Upper Cervical Chiropractic Care for Migraines: A Retrospective Case Series from a Private Practice

Abstract

Background: Migraine is a debilitating neurological condition affecting millions. While standard care often involves pharmacotherapy, complementary approaches targeting potential musculoskeletal contributors are under investigation. This report examines outcomes for migraine patients undergoing upper cervical chiropractic care. Methods: A retrospective case series was conducted on ten de-identified patient files from a single private practice (Origin Modern Health & Wellness - Carlsbad). Patients included had a complaint of migraines and received care from a NUCCA practitioner. Interventions involved precise upper cervical adjustments guided by CBCT 3D imaging. Data on patient-reported pain reduction, wellness scores, and qualitative outcomes were extracted from clinical records. Results: The cohort (n=10) reported a mean pain reduction of 68% (median 68%). While not all cases had quantitative pain scores, several reported complete or near-complete resolution of migraines. For instance, one patient with a 14-year history of migraines reported being migraine-free for seven months. Another discontinued preventative injectable and Botox treatments after starting care. Cases with tracked wellness scores showed substantial functional and emotional improvements. Conclusions: The findings from this small case series suggest that NUCCA upper cervical chiropractic care may be associated with significant reductions in migraine frequency and severity, as well as improvements in overall wellness for some patients. These results warrant further investigation through more rigorous controlled studies.

Methods

This study was conducted as a retrospective case series analyzing de-identified patient data from Origin Modern Health & Wellness in Carlsbad, CA. Inclusion criteria for this series consisted of patients who presented to the clinic with a primary complaint of migraines, received a course of care, and had documented outcomes in their clinical records. Data from a cohort of ten patients (n=10) meeting these criteria were reviewed.

The intervention provided by Dr. Vivek Soham, a NUCCA practitioner, involved specialized upper cervical chiropractic care. The treatment protocol is centered on correcting misalignments of the craniocervical junction. Patient assessment included the use of CBCT 3D imaging to perform a detailed biomechanical analysis of the upper cervical spine, allowing for a precise and individualized adjustment vector. The adjustments are characterized as low-force and are designed to restore the alignment of the atlas vertebra without forceful manipulation or audible cavitation.

Data were extracted directly from existing patient files. Outcome measures were heterogeneous and included quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative metrics, where available, included patient-reported pain reduction percentages and composite wellness scores tracked at baseline and re-examination. Qualitative data included patient-reported narratives of symptom changes, migraine frequency, and medication use, which were documented in clinician notes. As a retrospective review of existing, de-identified data, the study did not have a control group and relied solely on information as recorded during the normal course of care.

Discussion

The results of this retrospective case series suggest a positive association between NUCCA-based upper cervical chiropractic care and improvements in migraine symptoms and overall quality oflife for the ten individuals reviewed. The reported mean pain reduction of 68%, coupled with several narratives of complete migraine cessation and discontinuation of long-term preventative medications, indicates a clinically significant benefit for these patients.

These outcomes align with the clinical hypothesis that addressing misalignments at the craniocervical junction may modulate neurological function and reduce triggers for primary headache disorders. The improvements seen here, particularly the resolution of chronic, long-standing migraines (as in Case 7 and Case 9), suggest that for some individuals, a structural issue in the upper neck may be a significant contributing factor to their condition. The improvements in broad wellness scores (Cases 2-6), including measures of emotional well-being and social functioning, further suggest that the relief from migraine symptoms has a far-reaching positive impact on a patient's life.

While conventional migraine management is often centered on pharmacology, these cases highlight the potential for a non-pharmacological, structural approach. The use of CBCT imaging for precise diagnostic analysis and targeted, low-force adjustments represents a specific and reproducible methodology within the chiropractic field. Although these results are promising, they must be interpreted with caution given the limitations of the study design. This series does not establish causality but provides a compelling basis for future, more rigorous scientific inquiry, such as prospective cohort studies or randomized controlled trials, to validate these findings and better understand the patient populations most likely to benefit from this intervention.

Limitations

This study has several important limitations inherent to its retrospective case series design. First, the absence of a control group makes it impossible to attribute the observed improvements solely to the chiropractic intervention; factors such as the placebo effect, the natural history of the condition, or concurrent lifestyle changes cannot be ruled out. Second, the data were collected from a single clinical practice, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other settings or practitioners. The small sample size (n=10) further restricts the external validity. Third, the reliance on patient-reported outcomes, including pain levels and wellness scores, introduces subjectivity and potential for recall and reporting bias. Fourth, as a retrospective review, the study is susceptible to selection bias, as cases with positive outcomes may be more likely to be documented and included. A comprehensive understanding of the intervention's effectiveness would require data on all patients treated for the condition, including those with minimal or no improvement.