Chiropractic Management of Cervical Radiculopathy: A Retrospective Case-Series from a Private Practice

Abstract

Background: Cervical radiculopathy is a common neurological condition characterized by pain, numbness, and weakness stemming from cervical nerve root compression. Chiropractic care is frequently sought as a conservative management option. This study reviews outcomes for patients with cervical radiculopathy at a single chiropractic clinic. Methods: A retrospective case-series was conducted at Pure Wellness Chiropractic - Milford. Data were drawn from the records of seven (n=7) patients with verified outcomes for cervical radiculopathy. The primary outcome measure was patient-reported pain reduction, supplemented by qualitative reports of functional improvement. Results: The patient cohort experienced substantial clinical improvements. An aggregate mean pain reduction of 83% (median 84%) was observed. Individual cases reported a cessation of radiating arm numbness, restored cervical range of motion for activities like driving, and significant improvements in quality of life over treatment periods ranging from a few weeks to ten weeks. Conclusions: The findings from this small case-series suggest that a multimodal chiropractic treatment approach may be an effective strategy for reducing pain and improving function in patients with cervical radiculopathy. These results highlight the potential benefits of conservative care, though more rigorous, controlled studies are necessary to establish causality and generalizability.

Methods

This study employed a retrospective case-series design to evaluate the outcomes of patients treated for cervical radiculopathy at a single private practice, Pure Wellness Chiropractic - Milford, located in Milford, DE.

The study population consisted of a convenience sample of seven (n=7) established patients who presented with symptoms consistent with cervical radiculopathy and subsequently had verified positive outcomes during their course of care. Data was extracted from existing patient records. Inclusion was based on the presence of a diagnosis related to cervical radiculopathy (such as ICD-10 M54.12) or a chief complaint of radiating arm pain and numbness characteristic of the condition.

The primary outcome measure analyzed was the change in patient-reported pain intensity. Where available, pain was assessed using a 10-point numeric rating scale at baseline and post-treatment. The percentage of pain reduction was calculated for each case with complete data. Qualitative data, including patient-reported functional improvements and symptomatic relief, were also collected from chart notes and patient testimonials. Mobility improvement was not systematically tracked and was therefore not included in the aggregate analysis.

Interventions provided were consistent with the clinic's multimodal approach. As documented in patient files and the clinic's service profile, treatment protocols were personalized and could include a combination of Diversified, Thompson, Gonstead, Sacro Occipital Technique (SOT), Activator, extremity adjustments, Myofascial Release, instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization, and Cox Distraction, alongside therapeutic exercises and postural advice. The practitioners delivering care included Dr. Eric Marks, D.C., and Dr. Jessica Cortellino, D.C.

Discussion

The results of this retrospective case-series suggest that a multimodal chiropractic approach can be associated with favorable outcomes for patients suffering from cervical radiculopathy. The aggregate data, showing a mean pain reduction of 83% in this small cohort, indicates a substantial clinical benefit. This level of pain relief, combined with patient-reported qualitative improvements such as the resolution of arm numbness and the restoration of functional neck mobility for driving, points to the potential efficacy of the treatments rendered at this clinic.

The interventions employed, which included a mix of spinal adjustments, instrument-assisted techniques like Activator, and soft tissue modalities, reflect a comprehensive strategy. Such an approach addresses both the joint-related mechanical and soft-tissue components that can contribute to nerve root compression. For example, spinal manipulation aims to restore normal joint kinematics, potentially decompressing the intervertebral foramina, while myofascial release and stretching can reduce muscle tension that may exacerbate symptoms. The outcomes reported here are consistent with the broader clinical objective of conservative care: to manage symptoms and improve function without resorting to more invasive procedures.

While these findings are encouraging, they must be interpreted within the context of the study's design. As a retrospective series without a control group, it is not possible to definitively attribute the observed improvements solely to the chiropractic interventions. The natural history of cervical radiculopathy can involve spontaneous resolution, and placebo effects cannot be ruled out. Nonetheless, the consistency of positive outcomes across this patient cohort provides valuable clinical information. It suggests that the specific protocols used at Pure Wellness Chiropractic - Milford may warrant further investigation as a viable conservative treatment pathway for this often-debilitating condition.

Limitations

This study has several important limitations inherent to its design. Firstly, as a retrospective case-series, it relies on data not originally collected for research purposes, which can lead to incomplete or inconsistently recorded metrics. For instance, a standardized mobility metric was not available for analysis. Secondly, the findings are from a single private practice, which limits the generalizability of the results to other clinical settings or patient populations. The practitioners and specific clinic environment may represent a unique context. Thirdly, the primary outcome measure, patient-reported pain, is subjective. Without a control or sham group, it is impossible to isolate the treatment effect from placebo, patient expectation, or the natural history of the condition. Finally, the selection of cases with verified positive outcomes introduces a significant potential for selection bias, as patients who did not respond to care or discontinued treatment are not represented. Therefore, these results should be viewed as preliminary and descriptive rather than definitive evidence of treatment efficacy.