BVA decisions by condition

Lumbar spine disability: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a lumbar spine disability issue in 794 decisions. It granted the lumbar spine disability issue in 2.0% of them, below the 19.9% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 6.7%, and remanded it in 85.6%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 23.2% were granted.

Decisions

794

2018–2026

Granted

2.0%

All conditions: 19.9%

Granted on the merits

23.2%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

85.6%

Denied: 6.7%

Lumbar spine disability outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
100
0.0%5.0%91.0%
2019
111
1.8%9.0%82.0%
2020
101
3.0%4.0%87.1%
2021
80
2.5%8.8%82.5%
2022
111
2.7%9.0%81.1%
2023
91
2.2%4.4%86.8%
2024
82
2.4%4.9%89.0%
2025
78
1.3%5.1%91.0%

Evidence in granted and denied lumbar spine disability decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the lumbar spine disability 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 recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Positive nexus opinion22153.8%16.1%+37.8 pts
Lay statement71326.3%8.3%+18.0 pts
Private medical opinion30929.2%20.0%+9.2 pts
Treating physician opinion5725.0%23.0%+2.0 pts
Combat service5925.0%23.1%+1.9 pts
Favorable VA exam16120.0%23.7%−3.7 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 43.8% of the decisions that granted lumbar spine disability.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 50.0% of grants and 11.3% 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 lumbar spine disability was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Unfavorable VA exam65427.5%11.1%+16.3 pts
Negative nexus opinion44129.0%18.4%+10.6 pts

Why the Board granted or denied lumbar spine disability

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Appellant withdrew appeal for increased rating1
  2. Board lacks jurisdiction to review withdrawn issue1
  3. Competent evidence indicates back disability related to active duty service1
  4. Evidence evenly balanced between VA and private opinions1
  5. Evidence was found to be evenly balanced between 20% and 40% ratings, leading to the grant of 40%1
  6. Examiner's opinion lacked rationale on painful motion1
  7. February 2020 dbq showed flexion to 25 degrees with pain on all ranges of motion, significantly limiting functional ability1
  8. No adequate discussion of material improvement or its maintenance under ordinary conditions1

Most common reasons in denials

  1. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim2
  2. Board found evidence did not demonstrate severe functional loss or functional equivalent of ankylosis required for higher ratings1
  3. Board reviewed multiple VA examinations from feb 2014 to sep 20241
  4. Condition not shown to be related to active duty service1
  5. Consideration of flare-ups and functional impact1
  6. Denied service connection for low back disability1
  7. Evidence persuasively weighs against higher rating1
  8. Examinations noted pain with movement and some functional limitations, especially during flare-ups1

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 lumbar spine disability decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. 24019848T. Raymond · 2024

Appellant withdrew appeal for increased rating.; Board lacks jurisdiction to review withdrawn issue.

Citation Nr. A23017212Jonathan B. Kramer · 2023

Reduction from 40% to 20% effective January 20, 2020, was improper.; RO failed to comply with 38 C.F.R. § 3.344 regarding rating reductions.; No adequate discussion of material improvement or its maintenance under ordinary conditions.

Citation Nr. A22022083Lauren Bush · 2022

Probative evidence indicates thoracic spine disability due to in-service injury.; Veteran and spouse testimony regarding back pain since in-service injury found credible.; Treating physician attributed thoracic pain to in-service injury with 50% contribution.

Denied

Citation Nr. 24034571Jennifer Hwa · 2024

Board reviewed multiple VA examinations from Feb 2014 to Sep 2024.; Examinations noted pain with movement and some functional limitations, especially during flare-ups.; Board found evidence did not demonstrate severe functional loss or functional equivalent of ankylosis required for higher ratings.; Pain limitations during flare-ups did not rise to the level for higher rating.; Veteran did not have ankylosis or IVDS.; Limitations due to pain considered within currently assigned 40% rating.

Citation Nr. 24028071H.M. Walker · 2024

Flexion limited to 60 degrees with pain.; Consideration of flare-ups and functional impact.; 20% rating criteria met for the entire period.

Citation Nr. 23000772Lesley A. Rein · 2023

Prior to April 29, 2016, forward flexion was 75 degrees, combined range of motion was 200 degrees, with no abnormal gait, spinal contour, or ankylosis.; From April 29, 2016, onwards, forward flexion was 50 degrees, combined range of motion was 150 degrees, with pain on weight bearing and tenderness, but no objective muscle spasm or guarding resulting in abnormal gait or spinal contour.; Symptoms did not approximate ankylosis or meet criteria for higher ratings under 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.40, 4.45, 4.59, or DeLuca.

Rules that apply to lumbar spine disability claims

Research your lumbar spine disability case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a lumbar spine disability 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 (2018–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.