BVA decisions by condition

Median nerve paralysis: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a median nerve paralysis issue in 5,678 decisions. It granted the median nerve paralysis issue in 17.9% of them, close to the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 32.7%, and remanded it in 49.4%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 35.4% were granted.

Decisions

5,678

2017–2026

Granted

17.9%

All conditions: 19.4%

Granted on the merits

35.4%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

49.4%

Denied: 32.7%

Median nerve paralysis outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2017
385
13.2%34.8%46.8%
2018
642
13.9%34.9%49.1%
2019
622
14.3%37.0%49.0%
2020
624
13.9%40.4%47.3%
2021
639
16.3%33.3%50.4%
2022
607
18.8%29.7%52.1%
2023
671
18.3%24.4%57.5%
2024
644
22.4%30.6%47.8%
2025
595
25.2%30.6%45.4%
2026
249
26.9%31.3%42.6%

Evidence in granted and denied median nerve paralysis decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the median nerve paralysis 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 opinion78868.2%27.3%+40.9 pts
Favorable VA exam61458.4%30.9%+27.4 pts
Treating physician opinion26359.4%33.9%+25.5 pts
Private medical opinion1,59246.4%30.0%+16.4 pts
Buddy statement17350.5%34.9%+15.6 pts
Claimed as secondary1,13540.6%34.5%+6.1 pts
Combat service25340.3%35.2%+5.1 pts
Lay statement4,61635.2%36.9%−1.7 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 66.1% of the decisions that granted median nerve paralysis.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 38.1% of grants and 10.3% 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 median nerve paralysis was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion2,93732.4%39.4%−7.0 pts
Unfavorable VA exam4,15033.8%42.3%−8.5 pts

Why the Board granted or denied median nerve paralysis

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established151
  2. Caused by the service-connected disability41
  3. Continuity of symptomatology since service28
  4. Service connection established21
  5. Criteria for service connection met18
  6. Service connection granted9
  7. New and material evidence submitted8
  8. Service records negative or silent7

Most common reasons in denials

  1. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis293
  2. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service231
  3. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim196
  4. Service records negative or silent177
  5. No current diagnosis168
  6. Current diagnosis established92
  7. Criteria for service connection not met40
  8. No continuity of symptomatology35

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 median nerve paralysis decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26040130Martin B. Peters · 2026

Current right wrist disorder diagnosed as carpal tunnel syndrome.; Treatment records from civilian hospital and Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status dated July 21, 2017, indicate injury on that date.; Disorder had onset during ACDUTRA in 2017.

Citation Nr. A26039418D. Smart · 2026

Private medical opinion found condition at least as likely as not caused by service-connected left wrist injury.; VA opinions found condition less likely than not related to service.; Evidence found to be in approximate balance, with doubt resolved in Veteran's favor.

Citation Nr. A26039129K. Parakkal · 2026

Continuity of symptomatology since service established; Credible lay statements regarding in-service onset of pain/tingling; MOS involved copious typing; Service treatment records silent on left upper extremity issues, but this is not substantive negative evidence

Denied

Citation Nr. A26039785J. B. Freeman · 2026

No evidence of current diagnosis or in-service complaints; Symptoms began after service, not in service; No competent medical opinion linking to service

Citation Nr. A26039615Cory M. Picton · 2026

Persuasive evidence weighs against in-service injury or disease.; No relevant findings in service treatment records.; Normal separation examination findings.; Substantial gap between service separation and first documented symptoms.

Citation Nr. A26038602Cynthia M. Bruce · 2026

Symptoms are mild and wholly sensory.; Evidence weighs against a rating in excess of 10 percent.; Benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply.

Rules that apply to median nerve paralysis claims

Research your median nerve paralysis 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 median nerve paralysis 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.