Skip to content
The Comp GuysAttorneys at Robert Wilson & Associates
Got a work comp question?Call or text (612) 568-5291. You will speak to a live person right away, not a bot or a voicemail tree. No pressure.

PPD v2 rule page

Lumbar spine permanency rule 5223.0390

Minnesota lumbar permanency schedule structured around fractures, pain syndrome, and radiculopathy, with apportionment evaluated after the raw schedule rating.

PPD calculator

Why this v2 model matters

  • Questions are separate from ratings, so the worker flow no longer “chooses the answer” before the engine evaluates it.
  • Evidence, disputes, and apportionment are modeled alongside ratings instead of buried in one explanation blob.
  • Authority and case links are reusable across calculators, explainers, issue pages, and receipts.

Example output bundle

Raw rating
14%

Base + add-ons before apportionment.

Compensable rating
10.5%

Current rating minus preexisting ratable disability.

Matched rating: Lumbar radiculopathy D base matched at 9% whole body.
Matched rating: Lumbar fusion single-level add-on matched at 5% whole body.
Missing evidence: Objective radicular proof: Without objective findings, the worker may fall to a lower category or face a proof dispute.
Missing evidence: Fusion operative proof: The fusion add-on should not be claimed without operative or imaging support.
Dispute flag: Preexisting ratable disability may reduce payment: Minnesota treats apportionment as a separate step after the raw schedule rating is determined.
Uncertainty: Minnesota treats apportionment as a separate step after the raw schedule rating is determined. This most directly affects compensable rating, benefit valuation.
Uncertainty: Without objective findings, the worker may fall to a lower category or face a proof dispute. This most directly affects rating eligibility.
Uncertainty: The fusion add-on should not be claimed without operative or imaging support. This most directly affects rating eligibility.
Case note: Sass v. Blachowski Truck Line, Inc. - Useful when the insurer argues there can be no apportionment because the older condition was never formally rated.
Case note: Sletten v. American Hoist & Derrick Co. - Useful for explainer pages and payment-stage examples showing raw rating versus compensable rating.

Structured questions and proof

Which lumbar rating path best fits the injury?

Use fracture, pain syndrome, or radiculopathy. Only one primary path should apply per injury.

Do you have objective radicular findings?

Examples may include abnormal EMG, reduced reflexes, or measurable muscle weakness.

Common proof: EMG/NCS, Neurologic exam, MRI/CT, Operative report

Was a lumbar fusion performed?

Fusion add-ons should be handled separately from non-fusion surgery add-ons.

How many fusion levels were involved?
Has the worker reached MMI?

PPD is often disputed as premature if meaningful improvement could still change the rating category.

Is there a known preexisting ratable disability percentage?

Apportionment is a separate step after the current schedule rating is determined.

Call NowText