BVA decisions by condition

Wrist impairment: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a wrist impairment issue in 7,038 decisions. It granted the wrist impairment issue in 12.3% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 36.3%, and remanded it in 51.5%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 25.3% were granted.

Decisions

7,038

2017–2026

Granted

12.3%

All conditions: 19.4%

Granted on the merits

25.3%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

51.5%

Denied: 36.3%

Wrist impairment outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2017
420
7.4%41.4%49.8%
2018
673
9.5%35.5%53.5%
2019
774
8.1%35.0%55.9%
2020
763
9.0%42.9%48.9%
2021
736
11.0%39.5%48.9%
2022
707
10.9%28.3%61.5%
2023
905
12.9%30.2%56.8%
2024
846
14.5%35.1%51.8%
2025
909
17.9%41.6%41.9%
2026
305
25.6%35.1%40.0%

Evidence in granted and denied wrist impairment decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the wrist impairment 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 opinion82357.9%18.6%+39.4 pts
Favorable VA exam73946.7%21.2%+25.5 pts
Treating physician opinion24846.0%24.4%+21.6 pts
Buddy statement24141.5%24.7%+16.9 pts
Combat service33138.7%24.6%+14.1 pts
Claimed as secondary58337.7%24.6%+13.1 pts
Private medical opinion1,66534.3%21.8%+12.4 pts
Lay statement5,87825.9%21.7%+4.1 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 73.0% of the decisions that granted wrist impairment.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 52.0% of grants and 13.4% 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 wrist impairment was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion3,20126.9%23.8%+3.1 pts
Unfavorable VA exam5,21524.4%29.8%−5.4 pts

Why the Board granted or denied wrist impairment

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established157
  2. Caused by the service-connected disability22
  3. Continuity of symptomatology since service20
  4. Criteria for service connection met19
  5. Already at the maximum schedular rating18
  6. Evidence evenly balanced9
  7. Service connection granted7
  8. In-service injury documented7

Most common reasons in denials

  1. Already at the maximum schedular rating353
  2. No current diagnosis256
  3. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim253
  4. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis182
  5. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service175
  6. Service records negative or silent153
  7. Current diagnosis established114
  8. No evidence of ankylosis81

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 wrist impairment decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26040785S. Sorathia · 2026

Lay statements consistent with service; STRs show complaint of ankle pain; Benefit of the doubt applied

Citation Nr. A26040148Bethany L. Buck · 2026

In-service injury alleged (assault with metal rod); Private medical records show old injury, instability, and pain; Fellow veteran corroborates in-service assault; Pain alone can constitute functional impairment/disability; VA examiner opinion found inadequate (conflated chronicity of care with continuity of symptoms)

Citation Nr. A26039871Marjorie A. Auer · 2026

Resolving reasonable doubt in Veteran's favor; At least as likely as not related to RTV in-service accident

Denied

Citation Nr. A26038803C.A. Skow · 2026

No in-service injury, event, or disease involving the right wrist was persuasively established.; Service treatment records showed no complaints or pathology of the right wrist.; Private treatment records also showed no complaints or abnormalities of the right wrist.; Veteran's lay reports of symptoms were found less credible due to inconsistencies and lack of corroboration.

Citation Nr. A26038432R. Bisignani · 2026

Criteria for rating in excess of 10% not met.; No evidence of ankylosis or functional equivalent.; Current limitation of motion does not warrant higher rating under DC 5215.

Citation Nr. A26038289A. Ishizawar · 2026

No evidence of current left wrist disability; No in-service complaints or diagnosis documented; No persuasive evidence of functional impairment

Rules that apply to wrist impairment claims

Research your wrist impairment 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 wrist impairment 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.