What the NDIS's own data says about pain

Every participant's record lists the conditions they live with, and one of them is recorded as their primary disability. The NDIA publishes the totals every quarter. It's one of the few places the Agency's own numbers say something about how pain sits inside the scheme.

What they show is simple, and it matters for evidence. For most pain conditions, most of the people who have them on record have something else recorded as their primary disability. Where pain comes with a condition the NDIS already knows well, such as multiple sclerosis or Parkinson's disease, it's the other way round.

Strengths and limitations of the data

The figures below come from the NDIA's public participants by diagnosis data, at 30 June 2026, for Australia as a whole. Two numbers are given for each diagnosis: how many participants have it on record at all, and how many have it recorded as their primary disability.

The limits matter as much as the numbers. The diagnoses are reported by participants and aren't checked by the NDIA. The data covers people already in the scheme, so it says nothing about applications or who is refused. And it only includes conditions that have their own code in the published list, which leaves some large gaps (more on those below).

For most pain conditions, pain isn't the primary disability

NDIA, participants by diagnosis, national, 30 June 2026. Sorted within each group by the share recorded as primary. Spinal cord injury combines the complete and incomplete codes. Conditions with a page in my minimum evidence standard are linked.

Condition	On record	Primary	Share recorded as primary
Pain conditions
Rheumatoid arthritisM05	3,038	2,246	74%
Complex regional pain syndromeG90.5	142	77	54%
Other arthritisM12	2,324	606	26%
Chronic painG89.4	684	174	25%
FibromyalgiaM79.7	597	129	22%
OsteoarthritisM19.9	673	130	19%
Conditions that often bring pain with them
Motor neurone diseaseG12.2	1,073	1,070	>99%
Multiple sclerosisG35	12,736	12,531	98%
Parkinson's diseaseG20	5,282	4,938	93%
Spinal cord injury (complete and incomplete)T09.5, T09.7	7,134	6,609	93%
Muscular dystrophyG71.0	3,083	2,788	90%
Multiple traumatic amputationsT05	1,011	905	90%
StrokeI69	13,427	11,191	83%
Cerebral palsyG80	23,621	19,038	81%
Functional neurological disorderF44.4	636	408	64%
Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (all types)Q79.6	1,035	613	59%
Myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndromeR53.8	394	213	54%
Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndromeI49.8	242	65	27%
The catch-all physical code
Other PhysicalM95	40,575	16,522	41%

Three in four participants with chronic pain on record have something else as their primary disability (174 of 684). For fibromyalgia it's closer to four in five (129 of 597), and for osteoarthritis more than four in five (130 of 673).

The second group is the comparison. Pain is common in multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, stroke and cerebral palsy, and after an amputation. In each of those, the condition is recorded as the primary disability for at least four in five participants who have it: 98% for multiple sclerosis, 93% for Parkinson's disease and spinal cord injury. For those participants, the pain sits inside a disability the NDIS has already accepted.

Four conditions in the second group sit much lower: functional neurological disorder (64%), Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (59%), ME/CFS (54%) and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (27%). Pain is common in all four, but they're recorded as the primary disability far less often, and for POTS less often than for most of the pain conditions in the first group.

The data doesn't say why. But the pattern is consistent with what I see in decisions: pain on its own is a hard way into the scheme, and people often get in on the strength of another condition.

Why it matters for a support request

A support has to be tied to an impairment the NDIS has accepted. If pain isn't the disability on your record, a request for a support that manages your pain has a gap to close before anything else: it has to show how the pain connects to the disability the NDIS did accept, or that the pain is part of it.

That's the first question in my method, for access and for supports: is the pain the condition itself, or a consequence of another one? The answer decides which impairment the evidence has to be built around. It's also why the Ehlers-Danlos page treats the pain as secondary, and what that changes.

If your primary disability is one of the conditions in the second group, the impairment is usually already the right one. The work is showing that the pain is part of it, and what the pain stops you doing.

Your access letter or impairment notice says which impairments the NDIS accepted. It's worth reading it against this question before your next request.

What the list leaves out

There is no code in the published list for back pain, spinal conditions, migraine, endometriosis or pelvic pain. Whatever the numbers are for those conditions, they aren't visible in this data.

The "Other Physical" code is in the table for completeness. It's the largest physical code in the data, with 40,575 participants on record, and the data doesn't say what sits inside it, so there's no way to tell how many of those people live with pain.

The labels aren't perfect either. Complex regional pain syndrome appears in the dataset as "Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome". A small thing, but a reminder that a record is only as good as the words it uses, which is true of your own file as well.

---

Where this leaves your file

If pain is the reason you need the support, and something else is your primary disability, the request has to connect the two. That connection is usually missing, because nobody was asked to write it.

If you're not sure which impairments the NDIS accepted, start with your access letter or impairment notice. It's the document the next decision will be measured against.

An Evidence Audit reads your whole file against that question, and tells you in writing where the connection is made and where it isn't. If you'd rather talk it through first, the call is free.

Figures from the NDIA's public participants by diagnosis data, national, at 30 June 2026. Diagnoses are self-reported and not checked by the NDIA, counts under 11 are suppressed, and the data covers participants only. Nothing here is legal advice or a prediction about any outcome.