Reference: 38 CFR 4.63/4.68/4.69

Sources & Related Guides

What is the VA rating for Amputations?

Review Amputations guidance covering DC 5104-5111 (8 flat combinations-of-disabilities findings), DC 5120-5125 (7-level upper-extremity amputation schedule with a Major/Minor split), DC 5160-5167 (9-level lower-extremity amputation schedule, including DC 5160's distinct trans-pelvic amputation and disarticulation findings), and DC 5170-5173 (toe amputation schedule, including DC 5170's 2 disjunctive qualifying facts for one 30 percent tier), per RSCH-056.

Condition Overview & Clinical Scope

VA rates amputations and amputation-equivalent (loss of use) findings across 4 families: DC 5104-5111 (8 flat 100 percent 'combinations of disabilities' findings, each its own distinct diagnosis, not a severity ladder), DC 5120-5125 (upper extremity amputation levels, rated on distinct Major (dominant) and Minor (non-dominant) percentage columns -- the same dominance axis used by this site's Muscle Injuries and Peripheral Nerves, Upper Extremity hubs), DC 5160-5167 (lower extremity amputation levels through loss of use of the foot, rated on a single column with no dominance split), and DC 5170-5173 (toe amputation patterns). Three general provisions apply across this range: 38 CFR 4.63 defines when a functional loss is severe enough to be rated as if the limb were amputated ('loss of use'); 38 CFR 4.68 caps the combined rating for a single extremity at the amputation rating for that extremity's amputation level (the 'Amputation Rule'); and 38 CFR 4.69 explains how VA determines which hand is the dominant (major) hand.

EXPLORE THIS CONDITION

Explore Amputations Criteria & Tools

Save this condition to find it again later. Saved only on this device and browser. Never sent to RatingScope. Lost if you clear browser data or switch devices or browsers.

Overview

About this condition

VA rates amputations and amputation-equivalent (loss of use) findings across 4 families: DC 5104-5111 (8 flat 100 percent 'combinations of disabilities' findings, each its own distinct diagnosis, not a severity ladder), DC 5120-5125 (upper extremity amputation levels, rated on distinct Major (dominant) and Minor (non-dominant) percentage columns -- the same dominance axis used by this site's Muscle Injuries and Peripheral Nerves, Upper Extremity hubs), DC 5160-5167 (lower extremity amputation levels through loss of use of the foot, rated on a single column with no dominance split), and DC 5170-5173 (toe amputation patterns). Three general provisions apply across this range: 38 CFR 4.63 defines when a functional loss is severe enough to be rated as if the limb were amputated ('loss of use'); 38 CFR 4.68 caps the combined rating for a single extremity at the amputation rating for that extremity's amputation level (the 'Amputation Rule'); and 38 CFR 4.69 explains how VA determines which hand is the dominant (major) hand.

Regulatory authority: 38 CFR 4.63/4.68/4.69, Diagnostic Codes 5104-5111, 5120-5125, 5160-5173

This hub explains the published DC 5104-5111/5120-5125/5160-5173 schedule and its 3 general provisions. It does not diagnose an amputation or loss-of-use condition, determine service connection, infer undocumented findings, estimate an outcome, or replace medical care or accredited representation. IMPORTANT DISCLOSURE (NHD-1, genuinely unresolved): 38 CFR 4.68's per-extremity Amputation Rule ceiling and 38 CFR 4.26's bilateral-factor instruction to apply the 10 percent addition 'before other combinations are carried out' have no stated order of operations for a veteran with amputations or amputation-equivalent ratings in BOTH members of a paired extremity (e.g., both legs, or both arms). This hub discloses both possible readings side by side and never guesses or defaults to one. A second, narrower disclosure: DC 5104-5111 each carry an 'also entitled to special monthly compensation' footnote -- this hub discloses that footnote but does not model SMC or 38 CFR Part 3 eligibility, which is out of scope.

Percentage Guides

Understanding Your Percentage

Select a pathway to see what the published criteria ask about, what records may clarify it, and what should not be assumed.

100%

Highest listed pathway

This level covers every DC 5104-5111 combination-of-disabilities finding, forequarter amputation (DC 5120) on either extremity, and trans-pelvic amputation (DC 5160).

What separates the next level: Disarticulation at either the shoulder (DC 5120) or the hip (DC 5160) is a genuinely distinct, less extensive finding rated at 90 percent, never the same 100 percent tier.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5104-5111 each list 100 percent for their own combination of disabilities. DC 5120 lists forequarter amputation (complete removal of the humerus along with any portion of the scapula, clavicle, or ribs) at 100 percent for both Major and Minor extremities. DC 5160 lists trans-pelvic amputation (involving complete removal of the femur and intrinsic pelvic musculature along with any portion of the pelvic bones) at 100 percent.
Qualification explanation
These are genuinely distinct findings across 3 diagnostic code families -- a combination-of-disabilities finding, forequarter amputation, and trans-pelvic amputation are not interchangeable, and the record needs to identify which specific finding applies.
Examples
Anatomical loss of both hands is documented (DC 5106).; Forequarter amputation is documented, with removal of a portion of the scapula, clavicle, or ribs along with the humerus.; Trans-pelvic amputation is documented, with removal of a portion of the pelvic bones along with the femur and intrinsic pelvic musculature.
Medical evidence
Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Operative reports identifying the exact amputation level; Records confirming anatomical loss or loss of use across paired limbs
Functional impact examples
Complete loss of limb function at the highest documented severity level in this schedule.
Common misconceptions
Forequarter amputation and disarticulation of the shoulder are distinct findings (100 percent vs. 90 percent), not the same finding under different names.; Trans-pelvic amputation and hip disarticulation are distinct findings (100 percent vs. 90 percent), per the corrected wording confirmed across this hub and the Hip guide.
Related topics
combinations-of-disabilities; dominant-nondominant; lower-extremity-amputation-levels
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5104-5111, 5120, 5160; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

90%

Next: 100%

This level covers disarticulation at the shoulder (DC 5120), amputation above the insertion of the deltoid on the major extremity (DC 5121), and disarticulation at the hip (DC 5160).

What separates the next level: The identical DC 5121 finding on the minor extremity is 80 percent instead -- confirming the Major/Minor axis is genuinely load-bearing for DC 5120-5125.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5120 lists disarticulation (complete removal of the humerus only) at 90 percent for both Major and Minor extremities. DC 5121 lists amputation above the insertion of the deltoid at 90 percent for the Major extremity. DC 5160 lists disarticulation (involving complete removal of the femur and intrinsic pelvic musculature only) at 90 percent.
Qualification explanation
These are distinct findings across 3 diagnostic codes; the same 90 percent value does not mean the underlying findings are interchangeable.
Examples
Disarticulation at the shoulder is documented.; Amputation above the insertion of the deltoid is documented on the dominant arm.; Disarticulation at the hip is documented.
Medical evidence
Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Operative reports identifying the exact amputation level
Functional impact examples
Severe loss of limb function just short of the highest documented tier.
Common misconceptions
Disarticulation is a genuinely distinct, less extensive finding from forequarter amputation or trans-pelvic amputation -- never the same tier.
Related topics
dominant-nondominant; lower-extremity-amputation-levels
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5120, 5121, 5160; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

80%

Next: 90%

This level covers amputation above the insertion of the deltoid on the minor extremity (DC 5121), amputation below the insertion of the deltoid and above the insertion of the pronator teres on the major extremity (DC 5122/5123), and upper third of thigh amputation (DC 5161).

What separates the next level: The identical DC 5122/5123 findings on the minor extremity drop to 70 percent instead.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5121 lists 80 percent for the Minor extremity. DC 5122 and DC 5123 each list 80 percent for the Major extremity. DC 5161 lists amputation of the upper third of the thigh, one-third of the distance from the perineum to the knee joint measured from the perineum, at 80 percent.
Qualification explanation
4 distinct routes across 3 diagnostic codes share this value; the record needs to identify the specific amputation level and, for the upper-extremity routes, the extremity's dominance.
Examples
Amputation above the insertion of the deltoid on the non-dominant arm.; Amputation below the insertion of the deltoid on the dominant arm.; Amputation above the insertion of the pronator teres on the dominant arm.; Amputation at the upper third of the thigh, measured from the perineum.
Medical evidence
Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Operative reports identifying the exact amputation level and measurement from the perineum for thigh-level findings
Functional impact examples
Substantial loss of upper-arm or upper-thigh function and reliance on a prosthesis.
Common misconceptions
Amputation level in the thigh is measured from the perineum, not simply described as 'above the knee.'
Related topics
dominant-nondominant; lower-extremity-amputation-levels
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5121, 5122, 5123, 5161; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

70%

Next: 80%

This level covers amputation below the insertion of the deltoid and above the insertion of the pronator teres on the minor extremity, and amputation below the insertion of the pronator teres and hand loss of use on the major extremity (DC 5122-5125).

What separates the next level: The identical DC 5124/5125 findings on the minor extremity drop to 60 percent instead.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5122 and DC 5123 each list 70 percent for the Minor extremity. DC 5124 and DC 5125 each list 70 percent for the Major extremity.
Qualification explanation
4 distinct routes share this value across DC 5122-5125; identifying the specific amputation level and extremity dominance is required.
Examples
Amputation below the insertion of the deltoid on the non-dominant arm.; Amputation above the insertion of the pronator teres on the non-dominant arm.; Amputation below the insertion of the pronator teres on the dominant arm.; Loss of use of the dominant hand.
Medical evidence
Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Functional testing supporting a loss-of-use determination for DC 5125; Operative reports for amputation-level findings
Functional impact examples
Substantial forearm-level loss of function, or complete functional loss of the hand equivalent to amputation.
Common misconceptions
Loss of use under DC 5125 requires a functional-equivalence determination under 38 CFR 4.63, not simply severe pain or weakness.
Related topics
dominant-nondominant; section-4-63-loss-of-use-standard
Source context
38 CFR 4.63/4.68; 5122, 5123, 5124, 5125; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

60%

Next: 70%

This level covers amputation below the insertion of the pronator teres and hand loss of use on the minor extremity (DC 5124/5125), middle or lower thirds of thigh amputation (DC 5162), a defective stump recommended for reamputation (DC 5163), and amputation not improvable by a natural-knee-action prosthesis (DC 5164).

What separates the next level: The identical DC 5124/5125 findings on the major extremity are 70 percent instead. A lower-level amputation that does permit a prosthesis (DC 5165) drops to 40 percent instead.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5124 and DC 5125 each list 60 percent for the Minor extremity. DC 5162 lists amputation of the middle or lower thirds of the thigh at 60 percent. DC 5163 lists a defective stump where thigh amputation is recommended at 60 percent. DC 5164 lists amputation not improvable by prosthesis controlled by natural knee action at 60 percent.
Qualification explanation
4 distinct routes across 4 diagnostic codes share this value; DC 5163 and DC 5164 are easy to overlook 'orphan-zone' findings between the more commonly cited thigh-level and prosthesis-fitting findings.
Examples
Amputation below the insertion of the pronator teres on the non-dominant arm.; Loss of use of the non-dominant hand.; Amputation at the middle or lower third of the thigh.; A stump is documented as defective, with reamputation recommended.; The amputation is documented as not improvable by a prosthesis using natural knee action.
Medical evidence
Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Prosthetic-fitting records; Surgical notes describing stump condition
Functional impact examples
Meaningful loss of forearm or thigh-level function, or documented prosthetic-fitting difficulty.
Common misconceptions
DC 5163 (defective stump) and DC 5164 (not improvable by prosthesis) are genuinely distinct findings from the thigh-measurement-based levels (DC 5161/5162), not simply restatements of them.
Related topics
dominant-nondominant; lower-extremity-amputation-levels
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5124, 5125, 5162, 5163, 5164; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

40%

Next: 60%

This level covers a lower-level amputation permitting a prosthesis (DC 5165), forefoot amputation with more than one-half metatarsal loss (DC 5166), and loss of use of the foot (DC 5167).

What separates the next level: Higher lower-extremity findings (DC 5160-5164) all require more extensive amputation levels than a lower-level, prosthesis-compatible amputation.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5165 lists amputation at a lower level, permitting prosthesis, at 40 percent. DC 5166 lists forefoot amputation proximal to the metatarsal bones, with more than one-half metatarsal loss, at 40 percent. DC 5167 lists loss of use of the foot at 40 percent.
Qualification explanation
3 distinct findings share this value; DC 5165 and DC 5166 both concern lower-leg/foot-level amputation but are measured differently, and DC 5167's loss-of-use finding requires the 38 CFR 4.63 functional-equivalence standard.
Examples
A lower-level leg amputation is documented that permits a standard prosthesis.; Forefoot amputation with more than half of the metatarsal bones lost.; Loss of use of the foot is documented under the 38 CFR 4.63 functional-equivalence standard.
Medical evidence
Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Prosthetic-fitting records; Functional testing supporting a loss-of-use determination
Functional impact examples
Meaningful loss of lower-leg or foot function while still compatible with prosthetic use, or complete functional loss of the foot.
Common misconceptions
Loss of use of the foot (DC 5167) is not automatic just because a foot injury is severe -- it requires 38 CFR 4.63's functional-equivalence standard.
Related topics
lower-extremity-amputation-levels; section-4-63-loss-of-use-standard
Source context
38 CFR 4.63/4.68; 5165, 5166, 5167; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

30%

Next: 40%

This level covers DC 5170's two disjunctive routes (all toes amputated without metatarsal loss, or a transmetatarsal amputation with up to half of the metatarsal bones lost) and great toe amputation with removal of the metatarsal head (DC 5171).

What separates the next level: Great toe amputation without metatarsal involvement (still DC 5171) drops to 10 percent instead.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5170 lists 'toes, all, amputation of, without metatarsal loss' at 30 percent, and, separately, 'transmetatarsal, amputation of, with up to half of metatarsal loss' also at 30 percent. DC 5171 lists great toe amputation with removal of the metatarsal head at 30 percent.
Qualification explanation
DC 5170's two routes are genuinely equally valid, disjunctive qualifying findings resolving to the SAME 30 percent tier -- neither is a lesser or backup finding. DC 5171's route is a distinct diagnostic code from DC 5170 and requires great-toe involvement specifically.
Examples
All toes are amputated with no metatarsal bone lost.; A transmetatarsal amputation is documented with up to half of the metatarsal bones lost.; The great toe is amputated with the metatarsal head removed.
Medical evidence
Foot amputation DBQ or operative report; Imaging confirming metatarsal involvement
Functional impact examples
Significant loss of push-off and balance function.
Common misconceptions
DC 5170's transmetatarsal route is not a lesser finding than its all-toes route -- both are separate, equally valid paths to the identical 30 percent tier.
Related topics
toe-amputation-patterns
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5170, 5171; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

20%

Next: 30%

This level covers one or two toes other than the great toe, amputated with removal of the metatarsal head (DC 5172), and three or four toes, including the great toe (DC 5173).

What separates the next level: The same toe count without metatarsal-head removal (DC 5172) drops to 0 percent instead; the same 3-or-4-toe count without great-toe involvement (DC 5173) drops to 10 percent instead.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5172 lists amputation of one or two toes, other than the great toe, with removal of the metatarsal head, at 20 percent. DC 5173 lists amputation of three or four toes, including the great toe, at 20 percent.
Qualification explanation
2 distinct routes across 2 diagnostic codes share this value; the record needs to identify the number of toes involved, whether the great toe is included, and metatarsal-head involvement.
Examples
One or two toes, other than the great toe, are amputated with the metatarsal head removed.; Three or four toes, including the great toe, are amputated.
Medical evidence
Foot amputation DBQ or operative report; Imaging confirming metatarsal head involvement and toe count
Functional impact examples
Reduced forefoot support and altered gait.
Common misconceptions
Great-toe inclusion changes which diagnostic code and tier applies within DC 5173 -- it is not interchangeable with a non-great-toe finding.
Related topics
toe-amputation-patterns
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5172, 5173; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

10%

Next: 20%

This level covers great toe amputation without metatarsal involvement (DC 5171) and three or four toes amputated, not including the great toe (DC 5173).

What separates the next level: Great toe amputation WITH metatarsal head removal (DC 5171) rises to 30 percent instead; 3-or-4-toe amputation INCLUDING the great toe (DC 5173) rises to 20 percent instead.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5171 lists great toe amputation without metatarsal involvement at 10 percent. DC 5173 lists amputation of three or four toes, not including the great toe, at 10 percent.
Qualification explanation
2 distinct routes across 2 diagnostic codes share this value.
Examples
The great toe is amputated without metatarsal involvement.; Three or four toes, not including the great toe, are amputated.
Medical evidence
Foot amputation DBQ or operative report; Imaging confirming metatarsal status and toe count
Functional impact examples
Footwear fit and gait changes may still be real even when the record only supports a 10 percent pathway.
Common misconceptions
Metatarsal involvement is a distinct surgical finding from toe-only amputation, not assumed from severity alone.
Related topics
toe-amputation-patterns
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5171, 5173; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

0%

Next: 20%

This level covers one or two toes, other than the great toe, amputated without metatarsal involvement.

What separates the next level: The same toe count WITH metatarsal head removal rises to 20 percent instead.

Review CFR criteria, examples, and evidence
Official CFR language
DC 5172 lists amputation of one or two toes, other than the great toe, without metatarsal involvement, at 0 percent -- a genuine stated outcome, not missing evidence.
Qualification explanation
The record needs to confirm the toe count and confirm no metatarsal bone was involved; this is the one toe-amputation route rated at 0 percent.
Examples
One toe, other than the great toe, is amputated without metatarsal involvement.; Two toes, other than the great toe, are amputated without metatarsal involvement.
Medical evidence
Foot amputation DBQ or operative report
Functional impact examples
Balance or footwear-fit changes may still be real even when the record only supports a 0 percent pathway.
Common misconceptions
0 percent does not mean the amputation is unimportant -- it means this specific route does not reach a compensable percentage under DC 5172.
Related topics
toe-amputation-patterns
Source context
38 CFR 4.68; 5172; Current DC 5104-5173 educational pathway.

Learn

Understand the details behind the criteria

Use these short guides to connect published terms with the records and observations that may clarify them.

Why major and minor extremity ratings differ

DC 5120-5125 (upper extremity amputations) distinguish the major and minor extremity. That means which arm is affected, and which arm is dominant, can change how a published pathway is described.

  • The dominant arm is commonly called the major extremity in the schedule; the nondominant arm is commonly called the minor extremity.
  • A right arm is not always the major extremity, and a left arm is not always the minor extremity.
  • This site's Muscle Injuries and Peripheral Nerves, Upper Extremity hubs use the identical dominance axis.
  • RatingScope does not infer dominant-side status when it is missing.
  • DC 5160-5167 (lower extremity) and DC 5170-5173 (toes) do NOT use a dominance split -- only DC 5120-5125 does.

Records to review: Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; dominant-hand documentation; C&P examination history.

Amputations in both members of a paired extremity: a genuinely open question

38 CFR 4.68's per-extremity Amputation Rule ceiling and 38 CFR 4.26's bilateral-factor instruction have no stated order of operations for a veteran with amputations or amputation-equivalent ratings affecting both members of a paired extremity (both legs, or both arms).

  • Reading (a): apply each extremity's own 4.68 ceiling first, then apply 4.26's bilateral 10 percent addition across the two already-capped figures.
  • Reading (b): apply 4.26's bilateral addition first, then attempt to apply 4.68's per-limb ceiling to an already-bundled two-limb figure.
  • Neither section's published text states which order applies, and this hub does not guess or default to either reading.
  • This is disclosed as genuinely open, not a routine deferral -- review both this hub's per-extremity findings and 38 CFR 4.26 directly if this scenario may apply to your records.

Records to review: 38 CFR 4.68; 38 CFR 4.26; Operative reports for both affected extremities.

The Amputation Rule: a per-extremity ceiling

38 CFR 4.68 caps the combined rating for disabilities of a single extremity at the rating for amputation of that extremity at the elective site, using DC 5165 as its own illustrative example.

  • The combined evaluation for a single extremity's disabilities cannot exceed the amputation rating for that extremity's amputation level.
  • 38 CFR 4.68's own illustrative example uses DC 5165 (amputation at a lower level, permitting prosthesis) to demonstrate this ceiling.
  • This rule applies within a single extremity -- see the NHD-1 topic above for the genuinely unresolved question of sequencing this rule against the bilateral factor across two paired extremities.
  • 38 CFR 4.68 also states that painful neuroma of a stump after amputation shall be assigned the evaluation for the elective site of reamputation -- see the stump-neuroma topic below.

Records to review: 38 CFR 4.68; Combined-ratings documentation for the affected extremity.

What counts as 'loss of use' of a hand or foot

38 CFR 4.63 defines when a functional loss is severe enough to be rated as if the limb were amputated, including 2 specific illustrative standards for the foot/leg.

  • 38 CFR 4.63(a) states that extremely unfavorable complete ankylosis of the knee, complete ankylosis of 2 major joints of an extremity, or shortening of the lower extremity of 3 1/2 inches (8.9 cms.) or more, all constitute loss of use of the hand or foot involved.
  • 38 CFR 4.63(b) states that complete paralysis of the external popliteal (common peroneal) nerve with resulting footdrop constitutes loss of use of the foot.
  • Loss of use requires this functional-equivalence-to-amputation-stump standard, not simply severe pain, weakness, or an unfavorable diagnosis.
  • This standard applies across DC 5109-5111 (combinations), DC 5125 (hand loss of use), and DC 5167 (foot loss of use).

Records to review: 38 CFR 4.63; Range-of-motion and ankylosis findings; Nerve conduction studies documenting peroneal nerve paralysis.

How VA determines which hand is dominant

38 CFR 4.69 explains that hand dominance is determined from evidence of record or VA examination testing, with a specific default rule for ambidextrous veterans.

  • Dominance is determined from evidence of record, or by testing during a VA examination.
  • For a veteran who is ambidextrous, the more severely injured hand is considered the dominant hand for rating purposes.
  • This determination feeds directly into DC 5120-5125's Major/Minor percentage columns.

Records to review: 38 CFR 4.69; C&P examination hand-dominance testing.

DC 5104-5111: combinations of disabilities

8 flat 100 percent findings, each its own distinct diagnosis describing anatomical loss or loss of use across paired hands and feet -- not a severity ladder.

  • DC 5104-5108 describe anatomical loss combinations (e.g., one hand and loss of use of one foot; both hands; both feet; one hand and one foot).
  • DC 5109-5111 describe loss-of-use combinations (both hands; both feet; one hand and one foot), applying the 38 CFR 4.63 functional-equivalence standard.
  • Each of DC 5104-5111 carries an 'also entitled to special monthly compensation' footnote -- disclosed here, but SMC and 38 CFR Part 3 eligibility are not modeled by this hub.
  • This site's Spine hub discloses, consistently with this hub, that paraplegia is rated under DC 5110 and quadriplegia is rated separately under DC 5109 and DC 5110 and combined.

Records to review: Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Records documenting anatomical loss or loss of use across paired limbs.

DC 5160-5167: lower extremity amputation levels

9 distinct findings on a single column (no dominance split). DC 5160 alone carries 2 genuinely distinct findings at distinct percentages.

  • Trans-pelvic amputation (involving complete removal of the femur and intrinsic pelvic musculature along with any portion of the pelvic bones) is rated at 100 percent.
  • Disarticulation (involving complete removal of the femur and intrinsic pelvic musculature only) is a genuinely distinct, less extensive finding, rated at 90 percent -- never the same tier as trans-pelvic amputation, and never described as 'extrinsic' musculature.
  • DC 5163 (a defective stump where thigh amputation is recommended) and DC 5164 (amputation not improvable by a natural-knee-action prosthesis) are easy-to-overlook findings between the thigh-measurement levels (DC 5161/5162) and the prosthesis-compatible level (DC 5165).
  • DC 5160's own Note directs separately evaluating residuals involving other body systems (for example, bowel or bladder impairment) under the appropriate diagnostic code -- disclosed here, not automated.
  • This site's Hip guide covers DC 5160-5162 educationally; this hub owns the deterministic (registry/calculator) side of the full DC 5160-5167 range.

Records to review: Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation DBQ; Operative reports measuring amputation level from the perineum; Prosthetic-fitting records.

DC 5170-5173: toe amputation patterns

DC 5170 is satisfied by either of 2 disjunctive qualifying findings mapping to the SAME 30 percent tier. DC 5171-5173 each split into 2 tiers of their own.

  • DC 5170's 2 qualifying routes -- all toes amputated without metatarsal loss, OR a transmetatarsal amputation with up to half of the metatarsal bones lost -- are equally valid, both resolving to the identical 30 percent tier, never a lesser/backup finding.
  • DC 5171 (great toe) splits by metatarsal head removal: 30 percent with removal, 10 percent without.
  • DC 5172 (one or two toes other than the great toe) splits by metatarsal head removal: 20 percent with removal, 0 percent without.
  • DC 5173 (three or four toes) splits by great-toe inclusion: 20 percent including the great toe, 10 percent not including it.
  • This site's Foot Conditions guide covers this same range educationally; this hub owns the deterministic (registry/calculator) side.

Records to review: Foot amputation DBQ or operative report; Imaging confirming metatarsal involvement and toe count.

Painful neuroma of an amputation stump

38 CFR 4.68 states that painful neuroma of a stump after amputation shall be assigned the evaluation for the elective site of reamputation.

  • This clause redirects the rating to whatever level a hypothetical reamputation at the elective site would carry, rather than a separate neuroma-specific percentage.
  • This hub discloses this clause but does not automate a reamputation-site calculation -- review the specific amputation level tables above for the relevant elective site.
  • No live conflict with this site's Peripheral Nerves, Upper Extremity hub was found for this clause.

Records to review: 38 CFR 4.68; Operative and pain-management records documenting stump neuroma.

Evidence

Evidence that may clarify the published criteria

Amputation Rule / Residuals of Amputation Disability Benefits Questionnaire

VA's standardized exam form documenting amputation level, stump condition, prosthetic fitting, and functional findings.

A DBQ is one common evidence source, not the only way to document these findings.

Operative reports identifying the exact amputation level

Establishes which specific amputation level applies (e.g., above or below a named anatomical landmark, or measured from the perineum for thigh-level findings).

None -- required for identifying the specific amputation level in every family in this hub.

Functional testing supporting a loss-of-use determination

Establishes whether 38 CFR 4.63's functional-equivalence-to-amputation standard is met for DC 5109-5111, DC 5125, or DC 5167.

Not required for anatomical-loss findings, only for loss-of-use findings.

Hand-dominance documentation

Establishes which extremity is major (dominant) versus minor (non-dominant) for DC 5120-5125.

Not required for DC 5160-5173, which do not use a dominance split.

Imaging confirming metatarsal involvement

Establishes whether a metatarsal bone, or the metatarsal head specifically, was lost or removed for DC 5170-5173.

Not required for DC 5104-5111, 5120-5125, or 5160-5167.

Official VA Forms & DBQs

Downloadable DBQs & Supporting Claim Forms

Take the public DBQ to your private physician or review it prior to your C&P examination.

Terminology

Plain-English terms

Major extremity

Whichever hand a person naturally uses more (usually the hand they write with).

DC 5120-5125 rate Major and Minor extremities on distinct percentage columns -- a genuinely load-bearing fact, not a formality.

Examination records confirming hand dominance; dominant-nondominant

Minor extremity

Whichever hand a person naturally uses less (usually the hand they don't write with).

Major/minor distinctions must be preserved and should not be guessed -- DC 5120-5125 rate the two sides on distinct percentage columns.

Examination records confirming hand dominance; dominant-nondominant

Trans-pelvic amputation

An amputation at the hip that also removes part of the pelvic bone itself, not just the leg and hip-level muscle.

Rated 100 percent under DC 5160 -- a genuinely distinct, more extensive finding than disarticulation.

Operative report identifying pelvic-bone involvement; lower-extremity-amputation-levels

Disarticulation (hip)

An amputation at the hip joint that removes the leg and hip-level muscle but leaves the pelvic bone itself intact.

Rated 90 percent under DC 5160 -- distinct from, and less extensive than, trans-pelvic amputation.

Operative report confirming no pelvic-bone involvement; lower-extremity-amputation-levels

Loss of use

The limb is still physically present, but it functions so poorly that VA rates it as if it were amputated.

Applies to DC 5109-5111 (combinations), DC 5125 (hand), and DC 5167 (foot), each requiring documented functional-equivalence findings.

Range-of-motion and ankylosis findings; Nerve conduction studies; section-4-63-loss-of-use-standard

TDIU

Even if the schedular rating for Amputations does not reach 100 percent, TDIU may still provide a pathway to compensation at the 100 percent rate, based on unemployability from this and/or other service-connected disabilities combined.

A lower schedular percentage does not by itself foreclose TDIU eligibility -- this hub computes only the schedular percentage for this specific condition and does not determine TDIU eligibility.

Employment history; vocational impact documentation; occupational impairment

Common Questions

Questions veterans commonly ask

Does it matter which arm is dominant?

Yes, but only for DC 5120-5125 (upper extremity amputations). Those 7 levels rate major (dominant) and minor (non-dominant) extremities on distinct percentage columns. DC 5160-5173 (lower extremity and toes) do not distinguish dominance.

What happens when I have amputations in both legs, or both arms?

This is a genuinely open question. 38 CFR 4.68's per-extremity Amputation Rule ceiling and 38 CFR 4.26's bilateral-factor instruction have no stated order of operations for this scenario, and RatingScope discloses both possible readings rather than guessing.

What is the Amputation Rule?

38 CFR 4.68 caps the combined rating for a single extremity's disabilities at the amputation rating for that extremity's amputation level, illustrated with DC 5165 as an example.

What counts as 'loss of use' of a hand or foot?

38 CFR 4.63 sets a functional-equivalence-to-amputation standard, including specific illustrative findings such as extremely unfavorable complete knee ankylosis, complete ankylosis of 2 major joints, 3 1/2-inch (8.9 cm)-or-more shortening (loss of use of the foot), and complete peroneal nerve paralysis with footdrop (loss of use of the foot).

How does VA decide which hand is dominant?

38 CFR 4.69 looks to evidence of record or VA examination testing. For an ambidextrous veteran, the more severely injured hand is treated as dominant.

What are the combinations of disabilities?

DC 5104-5111 are 8 flat 100 percent findings describing specific anatomical-loss or loss-of-use combinations across paired hands and feet, each its own distinct diagnosis rather than a severity ladder. Each also carries a special-monthly-compensation footnote, disclosed but not modeled here.

How are lower-extremity amputation levels rated?

DC 5160-5167 rate 9 distinct findings on a single column. DC 5160 alone has 2 -- trans-pelvic amputation (100 percent) and disarticulation (90 percent) -- genuinely distinct findings, not one blended tier.

How are toe amputations rated?

DC 5170 is satisfied by either of 2 disjunctive findings mapping to the same 30 percent tier. DC 5171-5173 each split into 2 tiers depending on metatarsal involvement or great-toe inclusion.

What is a painful stump neuroma?

38 CFR 4.68 states that painful neuroma of an amputation stump is assigned the evaluation for the elective site of reamputation, rather than a separate neuroma-specific percentage.

Is this an active RatingScope assessment?

This Amputations hub is currently staged, matching this site's most recently built condition hubs. Do not enter amputation findings into another condition's assessment.

If my schedular rating for Amputations is below 100%, can I still be compensated at the 100% rate?

Possibly, through TDIU (Total Disability rating based on Individual Unemployability, 38 CFR 4.16) -- a separate pathway to 100 percent compensation based on unemployability, from this and/or other service-connected disabilities combined, independent of whether the schedular rating itself reaches 100 percent. This hub computes only the schedular percentage and does not determine TDIU eligibility.

What separates the 100% rating from adjacent levels?

Disarticulation at either the shoulder (DC 5120) or the hip (DC 5160) is a genuinely distinct, less extensive finding rated at 90 percent, never the same 100 percent tier.

What separates the 90% rating from adjacent levels?

The identical DC 5121 finding on the minor extremity is 80 percent instead -- confirming the Major/Minor axis is genuinely load-bearing for DC 5120-5125.

What separates the 80% rating from adjacent levels?

The identical DC 5122/5123 findings on the minor extremity drop to 70 percent instead.

What separates the 70% rating from adjacent levels?

The identical DC 5124/5125 findings on the minor extremity drop to 60 percent instead.

What separates the 60% rating from adjacent levels?

The identical DC 5124/5125 findings on the major extremity are 70 percent instead. A lower-level amputation that does permit a prosthesis (DC 5165) drops to 40 percent instead.

What separates the 40% rating from adjacent levels?

Higher lower-extremity findings (DC 5160-5164) all require more extensive amputation levels than a lower-level, prosthesis-compatible amputation.

What separates the 30% rating from adjacent levels?

Great toe amputation without metatarsal involvement (still DC 5171) drops to 10 percent instead.

What separates the 20% rating from adjacent levels?

The same toe count without metatarsal-head removal (DC 5172) drops to 0 percent instead; the same 3-or-4-toe count without great-toe involvement (DC 5173) drops to 10 percent instead.

What separates the 10% rating from adjacent levels?

Great toe amputation WITH metatarsal head removal (DC 5171) rises to 30 percent instead; 3-or-4-toe amputation INCLUDING the great toe (DC 5173) rises to 20 percent instead.

What separates the 0% rating from adjacent levels?

The same toe count WITH metatarsal head removal rises to 20 percent instead.

Ready when you are

Compare documented amputation findings

Use the amputation level, extremity-dominance, and metatarsal/great-toe language already documented in your records. Do not upload records or enter Social Security numbers, claim numbers, full dates of birth, or other sensitive identifiers. RatingScope does not infer missing findings.

Informational guidance only. RatingScope does not predict, decide, or guarantee VA outcomes.

Compare my amputation records

Learn More

Continue Understanding

Secondary conditions

Conditions commonly connected to Amputations

No commonly documented secondary connections are tracked for Amputations yet.

Keep going

Compare a percentage level and combined-rating math, or review evidence context.

See all tools

VA Math & Combined Ratings

Understand the whole-person method, final rounding, and bilateral limits, then calculate how percentages combine.

Open VA Math guide

Evidence Center

Understand common evidence categories and what they can clarify without treating them as a checklist.

Open Evidence Center