Case-series · July 28, 2026

Chiropractic Management of Ankle Pain: A Retrospective Case Series from a Private Practice

Abstract

Background: Ankle pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint that can significantly impact mobility and quality of life. Chiropractic care offers a biomechanical approach to management, yet clinical outcome reporting varies. This study describes a series of ankle pain cases from a private chiropractic setting. Methods: A retrospective case series was conducted by reviewing patient files at a single chiropractic clinic, Life Effect Centers in Frankfort, IL. Five patient cases were identified based on a diagnosis of ankle pain (ICD-10: M25.571). Data on the duration of clinical care were extracted. Pre- and post-treatment quantitative metrics for pain and mobility were not systematically recorded in the files and thus were not analyzed. Results: The five patients diagnosed with right ankle pain received care for durations ranging from 2 to 12 weeks. Individual care timeframes were 2, 3, 4, 6, and 12 weeks. Due to the absence of standardized outcome measures in the reviewed records, aggregate statistics for pain reduction and mobility improvement could not be calculated. Conclusion: This case series documents the presentation and duration of care for five individuals with ankle pain undergoing chiropractic management. The findings highlight the critical importance of implementing standardized outcome assessment tools in clinical practice to enable robust evaluation of treatment effectiveness and facilitate future research.

Methods

This study was conducted as a retrospective case series to describe the characteristics of patients with ankle pain presenting to a private chiropractic clinic. The setting for this review was Life Effect Centers, operated by Dr. Daniel Bai, DC, in Frankfort, IL. A search of clinic records was performed to identify patients with a primary diagnosis related to ankle pain. The inclusion criterion for this series was a recorded diagnosis code of M25.571, indicating 'Pain in right ankle and joints of right foot'. A total of five patient files (n=5) met this criterion and were selected for review. Data were extracted directly from the existing patient records. Information collected for each case included the assigned ICD-10 code and the total duration of the care plan, measured in weeks. Per the available records, demographic information such as age and gender, as well as specific narrative details of the chief complaint, were not consistently documented and therefore are not reported. The interventions provided at the clinic included chiropractic adjustments based on the Gonstead and CloseforChiro techniques, administered by the lead chiropractor. Therapeutic services were also available from other clinic staff. A significant limitation of the data available for this retrospective review was the absence of systematically recorded quantitative outcome measures. Standardized metrics such as a Numerical Pain Scale (NPS) for pain intensity or goniometric measurements for range of motion were not present in the files for this cohort, precluding any analysis of change over time.

Discussion

This retrospective case series provides a descriptive account of five patients who sought chiropractic care for right ankle pain at a single clinic. The primary finding is the documentation of care durations ranging from 2 to 12 weeks. This variability may reflect a number of unmeasured factors, including the initial severity and chronicity of the condition, patient-specific goals, comorbidities, or individual response to treatment. However, without baseline and follow-up data, these possibilities remain speculative. The most significant aspect of this study is what it reveals about the limitations of retrospective analysis when standardized outcome measures are not employed in routine clinical practice. While chiropractic care, using techniques like Gonstead and CloseforChiro, is based on a biomechanical rationale for addressing musculoskeletal pain, the efficacy of this approach for ankle pain cannot be determined from the data presented here. The absence of quantitative data on pain levels, functional status, or range of motion prevents any conclusions about treatment effectiveness. The clinical implications of this series are primarily centered on practice management and future research. It underscores the critical need for chiropractic clinics to integrate standardized, validated outcome assessment tools into their patient management processes. Routinely collecting data using simple instruments like a Numerical Pain Scale (NPS) and reliable patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for foot and ankle function would create a valuable repository of data. Such data would not only enhance patient-centered care by tracking progress objectively but also enable clinicians to conduct more robust research, contribute to the evidence base for chiropractic, and better demonstrate clinical value to patients and payers.

Limitations

This study has several significant limitations. First, its retrospective design means that data was collected from records not originally intended for research, leading to incomplete and missing information, most notably the absence of any quantitative outcome measures for pain or function. Second, the very small sample size (n=5) makes the findings anecdotal and not generalizable to a wider population of patients with ankle pain. Third, the study was conducted at a single private practice, so the findings may be unique to that clinic's specific patient population and provider techniques, limiting external validity. Fourth, the lack of a control group makes it impossible to attribute any potential (but unmeasured) patient improvement to the chiropractic interventions. Any changes could have been due to the natural history of the condition, a placebo effect, or other confounding factors. Finally, there is a high potential for selection bias, as these five cases may not be representative of all patients with ankle pain treated at the clinic.