BVA decisions by condition
Thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion issue in 12,599 decisions. It granted the thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion issue in 9.1% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 19.2%, and remanded it in 70.5%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 32.2% were granted.
Decisions
12,599
2017–2026
Granted
9.1%
All conditions: 19.4%
Granted on the merits
32.2%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
70.5%
Denied: 19.2%
Thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion outcomes by year
| Year | Issues decided | Granted | Denied | Remanded | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 908 | 3.6% | 18.4% | 74.4% | 3.5% |
| 2018 | 1,647 | 6.1% | 17.2% | 74.6% | 2.0% |
| 2019 | 1,746 | 6.8% | 19.4% | 72.8% | 1.0% |
| 2020 | 1,459 | 6.7% | 23.0% | 68.8% | 1.5% |
| 2021 | 1,280 | 7.3% | 19.1% | 72.3% | 1.4% |
| 2022 | 1,277 | 9.7% | 15.4% | 74.1% | 0.8% |
| 2023 | 1,456 | 10.0% | 18.1% | 70.6% | 1.4% |
| 2024 | 1,331 | 12.8% | 18.8% | 67.0% | 1.4% |
| 2025 | 1,192 | 15.0% | 23.5% | 59.9% | 1.6% |
| 2026 | 438 | 22.1% | 19.2% | 57.1% | 1.6% |
Each row counts issues (each condition the Board decided), so the shares add up to 100%. Other: dismissed, withdrawn or no clear outcome. Years with fewer than 50 issues are left out.
Evidence in granted and denied thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 1,499 | 71.1% | 22.1% | +49.0 pts |
| Treating physician opinion | 474 | 62.5% | 30.3% | +32.2 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 896 | 56.6% | 29.1% | +27.5 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 3,231 | 49.7% | 23.4% | +26.4 pts |
| Buddy statement | 526 | 52.7% | 31.1% | +21.6 pts |
| Combat service | 683 | 52.0% | 30.9% | +21.1 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 1,660 | 37.4% | 31.7% | +5.8 pts |
| Lay statement | 10,209 | 32.8% | 29.1% | +3.8 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 73.2% of the decisions that granted thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 50.0% of grants and 11.4% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfavorable VA exam | 8,381 | 32.6% | 30.9% | +1.8 pts |
| Negative nexus opinion | 5,692 | 32.3% | 32.1% | +0.2 pts |
Thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion claimed as a secondary condition
Decisions where thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion was claimed as secondary to another service-connected disability (38 CFR 3.310), by that disability.
Why the Board granted or denied thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established154
- Continuity of symptomatology since service49
- Criteria for service connection met29
- Caused by the service-connected disability26
- Service connection established14
- New and material evidence received11
- New and material evidence submitted10
- In-service injury documented8
Most common reasons in denials
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis294
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim278
- No current diagnosis220
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service202
- Service records negative or silent194
- Current diagnosis established137
- No continuity of symptomatology73
- Continuity of symptomatology since service39
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion decisions
Granted
No dispute of current disability.; Credible lay statements regarding in-service back use.; Probative private medical opinion provided positive nexus.
Negative service treatment records.; Diagnosis shortly after service separation.; No indication of post-service cause.; No evidence against nexus to service.
Veteran and witnesses attest to functional impairment from low back pain; Resolving doubt in Veteran's favor, current disability established; Evidence in approximate balance, favoring relation to 2019 ADT
Denied
No current diagnosis of lower back disability; No evidence of functional impairment; No complaints or treatments in service records
Petition to readjudicate denied; No new and relevant evidence received; Prior denial of service connection for low back disorder
Claims file lacks evidence of diagnosis; Veteran's testimony regarding functional impairment acknowledged; Testimony inconsistent with objective medical evidence
Rules that apply to thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion claims
- 38 CFR 3.303
Principles of service connection
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a thoracolumbar or lumbar spine limitation of motion issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
- “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.