Secondary service connection

Intervertebral disc syndrome secondary to a knee condition: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided intervertebral disc syndrome claimed as secondary to a knee condition in 1,662 decisions. It granted the issue in 20.5% of them, close to the 19.6% grant rate for all intervertebral disc syndrome issues, denied it in 12.5%, and remanded it in 65.3%. Counting only decisions on the merits, 62.2% were granted.

Decisions

1,662

2018–2026

Granted

20.5%

All intervertebral disc syndrome: 19.6%

Granted on the merits

62.2%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

65.3%

Denied: 12.5%

See all intervertebral disc syndrome decisions, direct and secondary.

Intervertebral disc syndrome secondary to a knee condition: outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
182
15.4%17.6%64.3%
2019
211
16.6%9.5%71.1%
2020
205
18.5%16.6%63.4%
2021
213
17.8%13.6%67.1%
2022
196
13.8%10.2%74.0%
2023
209
20.6%11.0%67.0%
2024
206
26.7%7.8%64.6%
2025
161
32.9%13.7%52.8%
2026
79
30.4%13.9%54.4%

Evidence in granted and denied intervertebral disc syndrome decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the intervertebral disc syndrome 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 opinion42791.6%30.4%+61.2 pts
Private medical opinion66475.7%40.8%+34.9 pts
Favorable VA exam16977.7%58.7%+19.0 pts
Treating physician opinion10278.0%60.3%+17.6 pts
Combat service4560.0%62.3%−2.3 pts
Lay statement1,34957.1%85.0%−27.9 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 79.2% of the decisions that granted intervertebral disc syndrome.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 24.0% of grants and 12.1% 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 intervertebral disc syndrome was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion1,15059.1%72.3%−13.2 pts
Unfavorable VA exam1,37560.6%74.2%−13.7 pts

Why the Board granted or denied intervertebral disc syndrome

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Caused by the service-connected disability60
  2. Service connection established29
  3. Current diagnosis established27
  4. Aggravated by the service-connected disability21
  5. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service11
  6. Criteria for service connection met6
  7. New and material evidence received to reopen claim4
  8. New and material evidence submitted to reopen claim3

Most common reasons in denials

  1. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service37
  2. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis29
  3. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim29
  4. Service records negative or silent22
  5. Aggravated by the service-connected disability18
  6. Caused by the service-connected disability9
  7. No continuity of symptomatology7
  8. Continuity of symptomatology since service6

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 intervertebral disc syndrome decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26039145Matthew W. Blackwelder · 2026

Conflicting medical opinions regarding nexus; VA examiner: less likely than not related to knee condition; Private provider: at least as likely as not related to knee condition; Board found private opinion more probative due to rationale and consistency

Citation Nr. A26037707B. D. Watson · 2026

VA opinion inadequate for failing to address aggravation; Private treatment note persuasive regarding gait changes exacerbating back pain; Veteran testimony supported gait strain on lower back; Evidence in approximate balance, doubt resolved in Veteran's favor

Citation Nr. A26036913Tanya Smith · 2026

Current disability documented in VA treatment records; Persuasive private medical opinion linking back condition to service-connected knee disabilities; Opinion stated it is more likely than not the back pain is due to in-service injury and knee replacement

Denied

Citation Nr. A26037649M. M. Celli · 2026

No causal relationship to service or service-connected knee disabilities.; Onset of back pain reported years after service.; No in-service event or diagnosis for back disorder.

Citation Nr. A26024687S. Heneks · 2026

Contemporaneous medical evidence more probative than later statements; VA examiner opinions found less likely than not related to service/aggravated by knee disability; Lengthy period between service and symptom onset weighs against claim

Citation Nr. 26002587E. I. Velez · 2026

Failure to attend VA examination without good cause; Service treatment records silent for back complaints/diagnoses; No evidence of nexus to service or secondary service connection

Rules that apply to secondary intervertebral disc syndrome claims

Research your intervertebral disc syndrome 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

  • Counts decisions in which the Board decided a intervertebral disc syndrome issue claimed as secondary to a knee condition, by the outcome of that issue.
  • The primary disability is read from the decision text ("secondary to …") and grouped by name, so spellings such as "PTSD" and "posttraumatic stress disorder" count together.
  • Secondary claims also include aggravation of a non-service-connected condition by a service-connected one (38 CFR 3.310(b)).
  • 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.