Lumbar disc herniations are a common musculoskeletal injury often seen in personal injury claims, particularly those resulting from motor vehicle accidents or other traumatic events. Accurate diagnosis and evidence-based treatment are critical not only for patient outcomes but also for resolving disputes in personal injury litigation. This paper reviews evidence-based approaches to diagnosing and treating LDH, with a focus on clinical guidelines, diagnostic imaging, conservative therapies, and surgical interventions. In the context of personal injury claims, diagnostic accuracy and treatment efficacy are paramount, as they directly influence legal determinations regarding causality and compensation.

Lumbar disc herniations occur when the jelly-like center, or nucleus pulposus, of a lumbar disc protrudes through the tough outer ring, or annulus fibrosus, potentially compressing nearby spinal nerves. Patients present with significant pain and disability, and it is a frequent focus of personal injury claims, particularly following motor vehicle crashes, falls, or workplace injuries. Up to 5% of the general population may experience symptomatic LDH at some point in their lives (Weinstein et al., 2006).

In personal injury cases, an accurate diagnosis and effective treatment plan are essential for both the recovery of the patient and the fair adjudication of claims. Evidence-based approaches to diagnosis and treatment ensure that clinical decisions are informed by the best available research, which is particularly important when the diagnosis is contested or when litigation may impact clinical care.

The diagnosis of LDH involves a combination of clinical evaluation and imaging studies. In personal injury claims, accurate and reliable diagnoses are vital for determining the severity of the injury and its causality. Misdiagnosis or lack of diagnostic clarity can result in disputes over the legitimacy of a claim. 

Early and appropriate evaluation by a spinal care specialist is of paramount importance in these cases, beginning with a thorough patient history and physical examination. Patients often present with lower back pain, radiating leg pain (sciatica), and neurological deficits such as weakness, numbness, or tingling in the affected limb. A detailed history of the symptoms, including the presence of pre-injury symptoms or treatment for spinal conditions, is essential, as it helps to establish whether the disc herniation is related to a traumatic event such as an accident or fall versus pre-existing degeneration (Deyo & Mirza, 2016)

In addition to symptom reporting, a physical examination is crucial. Positive findings such as the straight leg raise test, which reproduces pain in the leg when the patient’s leg is raised, can strongly suggest nerve root involvement due to disc herniation (Chou et al., 2016). Presence of non-organic findings such as Waddell’s Signs or a positive reverse flip test should be documented as well.

Imaging techniques such as X-rays and CT scans are commonly obtained be emergency department or primary care providers and can be helpful in identifying bony abnormalities such as a fracture but they are not very sensitive for detecting disc herniations (Koes et al., 2006). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the gold standard for diagnosing LDH providing objective evidence of the herniation and can confirm or refute claims of injury caused by an accident.  If available, pre-injury MRI can provide further information regarding the acute or chronic nature of the LDH.

It should be noted that, while MRI is highly accurate at identifying disc pathology, disc herniations can also be asymptomatic in some individuals (Boden et al., 1990). This underscores the importance of correlating imaging findings with clinical symptoms.

In some cases, electromyography (EMG) and nerve conduction studies are used to assess nerve root dysfunction. These studies can help confirm whether the herniation is causing radiculopathy (nerve root compression), which may be necessary in personal injury claims to demonstrate the severity of the injury (Kallewaard et al., 2013). However, EMG findings can be influenced by multiple factors and may not always correlate directly with the severity of the disc herniation.

The diagnosis of LDH in personal injury claims can be complicated by several factors. One challenge is distinguishing between pre-existing disc degeneration or herniations and those caused by a traumatic event. Research suggests that while many adults show signs of disc degeneration on imaging, the correlation between degeneration and pain is not always clear (Weinstein et al., 2006). Therefore, establishing a clear causal link between the traumatic event and the herniation is critical in these cases.

While LDH may occur at the time of an accident or injury, it is unlikely to occur if the disc is healthy prior to the event in question.  A good analogy is that a car hitting a speed bump may lose an aging, rusted muffler, but the speed bump itself was, for lack of a better term, merely “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”

The treatment of LDH is guided by the severity of the symptoms and the degree of functional impairment. Most patients with LDH respond to conservative treatments, but surgery may be necessary in certain cases.

Physical therapy should be the first line of treatment and can help patients regain strength, flexibility, and mobility, thus preventing the need for more invasive procedures. A systematic review by Hayden et al. (2005) found that structured exercise therapy, including stabilization exercises and aerobic conditioning, significantly reduced pain and improved function in patients with LDH.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used for pain management in patients with LDH. A study by Chou et al. (2016) emphasized the importance of NSAIDs in the short-term management of lumbar disc herniation, although long-term use can be associated with side effects such as gastrointestinal issues.

For patients with persistent pain despite conservative management, epidural steroid injections may provide relief by reducing inflammation around the nerve roots. While the evidence supporting ESIs is mixed, studies such as that by Atlas et al. (2010) have shown that they can provide short-term pain relief for patients with severe radiculopathy.

In cases where conservative treatments fail to alleviate symptoms, surgical intervention may be necessary. The most common surgical procedure for LDH is discectomy, which involves the removal of the herniated portion of the disc. A randomized controlled trial by Weinstein et al. (2006) comparing surgery with non-surgical treatment in patients with LDH found that surgery led to greater improvements in pain and function, particularly for patients with more severe symptoms. That said, patients undergoing surgery often require extensive rehabilitation to recover fully, and recurrence of symptoms is not uncommon.

A multidisciplinary approach to treating LDH can improve outcomes for patients. Pain management specialists, physical therapists, and orthopedic surgeons may collaborate to develop a comprehensive treatment plan tailored to the individual patient’s needs (Liu et al., 2017). This approach ensures that both the physical and psychological aspects of recovery are addressed, which is particularly important in personal injury cases where prolonged pain and disability may be disputed.

In personal injury claims, the diagnosis and treatment of LDH often intersect with complex legal issues. The accuracy of the diagnosis, the effectiveness of treatment, and the establishment of causality all play pivotal roles in determining the outcome of the case.

Personal injury claims frequently hinge on the diagnosis and the severity of the injury. The presence of objective imaging findings such as an MRI scan is essential for substantiating the claimant's version of events. However, diagnostic uncertainty—especially when MRI findings do not correlate with symptoms—can complicate the case. A lack of clear and objective evidence may lead to disputes over the legitimacy of the injury and its causality.
Establishing a clear causal link between the accident and the disc herniation is often the most contentious issue in personal injury cases. Expert testimony from medical professionals is often required to clarify the mechanism of injury and assess whether the accident was the substantial cause of the herniation versus merely an exacerbation or “lighting up” of a pre-existing condition (Ferguson et al., 2009).

Lumbar disc herniation is a common injury with significant clinical and medicolegal implications, particularly in the context of personal injury claims. Evidence-based approaches to diagnosis, including the use of MRI and electrodiagnostic studies, as well as evidence-supported treatment strategies such as physical therapy and surgery, are crucial in ensuring optimal patient outcomes and fair legal adjudication. By adhering to best practices informed by peer-reviewed research, clinicians and legal professionals can better navigate the complexities of diagnosing and treating LDH in personal injury cases, ensuring that both medical and legal decisions are based on sound, objective evidence.

---

Eric Harris, MD is a seasoned expert witness with over six years of experience in the medical-legal industry. He completed a prestigious spine fellowship at the Rothman Institute in Philadelphia, specializing in complex spinal conditions. A Commander with 30 years of distinguished service in the U.S. Navy, Dr. Harris completed two deployments and served as Director of Orthopedic Spine Surgery at the Naval Medical Center in San Diego, where he led advanced surgical care and complex case management. His extensive military leadership, surgical expertise, and deployment experience make him an invaluable resource for complex medical-legal matters. Dr. Harris works exclusively through Catalyst Experts -- hello@catalystexperts.com

---