Case-series · September 8, 2026

Chiropractic Care for General Musculoskeletal Dysfunction: A Retrospective Case-Series at Rozenhart Family Chiropractic

Abstract

Background: General musculoskeletal dysfunction (MSD) represents a common public health concern, impacting daily activities and quality of life. Chiropractic care is frequently sought for the management of these conditions. Methods: This retrospective case-series reviewed outcomes for 10 patients receiving chiropractic care for general MSD at Rozenhart Family Chiropractic in Gilbert, AZ. Data were extracted from verified patient reports, focusing on chief complaints, treatment duration, and reported improvements. Due to the retrospective nature and available data, formal quantitative metrics for pain reduction and mobility improvement were not tracked. Results: All 10 patients reported positive outcomes following chiropractic intervention. Improvements ranged from feeling "much better" after treatment, achieving "instant relief" within two adjustments, to progressing from frequent visits to maintenance care over five months, and a return to "living their best life." While specific percentage reductions were not recorded, patients consistently reported subjective improvement in their musculoskeletal symptoms and overall well-being. Conclusions: This case-series suggests that chiropractic care, incorporating techniques such as cervical and lumbar adjustments, disc decompression, and sports injury rehabilitation, may be associated with positive subjective outcomes for patients experiencing general musculoskeletal dysfunction. Further prospective research with standardized outcome measures is warranted.

Methods

This study was designed as a retrospective case-series, analyzing de-identified patient outcome data from Rozenhart Family Chiropractic located in Gilbert, AZ. The study population consisted of 10 patients who sought care for general musculoskeletal dysfunction and had their outcomes verified and documented by the clinic. The inclusion criterion was any patient presenting with a chief complaint of general musculoskeletal dysfunction who reported a post-treatment outcome. Data were extracted from existing patient records, focusing on chief complaints, reported baseline and post-treatment metrics, key outcomes, timeframes, and qualitative descriptions of their experiences and progress. Due to the retrospective nature of the data collection, specific quantitative metrics such as mean pain reduction percentages or mobility improvement percentages were not consistently recorded for the aggregate patient group. Individual case data, when available, detailed the patient's chief complaint, duration of care, and subjective reports of improvement. Treatment protocols at Rozenhart Family Chiropractic involve a multidisciplinary approach, potentially including techniques such as Sports Injury Rehabilitation, Regenerative Medicine (PRP & Injection Therapy), Headache & Migraine Care, Cervical (Neck) Adjustments, Lumbar (Low Back) Adjustments, and Disc Decompression & Spinal Traction, administered by Dr. Jennifer Rozenhart, Dr. Stephanie Rozenhart Arbet, and Kasandra Bujold (FNP-C). The primary limitation of this methodology is its reliance on subjective, self-reported outcomes and the absence of standardized objective measures, which precludes calculation of aggregate mean or median improvements.

Discussion

The consistent subjective improvements reported across all 10 cases in this retrospective series suggest that chiropractic care at Rozenhart Family Chiropractic may contribute positively to the management of general musculoskeletal dysfunction. While the absence of standardized quantitative metrics for pain and mobility prevents a direct comparison with established efficacy benchmarks in the literature, the qualitative outcomes align with general clinical expectations for chiropractic interventions. Patients reported various benefits, including significant overall improvement, instant relief, progression to maintenance care, and a return to daily activities, which are common goals in the treatment of MSD. The observed outcomes, such as rapid relief in some cases (e.g., Cases 4, 6, 8) and sustained improvement leading to reduced visit frequency in others (e.g., Case 2), suggest the potential effectiveness of the diverse chiropractic techniques employed at the clinic, including cervical and lumbar adjustments, disc decompression, and sports injury rehabilitation. The personalized approach, as highlighted in Case 7 and Case 10, may also play a crucial role in achieving patient satisfaction and positive outcomes. The reported results imply that chiropractic care may offer a valuable option for individuals seeking relief from musculoskeletal discomfort and aiming to improve their quality of life. These findings, although preliminary and based on subjective reporting, support the continued exploration of chiropractic care in managing MSD and warrant further investigation with more robust, objective outcome measures. The clinical implications suggest that this type of care can lead to patient-perceived improvements in symptoms and functional status.

Limitations

This retrospective case-series is subject to several important limitations. Firstly, its retrospective design inherently relies on existing patient records and self-reported outcomes, which may introduce recall bias and subjectivity. Secondly, it is a single-site study conducted at Rozenhart Family Chiropractic, limiting the generalizability of the findings to broader chiropractic populations or other clinical settings. Thirdly, the absence of standardized, objective metrics for pain reduction and mobility improvement across all cases prevents quantitative analysis and direct comparison with other studies. The reliance on qualitative patient reports, while valuable for understanding individual experiences, does not provide statistically rigorous evidence of efficacy. Furthermore, there was no control group, making it impossible to ascertain whether observed improvements were solely attributable to chiropractic interventions or to other factors such, as the natural history of the conditions or patient self-care. Finally, the study is vulnerable to selection bias, as only patients whose outcomes were verified and documented were included, and it does not account for patients who may not have reported improvement or discontinued care.