Secondary service connection
Urinary incontinence secondary to a back condition: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided urinary incontinence claimed as secondary to a back condition in 378 decisions. It granted the issue in 23.3% of them, above the 21.2% grant rate for all urinary incontinence issues, denied it in 22.8%, and remanded it in 52.9%. Counting only decisions on the merits, 50.6% were granted.
Decisions
378
2018–2026
Granted
23.3%
All urinary incontinence: 21.2%
Granted on the merits
50.6%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
52.9%
Denied: 22.8%
See all urinary incontinence decisions, direct and secondary.
Urinary incontinence secondary to a back condition: outcomes by year
| Year | Decisions | Granted | Denied | Remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 43 | 23.3% | 41.9% | 32.6% |
| 2019 | 56 | 23.2% | 26.8% | 48.2% |
| 2020 | 44 | 11.4% | 22.7% | 63.6% |
| 2021 | 46 | 17.4% | 26.1% | 56.5% |
| 2022 | 42 | 16.7% | 23.8% | 59.5% |
| 2023 | 39 | 35.9% | 10.3% | 53.8% |
| 2024 | 48 | 22.9% | 14.6% | 60.4% |
| 2025 | 52 | 36.5% | 17.3% | 46.2% |
Evidence in granted and denied urinary incontinence decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the urinary incontinence 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 | 74 | 78.6% | 37.3% | +41.3 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 57 | 68.3% | 45.1% | +23.2 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 118 | 60.5% | 42.9% | +17.7 pts |
| Lay statement | 292 | 49.0% | 58.6% | −9.7 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 79.5% of the decisions that granted urinary incontinence.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 25.0% of grants and 18.6% 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 urinary incontinence 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 226 | 45.9% | 58.7% | −12.8 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 304 | 48.3% | 62.1% | −13.8 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied urinary incontinence
Most common reasons in grants
- Caused by the service-connected disability17
- Service connection established8
- Current diagnosis established4
- Criteria for secondary service connection met3
- Secondary to lumbar spine disability2
Most common reasons in denials
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service17
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim11
- Caused by the service-connected disability7
- No current diagnosis6
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis6
- Service records negative or silent5
- Current diagnosis established3
- Aggravated by the service-connected disability2
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 urinary incontinence decisions
Granted
Evidence in approximate balance for requiring absorbent materials changed less than 2 times per day; Weight of evidence against higher rating; Criteria for 20% rating met
Evidence in approximate balance; Resolved reasonable doubt in veteran's favor; VA opinions lacked specific rationale; Incontinence can be caused by chronic medical conditions
Linked to service-connected quadriplegia; Spinal cord injury affects bladder/bowel function
Denied
VA examiner opined UI was less likely than not related to service-connected conditions.; Prostate brachytherapy identified as a more likely cause of UI.; No evidence of multi-link causal chain or inability to treat UI due to service-connected disabilities.
Incontinence more likely due to prostate cancer/tumor; No evidence of incontinence related to service-connected back/radiculopathy; VA examiners concluded cancer was the cause
No current diagnosis of bowel incontinence; No complaints of bowel incontinence in service or post-service records; March 2018 VA exam found no bowel problems
Rules that apply to secondary urinary incontinence claims
- 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - M21-1 V.ii.2.D
Secondary service connection and aggravation of non-service-connected disabilities
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your urinary incontinence case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Counts decisions in which the Board decided a urinary incontinence issue claimed as secondary to a back 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.