Thoracic Spine VA Rating

The single most counterintuitive fact about a thoracic spine claim is that the VA does not rate the thoracic spine as its own thing. Under 38 CFR § 4.71a, the thoracic (mid-back) and lumbar (low-back) segments are rated together as one unit called the "thoracolumbar" spine. A purely thoracic condition gets evaluated on thoracolumbar range of motion under the General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine. There is no separate scoring lane for the mid-back in isolation.

That structure trips up a lot of claims. A veteran with a thoracic strain or thoracic degenerative changes expects the examiner to measure how the mid-back moves. The General Rating Formula does not work that way. It measures forward flexion and combined range of motion of the whole thoracolumbar segment, and the same numbers that drive a low-back rating drive a thoracic-only rating. If the C&P exam treats the thoracic spine as a freestanding joint and measures it in isolation, the rating is built on the wrong data.

This page covers the thoracic spine VA rating: why the mid-back is rated with the low back, the codes that apply to a thoracic condition (principally DC 5237 for thoracic strain and DC 5242 for degenerative arthritis), the thoracolumbar rating chart, the separate-rating rule for thoracic radiculopathy and other nerve problems, the DeLuca and Sharp functional-loss framework, the C&P exam, and why VA denies thoracic spine claims. For a low-back claim, the back page covers the lumbar spine in full. Claim Raven read 2,395 decided Board rulings on thoracic spine conditions from 2021 to 2026, and remand was the most common result, at 46.4 percent. A ruling is one issue the Board decided in one decision; one decision often rules on several issues. When the Board sent these appeals back, the most common reason was an inadequate VA exam or opinion, and the regulatory structure is a big part of why.

TL;DR

• The VA does not rate the thoracic spine in isolation. Under 38 CFR § 4.71a, the thoracic and lumbar segments are rated together as the "thoracolumbar" spine under the General Rating Formula. This is the key, counterintuitive point.
• A thoracic-only condition is scored on thoracolumbar forward flexion and combined range of motion, the same measurements that drive a low-back rating.
• Common codes: DC 5237 (lumbosacral or cervical strain, which VA also uses for thoracic strain), DC 5242 (degenerative arthritis of the spine), and DC 5243 (intervertebral disc syndrome), within the DC 5235 to DC 5243 family.
• The thoracolumbar tiers run 10%, 20%, 40%, with 50% for unfavorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine and 100% for unfavorable ankylosis of the entire spine.
• Note (1) of the formula requires associated objective neurologic abnormalities (radiculopathy, bowel, bladder) to be rated separately, which is where additional rating points live.
• DeLuca v. Brown and Sharp v. Shulkin apply: the rater has to account for functional loss during flare-ups, and 38 CFR § 4.59 brings painful motion into the analysis.
• Across 2,395 decided Board rulings on thoracic spine conditions from 2021 to 2026, 23.1% were granted, 30.5% denied and 46.4% remanded. Remand is the most common outcome, and the grant rate is 1.6 points below the Board-wide 24.7%. Rating appeals outnumbered service connection appeals and were granted much less often; the Board section below shows results by what the appeal asked for and by diagnostic code.

Why the thoracic spine is rated with the lumbar spine

The General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine in 38 CFR § 4.71a divides the spine into two rating segments, not three. One segment is cervical (the neck). The other is thoracolumbar, which combines the thoracic and lumbar portions into a single unit. Note (6) to the formula says to evaluate the thoracolumbar and cervical segments separately, except when both have unfavorable ankylosis. There is no standalone thoracic segment to rate.

This was a deliberate change. Before September 26, 2003, the schedule had separate codes for the dorsal (thoracic) spine, including limitation of motion of the dorsal spine. When VA proposed the current formula in 2002, it explained the merger this way: "Because the thoracic and lumbar segments ordinarily move as a unit, it is clinically difficult to separate the range of movement of one from that of the other." The anatomy points the same way. The rib cage attaches to the thoracic spine, and a 2022 review in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology (Liebsch) found that it stiffens the thoracic spine in every direction of motion. So a condition limited to the mid-back may change the thoracolumbar flexion number only a little.

The practical consequence: when you file for a thoracic condition, the rating is built on the same range-of-motion math as a lumbar claim. Forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine, combined range of motion of the thoracolumbar spine, muscle spasm, guarding, and abnormal spinal contour are what the rater scores. A thoracic strain (DC 5237) and thoracic degenerative arthritis (DC 5242) both run through the General Rating Formula, and both are measured on the whole thoracolumbar segment.

Mid-back, low back and neck: how many spine ratings

If your mid-back condition coexists with a low-back condition, that does not produce two separate spine ratings for the same segment. Pyramiding under 38 CFR § 4.14 blocks rating the same thoracolumbar segment twice, so the thoracic and lumbar findings combine into one thoracolumbar evaluation. A neck (cervical) condition, by contrast, is a different rating segment and is rated separately. So a veteran with both neck and mid-back conditions has two spine ratings (cervical plus thoracolumbar), while a veteran with both mid-back and low-back conditions has one (thoracolumbar). What can be rated separately on top of the spine rating are neurologic abnormalities, which I cover below.

Thoracic strain, arthritis and disc codes (DC 5237, DC 5242, DC 5243)

The spine codes run from DC 5235 to DC 5243. A thoracic claim almost always lands on one of a small number of them, and nearly all are rated under the same General Rating Formula. The diagnostic code is mostly a label for the underlying pathology. The rating tiers are shared.

DC 5237, Lumbosacral or cervical strain. Despite the name, VA uses this code for a thoracic or thoracolumbar strain too; Board decisions on thoracic strain rate it under DC 5237. A soft-tissue mid-back strain without a more specific structural diagnosis usually rates here, on thoracolumbar range of motion.

DC 5242, Degenerative arthritis of the spine. Degenerative changes in the thoracic vertebrae rate here, and the current text also places degenerative disc disease other than intervertebral disc syndrome under this code. The code's title also points to DC 5003 or DC 5010 (arthritis). DC 5242 is evaluated under the General Rating Formula (range of motion).

DC 5243, Intervertebral disc syndrome. The current text reserves this code for disc herniation with compression or irritation of the adjacent nerve root, and assigns DC 5242 for all other disc diagnoses. Symptomatic thoracic disc herniation is rare; a 2019 review in International Orthopaedics (Bouthors) described it as mostly located between T8 and L1 and identified on CT and MRI. Disc syndrome is rated under the General Rating Formula or under the incapacitating-episodes formula, whichever gives the higher evaluation when all disabilities are combined. The incapacitating-episodes formula rates 10 percent for a total of at least one week in the past 12 months, 20 percent for at least two weeks, 40 percent for at least four weeks, and 60 percent for at least six weeks. An incapacitating episode counts only when a physician prescribed bed rest and treated it. The back page covers that pathway in detail.

The DC 5235 to DC 5243 family generally. This block also covers vertebral fracture or dislocation (DC 5235), sacroiliac injury and weakness (DC 5236), spinal stenosis (DC 5238), spondylolisthesis or segmental instability (DC 5239), ankylosing spondylitis (DC 5240), and spinal fusion (DC 5241). Apart from the disc-syndrome incapacitating-episode method, all of them rate under the General Rating Formula on motion and ankylosis.

The point that matters for a thoracic claim: the code chosen does not change the measurement. Whether the file calls it DC 5237 strain or DC 5242 arthritis, the rater is scoring thoracolumbar forward flexion, combined range of motion, and the spasm, guarding, and contour findings. In the Board's thoracic spine rating appeals, DC 5237 and DC 5242 came up most often, with similar results; the Board section below breaks rating appeals out by diagnostic code.

Thoracolumbar spine VA rating chart

The General Rating Formula does not use the same tiers for the thoracolumbar segment and the cervical segment. The cervical spine has a 30% tier and tops out at 40% for unfavorable ankylosis of the entire cervical spine. The thoracolumbar spine has no 30% tier and reaches 50% for unfavorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine. The thoracolumbar levels are these.

Normal forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine is 90 degrees. Normal combined range of motion (flexion plus extension plus left and right lateral flexion plus left and right rotation) is 240 degrees, and each measurement is rounded to the nearest five degrees. The formula applies "with or without symptoms such as pain (whether or not it radiates), stiffness, or aching in the area of the spine affected by residuals of injury or disease," which means pain does not have to be present for the motion-based rating to apply. Pain alone does not raise the rating past the measured tier; under Mitchell v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 32 (2011), pain counts as functional loss when it limits the normal working movements of the body.

Favorable and unfavorable ankylosis of the thoracolumbar spine

Note (5) to the formula defines unfavorable ankylosis as the entire cervical spine, the entire thoracolumbar spine, or the entire spine fixed in flexion or extension, with at least one listed consequence: difficulty walking because of a limited line of vision, restricted opening of the mouth and chewing, breathing limited to diaphragmatic respiration, gastrointestinal symptoms due to pressure of the costal margin on the abdomen, dyspnea or dysphagia, atlantoaxial or cervical subluxation or dislocation, or neurologic symptoms due to nerve root stretching. Fixation in the neutral position (zero degrees) is always favorable ankylosis.

What this means for a thoracic claim

Two things stand out. First, because the thoracic and lumbar segments move as a unit and the rib cage stiffens the mid-back, a thoracic-only condition may produce a relatively small reduction in thoracolumbar flexion, which can land at the 10% or 20% tier rather than the 40% tier. Second, the 20% "muscle spasm or guarding severe enough to result in an abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour" pathway does not require any specific flexion number. Documented spasm or guarding that produces an abnormal contour such as kyphosis can carry a 20% rating on its own, so check that the exam records spasm, guarding, and contour.

Thoracic radiculopathy and other nerve ratings (Note 1)

Note (1) to the General Rating Formula says: "Evaluate any associated objective neurologic abnormalities, including, but not limited to, bowel or bladder impairment, separately, under an appropriate diagnostic code." This is where additional rating points can come from in a spine claim, and it is easy to miss.

The orthopedic rating (the thoracolumbar motion score) and the neurologic ratings are not the same impairment, so rating them separately does not violate pyramiding under 38 CFR § 4.14. A thoracic disc condition that produces nerve root symptoms can carry the thoracolumbar motion rating plus a separate rating for the radiculopathy. Bowel or bladder impairment associated with the spine condition is also rated separately under its own code.

Thoracic radiculopathy presents differently than lumbar radiculopathy. Instead of pain down a leg, it can show up as pain in the chest wall, the flank, or the abdomen. Case reports describe a thoracic disc herniation that caused only severe flank pain (Ishii, NMC Case Report Journal, 2020) and thoracic radiculopathy as a cause of chest and abdominal pain (Taiello, BMJ Case Reports, 2020). Because it does not look like classic sciatica, it is easy to overlook. VA's back exam form builds its radiculopathy section around the leg nerves, but it has an "other nerves" line and a separate section for other neurologic abnormalities, which is where a thoracic finding belongs. The separate neurologic rating only gets applied when the objective abnormality is documented: a specific nerve, a measurable sensory or motor deficit, and a link to the spine condition.

The risk is that the orthopedic motion rating gets assigned and the neurologic question never gets developed. If the exam does not include a focused neurologic assessment of the affected nerve distribution, there is no objective finding for the rater to act on, and Note (1) goes unused. A complete claim documents the neurologic abnormality as its own line of evidence rather than assuming the motion rating captures it. The radiculopathy page covers how nerve impairment is rated.

Flare-ups and functional loss: DeLuca and Sharp

The functional-loss framework matters in spine claims the same way it matters in joint claims, and it interacts with the thoracic spine's natural stiffness in a specific way.

DeLuca v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 202 (1995), requires range-of-motion ratings to account for additional functional loss from pain, weakness, fatigability, or incoordination, not just the static measurement taken in the exam room. 38 CFR § 4.59 recognizes painful motion with joint or periarticular pathology as productive of disability. Sharp v. Shulkin (2017) requires the C&P examiner, when the veteran reports flare-ups, to estimate the additional functional loss during a flare in terms of degrees of lost motion, drawing on the veteran's own account when the exam is not done during a flare, or to explain why an estimate is not feasible. The examiner cannot stop at "no flare observed today."

For a thoracic claim, this plays out around the flexion thresholds. Measured thoracolumbar flexion on the day of the exam might be 70 degrees, which sits at the 10% tier. But the veteran reports that during flare-ups the mid-back locks up, flexion drops sharply, and bending or twisting becomes impossible for days. Under DeLuca, § 4.59, and Sharp, the rater is supposed to consider the flare presentation, and a flare that pulls effective flexion down into the range above 30 and up to 60 degrees supports the 20% tier rather than the 10% tier.

When the examiner writes "veteran reports occasional flare-ups" without a degree estimate or an explanation, the exam is inadequate under Sharp, and the Board can send the case back for a new one. An inadequate VA exam or opinion was the most common reason the Board sent thoracic spine appeals back; the Board section below shows how often each remand reason came up.

The evidence that supports a Sharp analysis comes from the veteran's own documentation: a symptom journal tracking which days the mid-back flares and what it stops you from doing, work-absence records, and lay statements from people who see you on bad days.

The thoracic spine C&P exam (back DBQ)

The spine C&P exam follows VA's Back (Thoracolumbar Spine) Conditions DBQ. The measurements are not optional, and a thoracic claim lives or dies on whether they were taken correctly. The form has no field for thoracic motion alone; every range-of-motion entry is for the thoracolumbar spine.

• Forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine, with a goniometer, in degrees, against a normal endpoint of 90 degrees.
• Extension, left and right lateral flexion, and left and right rotation, each measured, so combined range of motion can be calculated.
• Active and passive range of motion, and pain on weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing.
• Repetitive-use testing with at least three repetitions, with re-measurement.
• The point in the arc where pain begins.
• A flare-up estimate with quantified functional loss where feasible, under Sharp.
• Muscle spasm, guarding, and localized tenderness, and whether they produce abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour.
• A focused neurologic assessment of any affected nerve distribution, for the Note (1) separate rating.

A damaging error in a thoracic claim is the examiner measuring the thoracic spine in isolation, or describing thoracic motion qualitatively, instead of recording thoracolumbar forward flexion and combined range of motion under the General Rating Formula. The formula has no input for isolated thoracic degrees. If the report does not contain thoracolumbar flexion and the other planes of motion, the rater does not have the data the rating tiers require, and the case is built to be remanded.

Remand was the most common thoracic spine outcome, at 46.4 percent of decided rulings, against a Board-wide remand rate of 45.3 percent, and an inadequate VA exam or opinion was the most common reason for those remands, ahead of records VA still needed to get.

How to prove a thoracic spine condition is service connected

Every thoracic spine claim needs a current diagnosis, an in-service injury, event, or onset, and a link between them. Among the thoracic spine service connection rulings the Board decided from 2021 to 2026, direct claims outnumbered secondary ones and were granted more often; the Board section below shows both.

Direct service connection

Direct service connection covers a mid-back condition that began in service: a fall, a vehicle accident, a parachute landing, a lifting injury, or a strain documented in service treatment records. The nexus opinion has to tie the current diagnosis to that event, and it is stronger when the record shows mid-back complaints continuing after service.

Thoracic spine conditions secondary to a service-connected condition

The secondary route under 38 CFR § 3.310 allows service connection for a condition caused by a service-connected condition, or aggravated by it, meaning it would be less severe but for the service-connected condition (Allen v. Brown). An opinion that addresses only causation and skips aggravation is inadequate (El-Amin v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 136 (2013)). The chains that involve the thoracic spine include these.

Posture and altered mechanics between spine segments. A thoracic condition that changes how you hold yourself, or forces compensatory posture, can be argued as contributing to cervical or lumbar strain over time, and the reverse. The nexus opinion has to explain the mechanism and time course, not just assert proximity.

Thoracic disc disease to radiculopathy. As covered under Note (1), nerve-root involvement at a thoracic level is rated separately rather than as a secondary claim, but it has to be developed as objective neurologic evidence.

Chronic pain to a mental health condition. Chronic mid-back pain that limits activity is sometimes argued as a contributor to a mental health condition such as depression, and these arguments rise and fall on the quality of the medical opinion.

For any of these, the standard is the same one that governs every secondary claim. A bare "this is secondary to that" without rationale is not probative. A factually accurate, fully articulated opinion that identifies the mechanism, addresses the time course, and rules out other causes carries the case.

Why VA denies thoracic spine claims

Thoracic spine claims land a little below the Board average. Across 2,395 decided Board rulings on thoracic spine conditions from 2021 to 2026, 23.1% were granted, 30.5% denied and 46.4% remanded, a grant rate 1.6 points below the Board-wide 24.7 percent. When the Board denied service connection for a thoracic spine condition, the most common reason was a missing link to service, ahead of no in-service injury or event and no current diagnosis. The patterns behind those denials, and behind ratings that come in low, repeat.

The exam measures the wrong thing. The examiner treats the thoracic spine as an isolated joint and records thoracic motion, or describes the mid-back qualitatively, instead of recording thoracolumbar forward flexion and combined range of motion under the General Rating Formula. The rater then has no input the rating tiers can use. This is the structural trap unique to thoracic claims.

No flare-up estimate. The same Sharp problem that recurs in every musculoskeletal claim. The DBQ flags flare-ups, the examiner does not quantify them in degrees, and the functional-loss layer that could move a 10% rating to 20% never reaches the rating decision.

The neurologic question is never developed. Note (1) lets associated radiculopathy and bowel or bladder impairment be rated separately, but only on objective findings. Thoracic nerve involvement can show up as trunk, flank, or abdominal pain rather than classic sciatica, so it gets overlooked. Without a focused neurologic exam, the separate rating goes unused.

Spasm and contour findings are not recorded. The 20% tier can be reached through muscle spasm or guarding severe enough to produce abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour, with no specific flexion number required. If the exam does not document spasm, guarding, and contour (kyphosis, scoliosis, reversed lordosis), that alternative pathway to 20% is unavailable.

No nexus, or a vague diagnosis. A mid-back complaint logged in primary care as "thoracic pain" without imaging or a specific diagnosis tends to default to a minimal strain rating, and a claim with no opinion tying the condition to service fails at the link. A disc herniation is identified on CT or MRI; without the imaging that supports degenerative arthritis or disc syndrome, the structural basis for a higher rating is missing.

A secondary opinion that skips aggravation. When the thoracic condition is claimed as secondary, a negative opinion that addresses only causation is inadequate.

A favorable medical opinion the Board found persuasive went with a grant, and an opinion against the claim went with a denial. The Board section below shows how often each denial and remand reason came up, and what the Board did with medical opinions.

What to push for in a thoracic spine claim

A thoracic claim is won on getting the right measurements into the file. Three things move it.

First, make sure the exam scores the thoracolumbar segment, not the thoracic spine in isolation. The General Rating Formula needs thoracolumbar forward flexion and combined range of motion. An evidence checklist for spine claims should put thoracolumbar flexion, the other planes of motion, spasm and contour findings, and the neurologic assessment into their own proof lanes so nothing gets skipped.

Second, document flare-ups before the exam. A flare log with dates, what the mid-back stops you from doing on bad days, missed work, and any reduction in motion gives the examiner the facts a Sharp estimate requires. Use C&P exam prep for the thoracolumbar DBQ and track thoracic flare-ups and bad days ahead of time.

Third, develop the neurologic question separately. If you have trunk, chest-wall, flank, or abdominal pain or numbness that follows a nerve, ask for a focused neurologic assessment so a Note (1) separate rating has objective findings to rest on. Review the secondary conditions tool for the radiculopathy and posture chains.

Questions veterans ask about the thoracic spine

Does VA rate the thoracic spine separately from the lumbar spine?

No. The General Rating Formula in 38 CFR 4.71a rates the thoracic and lumbar spine together as one thoracolumbar segment, so a mid-back condition and a low-back condition share one spine rating. The neck (cervical spine) is rated separately, and nerve problems tied to the spine get their own ratings under Note (1).

What is the VA rating for a thoracic strain?

VA rates a thoracic strain under DC 5237 on thoracolumbar motion: 10 percent for forward flexion greater than 60 but not greater than 85 degrees, 20 percent for flexion greater than 30 but not greater than 60 degrees, and 40 percent for flexion of 30 degrees or less. Combined range of motion, muscle spasm, guarding, and abnormal contour can also set the 10 or 20 percent level.

What does forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine 30 degrees or less mean?

It means you can bend forward at the waist no more than 30 degrees, measured with a goniometer, against a normal of 90 degrees. Under the General Rating Formula it supports a 40 percent rating, the highest level short of ankylosis. Flexion greater than 30 but not greater than 60 degrees is 20 percent.

What is unfavorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine?

It is the entire thoracolumbar spine fixed in flexion or extension with at least one serious consequence listed in Note (5) of the spine formula, such as difficulty walking because of a limited line of vision, breathing limited to the diaphragm, or nerve symptoms from nerve root stretching. It rates 50 percent. Fixation in the neutral position is favorable ankylosis, which rates 40 percent.

Can thoracic radiculopathy be rated separately from my spine rating?

Yes, when the exam documents objective nerve findings. Note (1) to the spine rating formula tells VA to rate associated objective neurologic abnormalities separately, and the ratings then combine. Thoracic nerve symptoms can show up in the chest wall, flank, or abdomen, so ask for a focused neurologic assessment.

Is thoracic kyphosis a VA disability?

It can be part of a service-connected thoracic spine disability. The spine formula assigns 20 percent when muscle spasm or guarding is severe enough to cause an abnormal spinal contour such as abnormal kyphosis, and a vertebral fracture is rated under DC 5235, where loss of 50 percent or more of the vertebral body height supports at least 10 percent.

Bottom Line

A thoracic spine rating is not a mid-back rating. It is a thoracolumbar rating, scored on forward flexion and combined range of motion of the whole lower-and-mid-back segment under the General Rating Formula in 38 CFR § 4.71a. The diagnostic-code label (DC 5237 strain, DC 5242 arthritis) does not change the measurement. The motion does. The two failures to watch for: the exam measures the thoracic spine in isolation instead of the thoracolumbar segment, or it skips the flare-up estimate and the neurologic assessment that Sharp and Note (1) require. The cases that succeed have a complete thoracolumbar exam, a documented flare history, and any associated neurologic abnormality developed as its own line of evidence. Same condition, different paper trail, different outcome.

Related Conditions

Thoracic spine claims share rating logic and proof issues with the rest of the spine. They connect most directly to back and cervical spine claims, since all three run through the spine formulas, and to degenerative disc disease, herniated disc, spinal stenosis, scoliosis, and radiculopathy where the underlying pathology overlaps. Veterans with mid-back and low-back conditions should remember those merge into one thoracolumbar rating, while a neck condition rates separately, and should review the secondary conditions tool before assuming a single spine rating tells the whole story.

Methodology and Limitations

• Data source: Rating criteria quoted from 38 CFR § 4.71a, the General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine and its Notes (1) through (6), DCs 5235 through 5243, principally DC 5237 and DC 5242, and the Formula for Rating Intervertebral Disc Syndrome Based on Incapacitating Episodes. Pyramiding from § 4.14. Painful motion from § 4.59. Secondary service connection from § 3.310. Regulations re-checked against the eCFR current text on 2026-10-06. The reason for merging the thoracic and lumbar segments is quoted from VA's proposed rule, Schedule for Rating Disabilities; The Spine, 67 FR 56509 (September 4, 2002); the final rule took effect September 26, 2003. Case law from DeLuca v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 202 (1995), Mitchell v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 32 (2011), Sharp v. Shulkin (2017), Allen v. Brown (1995), and El-Amin v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 136 (2013). Exam details come from VA's public Back (Thoracolumbar Spine) Conditions disability benefits questionnaire, fetched from benefits.va.gov on 2026-10-06.
• Medical sources: Liebsch, "How Does the Rib Cage Affect the Biomechanical Properties of the Thoracic Spine? A Systematic Literature Review," Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology (2022). Bouthors, "Surgical treatment of thoracic disc herniation: an overview," International Orthopaedics (2019). Ishii, "Thoracic Disc Herniation Manifesting as Abdominal Pain Alone Associated with Thoracic Radiculopathy," NMC Case Report Journal (2020). Taiello, "Diabetic thoracic radiculopathy," BMJ Case Reports (2020).
• Board snapshot: Claim Raven's read of every Board decision from 2021 to 2026 that it holds covers 2,395 decided Board rulings on thoracic spine conditions: 23.1% granted (including partial grants and mixed outcomes), 30.5% denied, and 46.4% remanded. Dismissed, withdrawn and moot rulings are excluded. These are appealed claims, not your personal odds.
• Sample size: Patterns in this post are drawn from Claim Raven's read of 511,036 Board decisions from 2021 to 2026 containing 1,378,030 rulings, including 2,655 Board rulings on thoracic spine conditions (2,395 with decided outcomes). Among the decided rulings, outcomes ran 554 granted (23.1%), 1,111 remanded (46.4%), and 730 denied (30.5%). The Board section below the article breaks these out by appeal type, claim theory, diagnostic code, medical opinion, and denial and remand reason.
• Classification approach: Diagnostic code definitions and rating tiers drawn from the regulatory text. The thoracolumbar-segment structure follows the General Rating Formula as written.
• Limitations:
• Rating tiers and degree thresholds are quoted from the General Rating Formula. The formula text is periodically amended, so confirm the current version of § 4.71a for any active claim.
• The thoracic spine has no isolated rating segment; all figures here reflect thoracolumbar measurement, which is the regulatory design.
• Selection bias: Board-level patterns reflect cases that appealed. Many thoracic spine claims resolve at the regional office level and are not in any Board dataset.
• Application of the Sharp v. Shulkin and § 4.59 functional-loss framework at the regional office level is uneven.
• The thoracic radiculopathy sources are case reports and a surgical review, which describe how the condition can present, not how often.
• These observations reflect patterns from the regulatory text, case law, and Board decisions. They are not predictions of individual outcomes.