMJ is an acronym of the name of the
joint—temporomandibular joint—not the name of the condition. The condition is
actually called temporomandibular disease and should be referred to as TMD.
Still, if you are told that you have TMJ, it is rated under this code.
Under the proposed code, this condition
would still technically rated on limited motion, but additional factors, like
the types of food that can be eaten because of the limited motion, would also
be used when rating. The new code also specifies that the measurements are for
unassisted opening, meaning that the jaw could open further by pulling down on
the jaw or other assisted means, but by itself, it is limited to these
measurements.
The ratings for side-to-side limited motion
and the requirement that only side-to-side or open-and-closed motion, not both,
can be rated remain the same.
__________________________________________________________________________
Code 9906: If more than half of the
ramus is missing and the ability to chew or move the jaw is limited, then
it is rated 30% for one side and 50% for both sides. If the ability to chew or
move the jaw is not limited, then it is rated 20% for one side and 30% for both
sides.
This code is deleted since any loss of the
ramus is now covered under code 9902.
___________________________________________________________________________
Code 9907: If less than half of the
ramus is missing but the jaw function is not limited, then it is rated 10%
for one side and 20% for both sides.
This code is deleted since any loss of the
ramus is now covered under code 9902.
___________________________________________________________________________
Code 9908: If the condyloid process
is missing on one or both sides, then it is rated 30%.
Just as with code 9901, this code was
completely ignored. We are again going to assume that it is thus staying
exactly the same until clearly told otherwise.
____________________________________________________________________________
Code 9909: If the coronoid process
is missing, then it is rated 10% for one side and 20% for both sides.
Just as with codes 9901 and 9908, this code
was completely ignored. We are again going to assume that it is thus staying
exactly the same until clearly told otherwise.
____________________________________________________________________________
Code 9911: If half or more of the
hard palate is missing and cannot be replaced by a prosthesis, then it is
rated 30%. If it can be replaced by a prosthesis, then it is rated 10%.
-Proposed- Code 9911: If any portion of the hard palate is missing, it is rated
under this code. If half or more has been lost and it cannot be replaced by a
prosthesis, it is rated 30%. If less than half has been lost and it cannot be
replaced by a prosthesis, it is rated 20%. If half or more has been lost and it
can be replaced by a prosthesis, it is rated 10%, and if less than half has
been lost and it can be replaced by a prosthesis, it is rated 0%.
Literally, all they did to this code was
combine it with code 9912. The ratings and requirements are exactly the same,
just under one code now instead of two.
__________________________________________________________________________
Code 9912: If less than half of the
hard palate is missing and cannot be replaced by a prosthesis, then it is
rated 20%. If it can be replaced, it is rated 0%.
The VA proposes to get rid of this code
entirely and simply combine its ratings with the ratings under code 9911. No
rating requirements will change, it will just be rated under code 9911 instead.
___________________________________________________________________________
Code 9913: Regardless
of how many teeth are missing, if they can be replaced by a prosthesis
or false teeth, then it is rated 0%. If, however, they cannot be replaced, they
are rated as follows:
All teeth missing is rated
40%. The loss of all the upper teeth or all the lower teeth is rated
30%. If all the upper and lower posterior teeth or all the upper and
lower anterior teeth are missing, it is rated 20%. If only all the upper
anterior teeth or all the lower anterior teeth are missing, it is rated
10%. If all the upper and lower teeth on one side are missing, then it is also
rated 10%.
Code 9914: If more than half of the
maxilla is missing and cannot be replaced by a prosthetic piece it is rated
100%. If it can be replaced by a prosthesis, then it is rated 50%.
Code 9915: If 25 to 50 percent of
the maxilla is missing and cannot be replaced by a prosthesis, then it is
rated 40%. If it can be replaced by a prosthesis, then it is rated 30%. If less
than 25 percent of the maxilla is missing and cannot be replaced, then it is
rated 20%, and if it can be replaced, it is rated 0%.
Just as with codes 9901, 9908, and 9909,
these codes were completely ignored. We are again going to assume that they are
thus staying exactly the same until clearly told otherwise.
__________________________________________________________________________
Code 9916: If the maxilla has been
broken and hasn’t healed back together or has healed incorrectly, then it
is rated based on how severely the bone has been disfigured and thus limits its
ability to function. If it is severely disfigured, it is rated 30%. If it is
moderately disfigured, it is rated 10%. If it is slightly disfigured, it is
rated 0%.
-Proposed- Code 9916: If the maxilla has been broken and hasn’t healed back together (nonunion)
or has healed incorrectly, causing definite disfigurement to the bone
(malunion), it is rated under this code.
For nonunion, if
there is abnormal motion at the point of the break, then it is rated 30%. If
there is no motion at the point of the break, then it is rated 10%. To qualify
for rating, a nonunion must be clearly shown and diagnosed by an imaging study.
For malunion, if
the disfigurement causes a large gap between either the front teeth or the back
teeth when the jaw is closed, it is rated 30%. If it causes a medium gap between
either the front teeth or the back teeth when the jaw is closed, it is rated
10%. If it causes only a small gap between the front teeth or the back teeth,
then it is rated 0%.
The current rating requirements for this code
are rather vague, basing its ratings on “severe”, “moderate”, or “mild”
disfigurement. To make the requirements more clear and more applicable to the
true disability associated with this condition, the proposed code separates and
establishes different rating requirements for nonunion and malunion, as is done
for the mandible under codes 9903 and 9904.
The proposed rating requirements are also
similar to the ratings for the mandible, with nonunion based on the presence of
any abnormal motion and malunion based on the presence of a gap between the
teeth. In fact, the ratings for nonunion under this code are identical to the
ratings for nonunion of the mandible under code 9903.
The ratings for malunion under this code,
however, are not identical to the ratings for malunion of the mandible under
code 9904, even though the presence of a gap is still the same basis. This
seems pretty odd and unfair to us—a gap is a gap and causes the same level of
disability, regardless of the cause—so this is something we are definitely
going to comment on.
__________________________________________________________________________
- New
-
-Proposed- Code 9917: All benign neoplasms (tumors or oral lesions) of the mouth and teeth
are rated on the main structures of the mouth that they affect. So if the tumor
affects the teeth, it would be rated under code 9913. If it affects the hard
palate, it is rated under code 9911 or 9912. If it causes disfigurement, it is
rated under code 7800, etc.
Currently there aren’t any codes
specifically for cancer that affects the mouth and teeth, so the VA proposes
adding two new codes (this one and code 9918) to cover all cancer, both benign
and malignant. It is basically just rated on any symptoms or functional impairment
(inability to chew, etc.) that it causes.
_________________________________________________________________________
-
New -
-Proposed- Code 9918: All malignant neoplasms (tumors
and lesions) of the mouth and teeth
are rated 100% while the condition is active and undergoing treatment. This
100% rating will continue for 6 months following the last treatment, at which
point the VA will re-examine the condition and rate it based on any remaining
symptoms, like loss of teeth or disfigurement.
Just like code 9917, the VA proposes adding
this new code to cover malignant cancer of the mouth and teeth.
On July 28, 2015, the VA published their
proposed changes to the ratings for Dental and Oral Conditions. This is the
fifth set of changes that has been proposed as part of the VA’s complete
rewrite of the VASRD which is being done section by section throughout 2015 and
2016. Previously published changes include Mental Disorders, Female Reproductive System, The Eyes, and the Endocrine System.