20 C.F.R. § 404.1594
Example 1: You were awarded disability benefits due to a herniated nucleus pulposus. At the time of our prior decision granting you benefits you had had a laminectomy. Postoperatively, a myelogram still shows evidence of a persistent deficit in your lumbar spine. You had pain in your back, and pain and a burning sensation in your right foot and leg. There were no muscle weakness or neurological changes and a modest decrease in motion in your back and leg. When we reviewed your claim, your medical source, who has treated you, reported that he or she had seen you regularly every 2 to 3 months for the past 2 years. No further myelograms had been done, complaints of pain in the back and right leg continued especially on sitting or standing for more than a short period of time. Your doctor further reported a moderately decreased range of motion in your back and right leg, but again no muscle atrophy or neurological changes were reported. Medical improvement has not occurred because there has been no decrease in the severity of your back impairment as shown by changes in symptoms, signs or laboratory findings.
Example 2: You were awarded disability benefits due to rheumatoid arthritis. At the time, laboratory findings were positive for this condition. Your doctor reported persistent swelling and tenderness of your fingers and wrists and that you complained of joint pain. Current medical evidence shows that while laboratory tests are still positive for rheumatoid arthritis, your impairment has responded favorably to therapy so that for the last year your fingers and wrists have not been significantly swollen or painful. Medical improvement has occurred because there has been a decrease in the severity of your impairment as documented by the current symptoms and signs reported by your physician. Although your impairment is subject to temporary remission and exacerbations, the improvement that has occurred has been sustained long enough to permit a finding of medical improvement. We would then determine if this medical improvement is related to your ability to work.
Example: You are 65 inches tall and weighed 246 pounds at the time your disability was established. You had venous insufficiency and persistent edema in your legs. At the time, your ability to do basic work activities was affected because you were able to sit for 6 hours, but were able to stand or walk only occasionally. At the time of our continuing disability review, you had undergone a vein stripping operation. You now weigh 220 pounds and have intermittent edema. You are still able to sit for 6 hours at a time and to stand or walk only occasionally although you report less discomfort on walking. Medical improvement has occurred because there has been a decrease in the severity of the existing impairment as shown by your weight loss and the improvement in your edema. This medical improvement is not related to your ability to work, however, because your functional capacity to do basic work activities (i.e., the ability to sit, stand and walk) has not increased.
Example 1: You have a back impairment and had a laminectomy to relieve the nerve root impingement and weakness in your left leg. At the time of our prior decision, basic work activities were affected because you were able to stand less than 6 hours, and sit no more than 1/2 hour at a time. You had a successful fusion operation on your back about 1 year before our review of your entitlement. At the time of our review, the weakness in your leg has decreased. Your functional capacity to perform basic work activities now is unimpaired because you now have no limitation on your ability to sit, walk, or stand. Medical improvement has occurred because there has been a decrease in the severity of your impairment as demonstrated by the decreased weakness in your leg. This medical improvement is related to your ability to work because there has also been an increase in your functional capacity to perform basic work activities (or residual functional capacity) as shown by the absence of limitation on your ability to sit, walk, or stand. Whether or not your disability is found to have ended, however, will depend on our determination as to whether you can currently engage in substantial gainful activity.
Example 2: You were injured in an automobile accident receiving a compound fracture to your right femur and a fractured pelvis. When you applied for disability benefits 10 months after the accident your doctor reported that neither fracture had yet achieved solid union based on his clinical examination. X-rays supported this finding. Your doctor estimated that solid union and a subsequent return to full weight bearing would not occur for at least 3 more months. At the time of our review 6 months later, solid union had occurred and you had been returned to full weight-bearing for over a month. Your doctor reported this and the fact that your prior fractures no longer placed any limitation on your ability to walk, stand, lift, etc., and, that in fact, you could return to fulltime work if you so desired.
Medical improvement has occurred because there has been a decrease in the severity of your impairments as shown by X-ray and clinical evidence of solid union and your return to full weight-bearing. This medical improvement is related to your ability to work because you no longer meet the same listed impairment in appendix 1 of this subpart (see paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section). In fact, you no longer have an impairment which is severe (see § 404.1521 ) and your disability will be found to have ended.
Example: You were previously found to be disabled on the basis that "while your impairment did not meet or equal a listing, it did prevent you from doing your past or any other work." The prior adjudicator did not, however, include a residual functional capacity assessment in the rationale of this decision and a review of the prior evidence does not show that such an assessment was ever made. If a decrease in medical severity, i.e., medical improvement, has occurred, the residual functional capacity based on the current level of severity of your impairment will have to be compared with your residual functional capacity based on its prior severity in order to determine if the medical improvement is related to your ability to do work. In order to make this comparison, we will review the prior evidence and make an objective assessment of your residual functional capacity at the time of our most recent favorable medical determination, based on the symptoms, signs and laboratory findings as they then existed.
Example 1: You were found to be disabled because the limitations imposed on you by your impairment allowed you to only do work that was at a sedentary level of exertion. Your prior work experience was work that required a medium level of exertion. Your age and education at the time would not have qualified you for work that was below this medium level of exertion. You enrolled in and completed a specialized training course which qualifies you for a job in data processing as a computer programmer in the period since you were awarded benefits. On review of your claim, current evidence shows that there is no medical improvement and that you can still do only sedentary work. As the work of a computer programmer is sedentary in nature, you are now able to engage in substantial gainful activity when your new skills are considered.
Example 2: You were previously entitled to benefits because the medical evidence and assessment of your residual functional capacity showed you could only do light work. Your prior work was considered to be heavy in nature and your age, education and the nature of your prior work qualified you for work which was no less than medium in exertion. The current evidence and residual functional capacity show there has been no medical improvement and that you can still do only light work. Since you were originally entitled to benefits, your vocational rehabilitation agency enrolled you in and you successfully completed a trade school course so that you are now qualified to do small appliance repair. This work is light in nature, so when your new skills are considered, you are now able to engage in substantial gainful activity even though there has been no change in your residual functional capacity.
Example: The electrocardiographic exercise test has replaced the Master's 2-step test as a measurement of heart function since the time of your last favorable medical decision. Current evidence could show that your condition, which was previously evaluated based on the Master's 2-step test, is not now as disabling as was previously thought. If, taking all your current impairments into account, you are now able to engage in substantial gainful activity, this exception would be used to find that you are no longer disabled even if medical improvement has not occurred.
Example 1: You were granted benefits when it was determined that your epilepsy met Listing 11.02. This listing calls for a finding of major motor seizures more frequently than once a month as documented by EEG evidence and by a detailed description of a typical seizure pattern. A history of either diurnal episodes or nocturnal episodes with residuals interfering with daily activities is also required. On review, it is found that a history of the frequency of your seizures showed that they occurred only once or twice a year. The prior decision would be found to be in error, and whether you were still considered to be disabled would be based on whether you could currently engage in substantial gainful activity.
Example 2: Your prior award of benefits was based on vocational rule 201.12 in appendix 2 of this subpart. This rule applies to a person age 50-54 who has at least a high school education, whose previous work was entirely at a semiskilled level, and who can do only sedentary work. On review, it is found that at the time of the prior determination you were actually only age 46 and vocational rule 201.21 should have been used. This rule would have called for a denial of your claim and the prior decision is found to have been in error. Continuation of your disability would depend on a finding of your current ability to engage in substantial gainful activity.
Example: You were found disabled on the basis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The severity of your impairment was documented primarily by pulmonary function testing results. The evidence showed that you could do only light work. Spirometric tracings of this testing, although required, were not obtained, however. On review, the original report is resubmitted by the consultative examining physician along with the corresponding spirometric tracings. A review of the tracings shows that the test was invalid. Current pulmonary function testing supported by spirometric tracings reveals that your impairment does not limit your ability to perform basic work activities in any way. Error is found based on the fact that required, material evidence which was originally missing now becomes available and shows that if it had been available at the time of the prior determination, disability would not have been found.
Example: You were previously found entitled to benefits on the basis of diabetes mellitus which the prior adjudicator believed was equivalent to the level of severity contemplated in the Listing of Impairments. The prior record shows that you had "brittle" diabetes for which you were taking insulin. Your urine was 3 + for sugar, and you alleged occasional hypoglycemic attacks caused by exertion. On review, symptoms, signs and laboratory findings are unchanged. The current adjudicator feels, however, that your impairment clearly does not equal the severity contemplated by the listings. Error cannot be found because it would represent a substitution of current judgment for that of the prior adjudicator that your impairment equaled a listing.
20 C.F.R. §404.1594