The MRCC have approved a policy whereby (in appropriate cases) delegates will be able to streamline the investigation and decision making processes. Once the diagnosis has been established, the MRCC has approved a suite of medical conditions that can generally be accepted as service related without further investigation of the material raised in the claim. Specifically, where the claim and contents of service records contain all the necessary information set out in the paragraph below, entitled “Investigation of claims by the MRCC”, no further investigation is required to verify that information prior to the acceptance of liability.
Under the MRCA, these conditions are:
Tinnitus [3]
Solar keratosis [4]
Shin splints [7]
Tinea of the skin [13]
Pterygium [14]
Sprains and strains [15]
Benign neoplasm of the eye and adnexa [22](keratoachanthoma of the conjunctiva) – Reasonable Hypothesis only.
There is an extension to streamlining policy for specific sequela conditions under MRCA and VEA. For a list of these conditions and information about the policy applicable to them, see 3.4.5.2 Sequelae Streamlining Policy [35].
3.4.5.1 Statements of Principles
All of the identified conditions comprise diagnoses that are the subject of Statements of Principles (SoPs). The SoPs are legal instruments determined by the Repatriation Medical Authority (RMA) and are based on sound medical-scientific evidence. The SOPs detail the factors that must be met in order for a claim to be related to service. Each condition has two SoPs reflecting the different standards of proof: Reasonable Hypothesis (RH) which applies to warlike or non-warlike service; and Balance of Probabilities (BoP) which applies to peacetime service. Under s332 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA) all claims for the above MRCC-identified conditions must be determined using the relevant SoP.
3.4.5.2 Policy Rationale
The MRCC policy reflects the view that, on the balance of probabilities, most military personnel will meet the requirements of at least one of the SoP factors for each of the identified conditions due to the nature of military service. Service – regardless of type – needs only to have made a material contribution to the SoP factor requirements. The expectation, therefore, is that claims for the identified conditions will succeed, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
3.4.5.3 Acting under a Policy
Delegates of the MRCC who undertake investigations and make decisions on claims must exercise their own judgment and discretion, otherwise they risk making an error of law either in acting under direction or applying a policy without regard to the individual merits of a case. This does not mean that delegates are able to ignore a relevant policy put in place by the MRCC or the guidance of a more senior delegate. However, any such advice must be consistent with both the requirements of the MRCA and the relevant legislative instruments used or made under this Act (e.g. the SoPs). Delegates must therefore ensure that such advice is acknowledged in their reasons for decisions.
In the case of Tang v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1986) 67 ALR 177, Justice Pincus held that where a statutory discretion exists, and where the legislation itself does not specify the way in which the discretion is to be exercised, a decision maker is entitled to formulate a policy in relation to the exercise of that decision. In this particular case, His Honour drew a distinction between a policy 'guiding' the making of a decision on the one hand and 'controlling' it on the other. The former was said to be lawful and the distinction is a question of degree and not of kind.
Accordingly, the policy outlined here is to be used by delegates as 'guiding' the investigation and decision making processes that are to be applied in handling claims for the above-mentioned conditions under the MRCA.
Any concerns about individual cases where the delegate believes the policy would result in an inappropriate decision (eg, where this policy would have resulted in the approval of the claim or application but there is other available evidence to indicate that this should not be the outcome) should be brought to the attention of their supervisor who will then report the matter to the Director of the Liability and Service Eligibility (L&SE) Policy section for consideration.
3.4.5.4 Legal Responsibilities
While the MRCC supports the view that people with ADF service will almost invariably meet one of the SoP factors for the identified conditions, this does not negate a delegate's legal responsibilities. Under s336, the MRCC is 'not entitled to make certain presumptions' in relation to a claim for liability, and for this reason, it is essential that there is sufficient evidence available to make a legal determination. By the same token, however, it must be remembered that under s337 there is 'no onus of proof' on the person in relation to any matter that may be relevant to the determination of the claim.
3.4.5.5 Investigation of Claims by the MRCC
This policy clarifies that additional evidence beyond what is contained in the claim form and service records will not ordinarily be required for these conditions. This is because the claim should contain the correct medical diagnosis as well as a contention in relation to the claimed condition.
Even if this contention is simply ‘service conditions’, it is sufficient to conclude with reference to the service documents that the claimed condition was caused by exposure to gunfire, exposure to sunlight, level of physical exertion, etc. due to the nature of military service. Therefore, there should be no need to investigate such claims further, for example, by seeking to obtain further medical opinion or assessment questionnaire.
Therefore, further investigation of the connection with service is not required, provided that:
(i) there is evidence of relevant defence service;
(ii) the claim and/or service records contain information that points to at least one of the factors listed in the relevant SoP; and
(iii) the claim and/or service records contain medical opinions and/or medical reports from suitably qualified persons (eg, medical practitioners, audiologists, registered optometrists) that include a diagnosis that would enable a decision maker to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the client has a particular disease/condition. In such circumstances, no further opinion from a qualified person would be required.
One of the implications of the above is that investigative tools previously used (including the UV calculator, UV questionnaire or solar damage assessment form) will no longer be required for these conditions. This is expected to improve consistency in decision making and time taken to process claims for any of the specified conditions.
3.4.5.6 Exceptional Circumstances
Some cases, however, will demonstrate peculiarities that place them apart from the usual claim. These claims require careful consideration, including discussion with a team leader, before a decision can be made to reject. Each of the factors contained within the relevant SoP must be considered, and in a small number of cases, further investigation may be a necessary (but unusual) course of action. See “reject case example” below for further information.
3.4.5.7 Determination of Claims by Delegates of the Commission
Section 333 of the MRCA provides that after the investigation of a claim under section 324 is completed, the claim is to be referred to a delegate of the Commission who shall 'consider all matters that, in the Commission’s opinion, are relevant to the claim'. In this respect, the MRCC has determined that delegates are able to make decisions approving claims for liability under the MRCA for each of the above mentioned conditions providing the above information is contained within the claim and service records.
Delegates investigating and determining claims for liability that involve one of the defined streamlined conditions are now able to rely on the material lodged with the initial claim and/or contained in the service records. If that material is sufficient to satisfy the legal requirements of the MRCA (including the relevant SoP) then a decision to accept the claim can be made without the need for further circumstantial investigation. However, any decision to reject a claim for one of these conditions must first be discussed with a Team Leader who will report the case to the Director of the L&SE Policy section if deemed necessary.
3.4.5.8 Determining Claims
When determining claims it is important that an appropriate explanation and reasons for all decisions be provided to the client. Decisions to accept a claim should articulate the condition diagnosed, the contention, the evidence considered, standard of proof applicable and SOP factor met. Decisions to disallow a claim should contain similar information, but also acknowledge that all SoP factors have been considered and articulate the finding that service has not made a material contribution to the condition.
3.4.5.9 Accept case example
A decision to accept a claim for SNHL could advise in the following (generic) manner, suitably edited to reflect the circumstances of the case:
'The Statement of Principles which is relevant to your condition claimed states that exposure to an impulsive noise is a factor in the development of sensorineural hearing loss. I am satisfied such exposure (eg, in the form of gunfire) is commonplace during military service and I have accepted the claim on that basis.'
3.4.5.10 Reject case example-NMMN
Again suitably edited, a decision to reject a claim for NMMN of the skin – following discussion with a Team Leader – could be explained in the following way:
“The Statement of Principles for your claimed condition contains two separate factors that relate to solar exposure, however neither applies in your particular case. The reason for this is because the basal cell carcinoma (BCC) which you have claimed compensation for is located on the underside of your foot which would not usually be exposed to the Sun (and therefore cannot be related to your Defence service). I have also considered the other factors contained in the Statement of Principles, none of which apply in this case. Therefore, having considered the relevant evidence I am reasonably satisfied that your BCC is not causally related to your Defence service.”
3.4.5.11 Accept case example – Sprain or strain
A decision to accept a claim for sprain or strain could advise in the following manner, suitably edited to reflect the circumstances of the case:
‘The Statement of Principles which is relevant to your diagnosed condition states that experiencing a significant physical force through the affected joint is a factor which can cause a sprain. Having considered your contention I am reasonably satisfied that you suffered a significant physical force through your ankle when you tripped whilst undertaking physical training. I am satisfied that physical training is a requirement of military service and I have accepted your claim on that basis.’
3.4.5.12 Reject case example – Sprain or strain
Again suitably edited, a decision to reject a claim for sprain or strain – following discussion with a Team Leader – could be explained in the following way:
‘The Statement of Principles which is relevant to your diagnosed condition states that experiencing a significant physical force through the affected joint is a factor which can cause a sprain. The Diagnosis Form submitted with your claim states that you sustained an ankle sprain when you tripped at your local supermarket. Having examined your medical records I can find no instances of a service-related ankle injury nor evidence of another medical condition which could have contributed to this injury. Therefore, having considered the relevant evidence I am reasonably satisfied that your ankle sprain is not causally related to your Defence service.’
Summary
Delegates investigating and determining claims for liability that involve one of the conditions mentioned in this policy are now able to rely on the material lodged with the initial claim and/or contained in the service records. If that material is sufficient to satisfy the legal requirements of the MRCA (including the relevant SoP) then a decision to accept the claim can be made without the need for further circumstantial investigation. However, any decision to reject a claim for one of these conditions must first be discussed with a Team Leader who will report the case to the L&SE Policy section if deemed necessary.
The MRCC and RC have approved an additional streamlining policy for certain sequelae of service-related medical conditions. This policy allows Delegates to streamline the investigation and decision-making approach in relation to 44 conditions (sequelae) where they arise from specified service-related conditions. The SoPs for these sequelae contain factors providing a simple link between the sequelae and their corresponding identified causal condition, namely that the causal condition was present either ‘before’ or ‘at the time of’ the clinical onset of the sequela. The streamlining policy for these conditions simply requires the Delegate to be satisfied that:
Any policies requiring Delegates to re-assess the complete propagation chain do not apply in relation to claims for the 44 sequelae to which this streamlining policy applies. The sequelae approved for inclusion in this streamlining policy are listed below, along with the causal conditions which must have been accepted as service-related for the streamlining policy to apply.
Certain sequelae are streamlined under the MRCA and VEA in relation to certain causal conditions only, as follows:
Sequela condition | Causal service-related condition which must be present | SOP factor requires the causal service-related condition to be present… |
acquired cataract | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
alcohol use disorder* | substance use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
depressive disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
anosmia | alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
aortic aneurysm or aortic wall disorder | hypertension | Before clinical onset of sequela |
aortic stenosis* | hypertension | Before clinical onset of sequela |
diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela | |
atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter | hypertension | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
bipolar disorder | substance use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
bronchiectasis | inflammatory bowel disease | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
cardiomyopathy | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
carotid artery disease* | diabetes mellitus, | Before clinical onset of sequela |
hypertension | Before clinical onset of sequela | |
cerebrovascular accident | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
chronic pruritus ani* | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
inflammatory bowel disease | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
conjunctivitis | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
depressive disorder | alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
Dupuytren disease* | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
erectile dysfunction* | depressive disorder, | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
diabetes mellitus, | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
hypertension | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
female sexual dysfunction | depressive disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
gingivitis | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
heart block | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
IgA nephropathy | inflammatory bowel disease | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
immune thrombocytopaenia | inflammatory bowel disease | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
ischaemic heart disease* | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
hypertension | Before clinical onset of sequela | |
non-aneurysmal aortic atherosclerotic disease* | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
hypertension | Before clinical onset of sequela | |
non-Hodgkin lymphoma | inflammatory bowel disease | Before clinical onset of sequela |
osteomyelitis | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
otitis externa | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
periodontitis | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
peripheral artery disease* | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
hypertension | Before clinical onset of sequela | |
peripheral neuropathy | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
porphyria cutanea tarda | alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
renal artery atherosclerotic disease | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
renal stone disease* | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
inflammatory bowel disease | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
retinal vascular occlusion* | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
hypertension | Before clinical onset of sequela | |
sick sinus syndrome | hypertension | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
steatohepatitis | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
subarachnoid haemorrhage | hypertension | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
subdural haematoma | alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
substance use disorder* | alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
depressive disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
suicide or attempted suicide* | alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
depressive disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
substance use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela | |
tinea | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
tooth wear (tooth erosion) | alcohol use disorder | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
trigeminal neuropathy | diabetes mellitus | At the time of clinical onset of sequela |
trigger finger | diabetes mellitus | Before clinical onset of sequela |
Tuberculosis | alcohol use disorder | Before clinical onset of sequela |
The following policy advice relates to sinus barotrauma and otitic barotrauma (barotrauma) liability claims, and sequela conditions which are considered by medical advice to have arisen from a barotrauma incident.
This policy applies to members/former members who contend that they experienced a barotrauma from a specific Australian Defence Force (ADF) employment role or a training activity, but lack service records/evidence that the barotrauma incident took place. This can be common as barotrauma usually resolves within a short time period, meaning that members may not report incidents. Additionally, barotrauma incidents can take place in ADF settings where there may be a lack of access to medical treatment or limited medical reporting, such as on board submarines.
This policy assists in identifying ADF employment roles and training activities which involve a high risk of barotrauma incidents, and applies a streamlined approach to Barotrauma claims from members of these cohorts. Certain ADF cohorts are considered to have met barotrauma SOP factors and can therefore potentially have barotrauma claims accepted in the absence of evidence on the ADF medical files.
Application
This policy applies to the Statement of Principles (SOPs) for sinus barotrauma and otitic barotrauma under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA).
This policy may also provide guidance for claims under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (DRCA). For DRCA claims, the Balance of Probabilities SOP can be used as a guide by delegates.
Pulmonary barotrauma is specifically excluded as it is a severe and potentially life-threatening injury for which there will be evidence on file.
SOPs for Otitic and Sinus Barotrauma
Both otitic (ear) and sinus (nasal passageway) barotrauma include a SOP factor which includes “experiencing a change in the ambient barometric pressure as specified”. This means a significant and rapid reduction or increase in the pressure surrounding the person.
Under the definitions of these SOPs, the following circumstances involve a “change in the ambient barometric pressure as specified”:
· ascending from a submerged craft or device or a submarine escape training facility;
· decompression or compression in a hypobaric or hyperbaric chamber;
· flying;
· sky diving;
· underwater diving;
· working in a submarine;
· working in a pressurised chamber or tunnel;
· exposure to explosive blasts.
Prescribed ADF roles and training activities
According to Defence advice, certain ADF activities may give rise to ‘a change in ambient barometric pressure’ and blast exposure. Accordingly, the following ADF employment roles and training activities are covered under the policy and are considered to have met the factor for experiencing a change in ambient barometric pressure:
Roles · Special forces; including SASR, Commandos, Special Operations Engineer Regiment (whose roles may include diving or parachute training as well as roles involving being in close proximity to explosions such as breaching) · Engineers with roles including the disposal/use of explosive ordinance · Clearance/Ships’ divers · Submariners · Pilots and aircrew · Aeromedical evacuation personnel · Underwater medicine medical personnel (officers and medics)
Training and other activities If an ADF member has not been involved in an above employment role, the following training activities could be taken into consideration by delegates: · Training in submerged environments (e.g. Helicopter Underwater Escape Training (HUET) or submarine escape training) · Scuba training · Other diving roles (non scuba) · Parachute training · Documented exposure in close proximity to an explosion · Personnel whose role includes being inside an operational hyperbaric chamber
|
The above list does not preclude a delegate from assessing the relevance of other ADF roles or training activities in barotrauma liability claims. However, for barotrauma claims that do not involve the specified ADF roles or training activities contained in this policy, the normal liability assessment process would take place, and the assumption of relevant exposure does not apply.
Required evidence
To apply this policy in circumstances where there is a lack of service records or evidence of a barotrauma incident, the following process should be followed.
1. Client contention
The client would need to contend that the barotrauma incident arose from at least one of the ‘Prescribed ADF roles and training activities’.
2. ENT Specialist
In the absence of records in the veterans’ service medical documents an Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) specialist would need to
I. Provide a diagnosis and conduct an assessment concerning the causation of the barotrauma.
II. Attribute the cause of the barotrauma to at least one of the ‘Prescribed ADF roles and training activities’, as opposed to any non-service related activity.
III. Provide the date of clinical onset of the barotrauma.
(please note that if the service medical documents contain a relevant barotrauma incident, a specialist opinion is not required.)
3. Service documentation
Service records/evidence must demonstrate that the member was engaged in the attributed ‘Prescribed ADF roles and training activities’, at the time of the onset that has been advised by the ENT specialist. Specific training activities may not show up on the service medical/personnel records, but if the delegate is unable to confirm the client’s contention a SAM request could be lodged.
4. SOP timeframe
The delegate would need to review the relevant SOPs and establish whether the date of onset of barotrauma (as noted by the ENT specialist) meets the specified onset timeframes outlined by the SOPs.
Given the required onset timeframes for barotrauma under the SOP factors are typically limited to a 24 hour period following relevant exposure, an ENT specialist will need to provide evidence of onset having occurred at the relevant time, and a delegate will need to be satisfied that the onset timeframe has been met.
Sequela conditions
While barotrauma typically resolves within a short time period, a barotrauma incident may lead to sequela conditions.
According to the SOP factors, otitic barotrauma may lead to sensorineural hearing loss, conductive hearing loss, otitis media and tinnitus. Sinus barotrauma may lead to sinusitis and trigeminal neuropathy. Most of these sequela conditions are required by the SOPs to have emerged within a short timeframe (usually weeks) after the barotrauma incident.
Should a member submit a claim for a sequela condition contending that it arose from a service-related barotrauma, and barotrauma has not previously been accepted or has been determined as ‘No Incapacity Found’, a report from an Ear, Nose and Throat specialist will be required.
If the sequela is contended to have arisen from a previously accepted barotrauma, it will be necessary to see whether medical evidence attributes causation of the sequela to the barotrauma and confirms onset within the relevant SOP factor timeframe.
If liability for sinus or otitic barotrauma has not been accepted, assessment of liability for barotrauma and the contended sequela should take place at the same time.
If liability for sinus or otitic barotrauma is to be accepted prior to accepting the sequela, the following would need to take place to accept liability for the barotrauma and contended sequela:
1. Client contention
The client would need to contend that the barotrauma incident arose from at least one of the ‘Prescribed ADF roles and training activities’, and a sequela condition arose from that same incident.
2. ENT Specialist
An Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) specialist would need to:
*If an ENT specialist is not suitable for providing advice for the contended sequela, the relevant medical specialist for that sequela should be utilised.
3. Service documentation
Service records/evidence must demonstrate that the member was engaged in the attributed ‘Prescribed ADF roles and training activities’, at the time of onset for the barotrauma that has been advised by the ENT specialist. Specific training activities may not show up on the service medical/personnel records, but if the delegate is unable to confirm the client’s contention a SAM request could be lodged.
4. SOPs
The delegate would need to review the relevant SOP of the barotrauma and sequela. The delegate must be satisfied that the date of onset of the barotrauma and sequela, provided by the relevant specialist, has met the specified onset timeframes in relation to the factor as outlined by the respective SOP.
Further Questions
For further information or advice about this policy, please contact Liability and Service Eligibility Section at L.and.SE.Policy@dva.gov.au
Links
[1] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/19042%23comment-form
[2] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/q-z/sensorineural-hearing-loss-f001-h903-h904-h905
[3] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/q-z/tinnitus-f034-h931
[4] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/q-z/solar-keratosis-m011-l570
[5] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/n-p/non-melanotic-malignant-neoplasm-skin-b046-c000c001c002c00
[6] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/b/acquired-cataract-f023-h25h26h281h282
[7] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/q-z/shin-splints-n061-7297
[8] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/b/achilles-tendinopathy-and-bursitis-n038-m766
[9] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/n-p/plantar-fasciitis-n024-m722
[10] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/c-d/chondromalacia-patella-n011-m224
[11] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/h-l/internal-derangement-knee-n046-m232m235m238m239
[12] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/m/malignant-melanoma-skin-b026-c43
[13] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/q-z/tinea-skin-a001-b350b352b353b35
[14] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/n-p/pterygium-f019-h110
[15] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/q-z/sprain-and-strain-s004-s034-5s134-5s23
[16] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/h-l/iliotibial-band-syndrome-n066-m763
[17] https://clik.dva.gov.au/sop-information/sops-and-supporting-information-alphabetic-listing/q-z/trochanteric-bursitis-n074
[18] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/n-p/patellar-tendinopathy-n072-m765
[19] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/n-p/pinguecula-f031-h111
[20] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/q-z/seborrhoeic-keratosis-m016-l82
[21] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/m/malignant-neoplasm-eye-b031-c690-c694c698
[22] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/b/benign-neoplasm-eye-and-adnexa-b049-d31
[23] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/b/acute-articular-cartilage-tear-n069-s833t1431
[24] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/b/acute-meniscal-tear-knee-n067-s832
[25] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/c-d/dislocation-n035-7182830-8358363-83
[26] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/e-g/fracture-n001-7331800-829
[27] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/h-l/joint-instability-n065-m220m221m242m24
[28] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/h-l/labral-tear-n071-s437s7318
[29] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/e-g/external-bruise-s003-920-924
[30] https://clik.dva.gov.au/ccps-medical-research-library/sops-grouped-icd-body-system/e-g/external-burn-s001-t20-t26t29-t31t698
[31] https://clik.dva.gov.au/sop-information/sops-and-supporting-information-alphabetic-listing/e-g/gunshot-injury-s026
[32] https://clik.dva.gov.au/sop-information/sops-and-supporting-information-alphabetic-listing/e-g/explosive-blast-injury-s002
[33] https://clik.dva.gov.au/sop-information/sops-and-supporting-information-alphabetic-listing/c-d/cut-stab-abrasion-and-laceration-s005
[34] https://clik.dva.gov.au/sop-information/sops-and-supporting-information-alphabetic-listing/e-g/femoroacetabular-impingement-syndrome-n075
[35] https://clik.dva.gov.au/military-compensation-mrca-manuals-and-resources-library/policy-manual/ch-3-liability/34-investigating-claim/345-applying-streamlining-procedures/3452-sequelae-streamlining-policy