Name: El Paso Back Clinic | Medical Spine Specialists - El Paso, TX
Price range: $$

Imaging & Diagnostics

Back Clinic Imaging & Diagnostics Team. Dr. Alex Jimenez works with top-rated diagnosticians and imaging specialists. In our association, imaging specialists provide fast, courteous, and top-quality results. In collaboration with our offices, we provide the quality of service our patients’ mandate and deserve. Diagnostic Outpatient Imaging (DOI) is a state-of-the-art Radiology center in El Paso, TX. It is the only center of its kind in El Paso, owned and operated by a Radiologist.

This means when you come to DOI for a radiologic exam, every detail, from the design of the rooms, the choice of the equipment, the hand-picked technologists, and the software which runs the office, is carefully chosen or designed by the Radiologist and not by an accountant. Our market niche is one center of excellence. Our values related to patient care are: We believe in treating patients the way we would treat our family and we will do our best to ensure that you have a good experience at our clinic.

Changing Back Pain Diagnoses Reflect Better Clinical Insight

by Dr Alex Jimenez DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP | Auto Accident Injuries, Chiropractic Examination, Imaging & Diagnostics, Injury Care, Lower Back Pain, Med-Legal Corner, Personal Injury, Spine Care

Why Changing Back Pain Diagnoses During Rehabilitation May Reflect Better Clinical Understanding

After a collision on I-10, Carlos, a 42-year-old warehouse supervisor from El Paso, walked into the clinic with intense low-back pain that made sitting, bending, and even standing long enough to finish a shift feel impossible. Two days after the rear-end impact, his lumbar muscles were locked in protective spasm, swelling limited his ability to twist or extend, and every movement provoked sharp local pain. The first examination pointed to an acute lumbar strain with facet joint irritation—an understandable starting point when inflammation still masks deeper findings. By the second visit, the picture had already begun to shift. By the third, objective imaging and clearer symptoms allowed a more precise diagnosis of a traumatically aggravated lumbar disc injury. Far from signaling inconsistency, these evolving impressions demonstrated careful clinical reasoning that ultimately strengthened both his recovery path and the medical-legal record.

Initial findings in acute spinal trauma are often provisional by necessity. In the first 48–72 hours, inflammatory chemicals flood the injured tissues, producing swelling, muscle guarding, and reduced range of motion that can obscure the full extent of disc, ligament, or nerve involvement. Guidelines and clinical observation confirm that many patients present with nonspecific low-back pain until the acute inflammatory stage begins to resolve. As swelling decreases, patients can better describe the character and radiation of their symptoms, orthopedic tests become more reliable, and clinicians can distinguish simple muscular strain from patterns that suggest disc or nerve-root irritation. When symptoms persist or change in quality, imaging is appropriately obtained and interpreted in the context of the mechanism of injury, the timeline, and serial examinations. Alternative explanations—pre-existing degeneration, subsequent activity, or unrelated conditions—are systematically considered and either ruled out or incorporated. This refinement process is a hallmark of good care, not a sign of error.

Visit One: The Acute Phase and a Provisional Working Diagnosis

Carlos arrived two days after the collision. His history matched the mechanics of rapid deceleration: seat-belt restraint, torso thrust, and immediate low-back pain. Examination showed limited lumbar flexion and extension, tenderness over the paraspinal muscles and lower facets, and a negative straight-leg raise limited by back pain alone. Swelling and spasm made precise segmental testing difficult. The working diagnosis recorded that day was acute lumbar sprain/strain with possible facet irritation secondary to the motor-vehicle collision. Treatment focused on reducing inflammation, restoring gentle motion, and protecting the tissues while they began to settle. Chiropractic adjustments were deferred until guarding decreased; instead, soft-tissue work, gentle mobilization, and education on activity modification helped him manage pain and maintain as much function as possible. Objective measures, including a baseline Oswestry Disability Index, documented the functional impact so that later changes could be compared against a clear starting point.

Visit Two: Swelling Subsides and Symptoms Clarify

Ten days later, the protective muscle spasm had eased. Carlos could now describe a deep, aching low-back pain that occasionally traveled into the buttock and the back of the thigh when he sat for more than twenty minutes or lifted a light box at work. Kemp’s test and repeated extension reproduced familiar symptoms; the straight-leg raise remained limited but now produced mild buttock referral. These findings raised the possibility of disc involvement masked by early swelling. The clinical note explicitly recorded the reasoning: “Initial acute inflammatory presentation limited differential. With reduced edema, radicular-pattern symptoms and provocative testing now support consideration of intervertebral disc injury at the lower lumbar levels. MRI ordered to correlate clinical findings and rule out alternative structural causes.” This documentation is essential. It shows the diagnosis was not arbitrarily changed but updated based on new, objective information. Serial functional scores and range-of-motion measurements further demonstrated that the clinical picture was evolving in a biologically plausible way.

Visit Three: Imaging Confirms, and the Diagnosis Is Refined

MRI obtained in the fourth week revealed a moderate protrusion at L4–5 with annular fissuring, consistent with the timing of the collision and the emerging leg symptoms. Mild pre-existing disc desiccation was noted, yet the acute morphology and symptom correlation supported traumatic aggravation of the disc rather than purely degenerative change. The updated diagnosis—lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion with mild radicular component, traumatically aggravated by the collision—was accompanied by a clear narrative of clinical reasoning: mechanism of injury, temporal relationship, progressive findings once swelling subsided, exclusion of red-flag alternatives, and correlation with imaging. Treatment shifted toward targeted disc decompression, directional preference exercises, and progressive core stabilization while medical oversight addressed any metabolic factors that could slow healing. Patients gain measurable benefits from this approach: reduced nerve irritation, improved sitting and lifting tolerance, better sleep, and a clearer path back to work without reliance on prolonged medication or early surgery.

Documenting the Clinical Reasoning

behind each diagnostic shift protects both the patient and the legal record. In personal-injury cases, defense experts frequently argue that changing diagnoses indicate uncertainty or exaggeration. Thorough notes that explain why new information warranted an updated impression neutralize that argument. They establish the proximate link between the collision forces and the objective injury, support Letters of Protection, and demonstrate that the care plan remained evidence-based as the clinical picture clarified. Tools such as the Oswestry Disability Index, digital range-of-motion measurements, and consistent orthopedic testing provide the objective anchors that allow these evolving impressions to withstand scrutiny. Readers seeking a deeper understanding of how mechanism, timeline, and serial findings establish causation can review the clinic’s detailed discussion of medical-legal causation principles.

Careful Documentation also Serves the Three Bioethical Pillars that Guide Care

Beneficence is realized when the multidisciplinary team—chiropractic biomechanical assessment, nurse-practitioner soft-tissue and functional evaluation, and internal-medicine oversight—works together to identify the true source of pain and address it at its root rather than merely masking symptoms. Non-maleficence is honored by favoring non-invasive options such as chiropractic adjustment, electroacupuncture, and targeted rehabilitation that reduce the risks associated with opioid dependency or premature surgery. Autonomy is strengthened when patients receive clear explanations of why their diagnosis may evolve, what each new finding means, and how they remain active partners in decisions about imaging, activity, and treatment goals. Coordination with the patient’s existing medical providers further supports informed choice.

What makes Injury Medical Chiropractic and Functional Medicine Clinic unique is its integrated structure, which makes this level of precision possible. Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, a board-certified internal medicine physician with more than forty years of experience, directs the clinic and provides medical direction, advanced laboratory interpretation, and risk stratification. Working alongside her is Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP, a dual-licensed chiropractor and board-certified family nurse practitioner who specializes in soft-tissue injury, structural alignment, and the objective documentation required for personal-injury cases. This dual-licensure model—medical director plus nurse practitioner specializing in soft-tissue injury—is the only integrated arrangement of its kind in El Paso, Texas, allowing the same clinical team to generate both the biomechanical findings and the medical reasoning that appear in a single, coherent causation file.

Readers who wish to explore related topics will find practical guidance on the stages of healing from neck or back injuries, the proper nomenclature for lumbar disc findings, and auto-accident management strategies for sciatica and herniated discs. Each of these resources reinforces the same principle illustrated by Carlos’s three visits: better clinical understanding is not a fixed label applied on day one but a progressive process of observation, testing, and documented reasoning that ultimately produces a clearer diagnosis, more effective treatment, and a more defensible medical-legal record.

References

Brumitt, J., & Cuddeford, T. (2015). Current concepts of muscle and tendon adaptation to strength and conditioning. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 10(6), 748–759. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4637912/

Duchesne, E., Dufresne, S. S., & Dumont, N. A. (2017). Impact of inflammation and anti-inflammatory modalities on skeletal muscle healing: From fundamental research to the clinic. Physical Therapy, 97(8), 807–817. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzx056

Fardon, D. F., Williams, A. L., Dohring, E. J., Murtagh, F. R., Gabriel Rothman, S. L., & Sze, G. K. (2014). Lumbar disc nomenclature: Version 2.0: Recommendations of the combined task forces of the North American Spine Society, the American Society of Spine Radiology, and the American Society of Neuroradiology. The Spine Journal, 14(11), 2525–2545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.022

Johnsen, L. G., Hellum, C., Nygaard, Ø. P., Storheim, K., Brox, J. I., Rossvoll, I., Leivseth, G., & Grotle, M. (2013). Comparison of the SF6D, the EQ5D, and the Oswestry Disability Index in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc disease. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 14, Article 148. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-148

Wu, Y. S., & Chen, S. N. (2014). Apoptotic cell: Linkage of inflammation and wound healing. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 5, Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2014.00001

Lumbar MRI Accident Causation and Legal Implications

by Dr Alex Jimenez DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP | Herniated Disc, Imaging & Diagnostics, Med-Legal Corner, Personal Injury

What a Lumbar Spine MRI Can and Cannot Tell a Jury About an Accident-Related Disc Injury

A lumbar spine MRI provides one of the clearest pictures medicine can give a jury of what is happening inside the low back after a crash, fall, or workplace impact. It shows the discs, the nerves, and the surrounding structures in high detail. Yet the same scan that reveals a herniation or compressed nerve root often leaves the most important legal questions unanswered: When did this finding appear, and was the accident the cause?

Defense experts frequently point to the MRI and call every abnormality “pre-existing degeneration.” That argument succeeds when the imaging is presented in isolation. It weakens when the MRI is viewed alongside the patient’s history, the collision mechanics, the examination findings, and serial clinical notes. Understanding what the scan can and cannot prove helps patients, clinicians, and attorneys interpret the evidence correctly.

How MRI Shows Lumbar Disc Herniations and Nerve Root Compression

The intervertebral disc has a soft, gel-like center (nucleus pulposus) surrounded by a tough outer ring (annulus fibrosus). On a T2-weighted MRI, the healthy nucleus appears bright because it holds water. When the annulus tears and nuclear material pushes outward, the MRI shows the displaced material as a protrusion, extrusion, or sequestration.

A herniation is called focal when it involves less than 25 percent of the disc circumference. Posterolateral herniations are the most common pattern after trauma because the posterior longitudinal ligament is thinner on the sides. When herniated material compresses a nerve root in the lateral recess or foramen, MRI can show the root flattened or displaced. Surrounding soft-tissue edema or a high-intensity zone (HIZ)—a bright spot on T2 images within the posterior annulus—further signals an acute or subacute annular tear.

Nerve-root compression is not always dramatic. Mild contact may still produce radicular pain through chemical inflammation from the herniated material rather than pure mechanical pressure. Clinical correlation remains essential: the side and level of the imaging finding must match the patient’s leg pain, numbness, or reflex changes. Digital range-of-motion measurements and electrodiagnostic studies (when indicated) help confirm that the compressed root, not an incidental finding, is causing the symptoms.

Degenerative Findings That Commonly Appear on MRI

Disc desiccation (darkening of the nucleus), multilevel bulging, small osteophytes, and mild facet arthropathy appear on MRI scans of many adults who have never been in a crash and who have no pain. Large population studies show that roughly one-third of asymptomatic people in their twenties already have disc bulges or protrusions; by the seventies and eighties the rate approaches 90 percent. These age-related changes do not automatically mean a patient’s current pain is unrelated to trauma.

The key distinction is between symmetric, multilevel, slowly progressive degeneration and a focal, asymmetric finding that matches the biomechanics of the accident and the patient’s new symptoms. An annular high-intensity zone that is bright, a few millimeters of unilateral disc-height loss, or a new extrusion at the level and side of impact is far more suggestive of traumatic aggravation than uniform drying across five levels.

MRI nomenclature follows standardized terms. A bulge is a broad-based extension greater than 25 percent of the circumference, usually from annular redundancy as the disc loses height. A protrusion remains contained by outer annular fibers; an extrusion has broken through them. These distinctions matter for both treatment planning and for explaining the finding to a jury, but the nomenclature itself does not assign cause or date. The official lumbar disc nomenclature notes that dating a herniation from images alone is unreliable; bright signal and surrounding inflammation suggest relative acuteness, yet those changes can persist for months.

Why the MRI Alone Does Not Establish Age or Cause

An MRI is a snapshot. It doesn’t carry a time stamp saying, “This herniation occurred on the day of the collision.” Even an acute-appearing high-intensity zone can remain bright for many months. Without prior imaging, the radiologist cannot know whether a disc protrusion existed silently before the crash. That is why defense experts correctly state that the presence of a herniation on MRI does not, by itself, prove the accident caused it.

Causation is established by linking several elements:

The patient had no comparable radicular symptoms before the event.
The mechanism (axial compression plus flexion or lateral shear typical of rear-end or side-impact collisions) is capable of tearing the annulus and forcing nuclear material posterolaterally.
Symptoms began or dramatically increased shortly after the impact.
The MRI finding matches the level, side, and clinical examination.
Serial notes document ongoing functional limitations that track the imaging abnormality.

When these elements are present, the MRI becomes powerful objective evidence of traumatic aggravation under the Texas Eggshell Plaintiff rule. A pre-existing, asymptomatic disc that is torn and made symptomatic by the crash is still a compensable injury. The clinic’s records capture this linkage in plain language so that the attorney and the jury can follow the chain from collision forces to specific MRI morphology.

The Role of Clinical Correlation and Multidisciplinary Documentation

Radiology reports describe anatomy; they do not decide legal causation. The treating clinician must integrate the images with the history, the physical examination, and the functional status. Digital range-of-motion testing, postural analysis, and response to conservative care provide additional objective data that MRI alone cannot.

At Injury Medical Clinic PA, the dual-licensed team coordinates these pieces. Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, documents soft-tissue and structural findings, correlates them with the mechanism of injury and MRI, and tracks the response to non-invasive care. Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, provides medical direction, reviews metabolic and inflammatory factors that affect disc healing, and ensures the overall clinical picture is medically coherent. The result is a continuous, Colossus-compliant record that withstands cross-examination far better than isolated imaging reports.

Patients benefit from this approach through clearer understanding of their condition, safer non-drug options such as targeted chiropractic care, spinal decompression, and electroacupuncture, and better coordination with any outside physicians. Attorneys receive the objective linkage needed for Letters of Protection and trial. Clinicians outside the clinic can rely on the same transparent interpretation when they review the records.

What Makes the Clinic Unique

Dr. Jimenez’s Injury Medical Chiropractic and Functional Medicine Clinic is the only practice in El Paso, Texas, that integrates a board-certified internal medicine medical director with a dual-licensed chiropractor and nurse practitioner who specializes in soft-tissue and disc injury.
Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, provides medical direction and advanced laboratory oversight for patients with metabolic conditions that affect recovery.
Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, focuses on the structural and soft-tissue consequences of trauma, using precise imaging correlation, digital functional testing, and non-invasive therapies. This single-clinic model produces unified documentation rather than fragmented records from separate providers, giving both patients and attorneys a clearer, more defensible account of how the accident affected the lumbar spine.

For deeper discussion of how imaging findings are tied to causation, see the detailed review of advanced spinal MRI interpretation for attorneys at dralexjimenez.com and the explanation of why abnormal MRI findings do not automatically establish injury age. The standardized lumbar disc nomenclature used in these reports is also available for reference.

An MRI is indispensable, but it is only one piece of the story. Read in context with the mechanism, history, and clinical course, it becomes courtroom-ready evidence of traumatic disc injury rather than an ambiguous picture the defense can relabel as ordinary aging.

Feeling Better Than Ever After a Semi-Truck Accident | El Paso, TX

References

Brinjikji, W., Luetmer, P. H., Comstock, B., Bresnahan, B. W., Chen, L. E., Deyo, R. A., Halabi, S., Turner, J. A., Avins, A. L., James, K., Wald, J. T., Kallmes, D. F., & Jarvik, J. G. (2015). Systematic literature review of imaging features of spinal degeneration in asymptomatic populations. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 36(4), 811–816. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4173

Fardon, D. F., & Milette, P. C. (2001). Nomenclature and classification of lumbar disc pathology: Recommendations of the combined task forces of the North American Spine Society, American Society of Spine Radiology, and American Society of Neuroradiology. Spine, 26(5), E93–E113. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200103010-00006

Fardon, D. F., Williams, A. L., Dohring, E. J., Murtagh, F. R., Gabriel Rothman, S. L., & Sze, G. K. (2014). Lumbar disc nomenclature: Version 2.0: Recommendations of the combined task forces of the North American Spine Society, the American Society of Spine Radiology and the American Society of Neuroradiology. The Spine Journal, 14(11), 2525–2545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.022

Aprill, C., & Bogduk, N. (1992). High-intensity zone: A diagnostic sign of painful lumbar disc on magnetic resonance imaging. British Journal of Radiology, 65(773), 361–369. https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-65-773-361

Boden, S. D., Davis, D. O., Dina, T. S., Patronas, N. J., & Wiesel, S. W. (1990). Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects. A prospective investigation. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 72(3), 403–408. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199072030-00013

Back Pain After Accident: Why Pain Location Matters

by Dr Alex Jimenez DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP | Auto Accident Injuries, Chiropractic Examination, Imaging & Diagnostics, Lower Back Pain, Med-Legal Corner

Why the Location of Back Pain Matters When an Accident Injury Is Disputed

After a car crash, slip-and-fall, or workplace accident, a patient may tell a doctor, “My back hurts.” Clinically, that statement is only the beginning.

Where does the pain begin? Does it stay in the center of the lower back? Is it stronger on one side? Does it spread into the buttock, thigh, calf, or foot? Is there numbness, tingling, weakness, or a change in walking?

Those details matter because the location and distribution of back pain can help clinicians determine whether a patient’s symptoms fit a proposed structural or neurological diagnosis. They become even more important when an insurance company, defense expert, or opposing attorney disputes whether an accident caused the condition.

Pain location does not prove causation by itself. Instead, clinicians look for agreement among the patient’s history, spinal examination, neurological findings, functional limitations, diagnostic imaging, and accident mechanism.

Back Pain Is a Symptom, Not a Diagnosis

Back pain can arise from many structures. Muscles, ligaments, spinal joints, intervertebral discs, nerve roots, and the sacroiliac region can all produce pain in or around the lower back. Conditions outside the spine can sometimes produce similar symptoms.

That is why clinicians begin by defining the pattern.

Pain centered across the lumbar region may be associated with muscular, joint, or disc-related problems. One-sided pain around the lower back or buttock can originate from several musculoskeletal structures. Pain that travels from the back or buttock down a leg raises additional questions about nerve involvement, particularly when it occurs with numbness, tingling, weakness, or altered reflexes.

Clinical research supports evaluating lumbosacral radicular pain through a combination of symptom history, pain distribution, examination findings, and additional testing when appropriate—not through one symptom in isolation (Peene et al., 2024).

Patients wanting a deeper explanation of radiating symptoms can review Dr. Jimenez’s discussion of radiculopathy and sciatica.

Why the Location of Back Pain Matters

Imagine two people with lower-back pain after similar rear-end collisions.

The first person has soreness mainly in the lumbar muscles and stiffness when bending.

The second has lower-back pain that travels through one buttock, down the outside of the leg, and toward the foot. That patient also reports tingling and difficulty walking on the heel.

Both patients have back pain, but their clinical presentations are different.

The second pattern raises more concern for possible nerve-root involvement. A clinician would therefore pay particular attention to sensation, muscle strength, reflexes, gait, and neural tension during the examination.

Research has found that findings such as sensory disturbance, myotomal weakness, decreased reflexes, focal muscle changes, and certain neural tension findings can support a diagnosis of radiculopathy when interpreted together (Bateman et al., 2025).

Pain Patterns Are Helpful—but They Are Not Perfect Maps

Clinicians sometimes compare radiating pain to dermatomes, areas of skin associated with particular spinal nerve roots.

However, the human nervous system doesn’t always follow a textbook diagram.

Studies of patients with confirmed lumbar nerve-root problems have found substantial overlap between pain distributions. Therefore, a patient does not need to trace a perfect line on a dermatome chart for a nerve problem to be possible.

This distinction is especially important in personal injury cases. Pain distribution can support a diagnosis, but it shouldn’t be used alone to claim a particular disc or nerve root caused the symptoms.

The stronger question is:

Does the complete neurological and biomechanical pattern make sense?

What a Spinal Examination Looks For

When accident-related back pain is disputed, a thorough examination provides information that a pain rating alone cannot.

A clinician may compare both sides of the body and evaluate how the patient moves, walks, bends, sits, and responds to specific tests. Common examination components can include:

Lumbar range of motion and movement tolerance
Palpation for tenderness, muscle guarding, or spasm
Orthopedic and neurological provocation testing
Straight-leg raise or related neural tension procedures
Lower-extremity muscle strength
Sensory testing
Patellar and Achilles reflexes
Heel and toe walking
Gait and balance
Functional tolerance for sitting, standing, bending, lifting, and walking

No single examination maneuver proves a spinal diagnosis.

Newer research has made that point even clearer. A 2026 systematic review found that the straight-leg raise and crossed straight-leg raise tests, by themselves, generally produced only limited changes in the probability of lumbosacral radicular pain. The practical lesson is that clinicians should combine tests rather than diagnose based on one positive maneuver (Nee et al., 2026).

Do the Symptoms Match the Structural Diagnosis?

Suppose an MRI identifies a lumbar disc herniation.

That finding matters, but another question immediately follows:

Does the disc finding explain this patient’s symptoms?

A stronger clinical match includes a disc abnormality that can affect a particular nerve root, pain and sensory complaints in a reasonably compatible area, corresponding strength or reflex changes, and functional limitations consistent with the involved nerve.

Current WFNS Spine Committee recommendations emphasize history, pain localization, muscle strength, sensory testing, sphincter function, and appropriate neurological testing when evaluating suspected lumbar disc herniation. MRI is the preferred imaging study to confirm a suspected disc herniation when advanced imaging is clinically warranted (Pojskic et al., 2024).

Dr. Jimenez provides additional patient education about lumbar herniated discs and sciatica.

An MRI Finding Is Not Automatically Proof of Accident Causation

This distinction is critical for both patients and attorneys.

An MRI can show anatomy. It may demonstrate a disc protrusion, herniation, stenosis, degeneration, or another abnormality. But the image alone usually cannot tell an attorney exactly when that abnormality developed or whether a specific collision made it symptomatic.

Some spinal abnormalities can exist before an accident without producing significant symptoms.

That is why clinicians correlate imaging with the history and examination rather than simply pointing to an MRI and declaring causation.

Current recommendations also discourage routine imaging for uncomplicated acute low-back pain. Imaging becomes more appropriate when red flags are present, radicular symptoms persist, neurological deficits progress, or another clinical reason warrants further investigation (Gushcha et al., 2024).

What If the Pain Pattern Does Not Fit?

A careful clinician should not try to force every symptom into a spinal diagnosis.

Hip disorders, tendon injuries, muscle problems, peripheral nerve disorders, neuropathy, vascular conditions, and other musculoskeletal conditions can sometimes resemble lumbar radiculopathy. Some can even coexist with a spinal injury.

A recent review emphasized the importance of distinguishing true lumbosacral radiculopathy from musculoskeletal conditions that can produce similar radiating pain or weakness (Bateman et al., 2025).

This differential diagnosis becomes especially valuable when an injury claim is challenged.

A medically defensible causation opinion should identify reasonable competing explanations, evaluate them, and explain why the available evidence supports or does not support each possibility.

Connecting the Accident Mechanism to the Symptoms

The next step is to ask whether the accident mechanism is compatible with the proposed injury.

Motor-vehicle crashes can expose the spine and surrounding soft tissues to rapid acceleration, deceleration, compression, rotation, or combined forces. Depending on the circumstances, those forces may affect muscles, ligaments, joints, discs, or neural structures. Dr. Jimenez discusses these mechanisms further in his resource on spinal injuries following motor-vehicle collisions.

Consider a patient who had no meaningful radiating leg symptoms before a crash but soon afterward developed unilateral low-back pain extending into the leg. The examination then identifies compatible sensory loss, weakness, or reflex changes, and clinically appropriate imaging demonstrates a corresponding structural abnormality.

That sequence provides a more coherent causation analysis than simply saying, “The MRI showed a disc problem.”

Clinicians also review prior injuries, previous imaging, medical conditions, treatment history, subsequent accidents, and other possible causes. Injury Medical Clinic’s current medical-legal guidance similarly emphasizes evaluating symptom timing, prior history, neurological findings, imaging, functional limitations, and alternative causes rather than relying on one test.

Attorneys can review that discussion in Medical-Legal Causation Opinions for Attorneys Explained.

Functional Limitations Add Another Layer of Evidence

Pain tells clinicians what the patient feels. Function shows what the condition prevents the patient from doing.

An accident victim may have difficulty sitting through a workday, getting out of a vehicle, lifting a child, climbing stairs, carrying groceries, sleeping comfortably, exercising, or walking for extended periods.

Documenting those limitations helps connect the diagnosis to real-world impairment.

Repeated examinations are also valuable. If strength, range of motion, walking tolerance, and everyday function improve as the patient recovers, clinicians can compare those objective and functional changes over time.

That creates a more complete clinical record than repeatedly documenting only “pain 7/10.”

What Makes Injury Medical Chiropractic and Functional Medicine Clinic Different?

Injury Medical Chiropractic and Functional Medicine Clinic in El Paso uses a multidisciplinary structure that brings structural, neurological, functional, and medical evaluations together.

The Natural Way to Heal: Non-Surgical Chiropractic Care for Pain Relief | El Paso, TX

Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, a board-certified internal medicine physician with more than 40 years of experience, serves as Medical Director and Collaborative Physician. Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP, is dual-licensed as a Doctor of Chiropractic and board-certified Family Nurse Practitioner. This allows the clinic to coordinate chiropractic biomechanics and soft-tissue injury evaluation with advanced-practice nursing assessment and medical oversight. The clinic website confirms Dr. Cardenas’s medical-director role and Dr. Jimenez’s dual clinical credentials.

The clinic describes this coordinated combination of chiropractic care, medical oversight, soft-tissue injury evaluation, rehabilitation, diagnostic assessment, acupuncture/electroacupuncture, and advanced treatment options as a unique model in El Paso. Rather than requiring every patient to follow the same protocol, the multidisciplinary approach matches treatment and referrals to examination findings, medical risk, patient preferences, and existing healthcare relationships.

That approach also supports three important principles: helping patients recover function and reduce pain, choosing conservative and non-invasive options when appropriate, and giving patients enough information to participate meaningfully in decisions about their care.

When Back Pain Needs More Urgent Evaluation

Conservative spine care may help appropriate patients improve pain, mobility, sleep, and physical function. Clinicians may incorporate chiropractic care, rehabilitation, mobility work, acupuncture, and electroacupuncture when clinically appropriate.

But treatment should always follow the diagnosis.

New bowel or bladder dysfunction, saddle-area numbness, rapidly progressive leg weakness, significant neurological deterioration, or other signs of serious neural compression require urgent medical assessment rather than routine musculoskeletal treatment. Guidelines specifically identify progressive neurological deficits and bowel or bladder dysfunction as reasons for further investigation.

The Bottom Line: Location Helps Build the Clinical Story

When an accident-related back injury is disputed, where the pain occurs matters—but it’s only the beginning of the analysis.

Strong clinical reasoning looks for agreement among the accident mechanism, symptom timing, pain distribution, spinal examination, neurological findings, imaging, medical history, competing explanations, and functional limitations.

For patients, the lesson is simple: describe your symptoms precisely. Tell your clinician where the pain starts, where it travels, whether you experience numbness or weakness, which movements make it worse, and what you can no longer do comfortably.

For attorneys, the lesson is equally important: don’t evaluate a spinal injury claim based on a single MRI phrase or pain score. Look at whether the complete clinical record demonstrates a coherent relationship between the mechanism of trauma, the patient’s symptoms, objective findings, diagnosis, and resulting functional impairment.

A well-documented examination does more than attach a diagnostic label to back pain.

It explains why the diagnosis fits—or does not fit—the patient standing in front of the clinician.

References

Bateman, E. A., Fortin, C. D., & Guo, M. (2025). Musculoskeletal mimics of lumbosacral radiculopathy. Muscle & Nerve, 71(5), 816–832. PubMed record

Gushcha, A. O., Sharif, S., Zileli, M., Oertel, J., Zygourakis, C. C., & Yusupova, A. R. (2024). Acute back pain: Clinical and radiologic diagnosis: WFNS Spine Committee recommendations. World Neurosurgery: X, 22, 100278. PubMed record

Nee, R. J., Boyd, B. S., Sierra-Silvestre, E., & Coppieters, M. W. (2026). Diagnostic accuracy of the straight leg raise test for lumbosacral radicular pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice, 86, 103666. PubMed record

Peene, L., Cohen, S. P., Kallewaard, J. W., Wolff, A., Huygen, F., van de Gaag, A., Monique, S., Vissers, K., Gilligan, C., Van Zundert, J., & Van Boxem, K. (2024). Lumbosacral radicular pain. Pain Practice, 24(3), 525–552. PubMed record

Pojskic, M., Bisson, E., Oertel, J., Takami, T., Zygourakis, C., & Costa, F. (2024). Lumbar disc herniation: Epidemiology, clinical and radiologic diagnosis—WFNS Spine Committee recommendations. World Neurosurgery: X, 22, 100279. PubMed record

Disc Changes After Fall: Legal Implications to Consider

by Dr Alex Jimenez DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP | Back Pain, Chiropractic, Imaging & Diagnostics, Injury Care, Lower Back Pain, Nerve Injury

A New Injury or an Old Problem? Understanding Disc Changes After a Fall

Imagine stepping off a curb in El Paso and feeling a sharp jolt travel up your spine. Within hours, the low back that felt ordinary yesterday now radiates pain down one leg, with numbness in the foot and difficulty standing straight. An MRI later shows disc desiccation, a bulge, and an annular fissure at L4-L5. The insurance adjuster or defense reviewer labels everything “pre-existing degeneration.” The question that decides both clinical care and legal causation is whether the fall created a new injury, activated a silent process, or permanently aggravated an older one.

Clinicians at El Paso Back Clinic, led by Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP (Texas License #1191402, Prescriptive Authority #59628, NPI: 1205907805), and collaborating with Medical Director Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD (Texas License #J2933, NPI: 1164426748), treat this distinction as the foundation of both recovery and documentation. Dual licensure allows structural alignment work to sit alongside medical diagnostics and internal-medicine coordination. The goal is root-cause healing that reduces reliance on heavy medication or early surgery while giving patients clear information so they remain the informed decision-makers.

How Pre-Existing Degeneration Is Separated from Traumatic Aggravation

Disc degeneration is nearly universal with age. Desiccation (loss of water content), height loss, and annular fissures appear on MRI in many people who have never had significant pain. The North American Spine Society, American Society of Spine Radiology, and American Society of Neuroradiology nomenclature deliberately prefers “annular fissure” over “tear” because the finding itself does not prove a traumatic event. Less-than-violent trauma superimposed on degeneration is a clinical judgment that cannot be made from images alone; in the absence of fracture or clear violent disruption, such discs are classified morphologically as degeneration (NASS, 2014).

Texas law follows the eggshell-plaintiff principle. A defendant takes the injured person as found. Pattern Jury Charges instruct that damages cover the aggravation caused by the occurrence, not the underlying condition itself. Even when a disc already showed wear, if the fall produced new or substantially worse symptoms, functional limits, and objective findings, recovery is available for that change (PJC 28.8B and 28.8C guidance). The Fifth Circuit has confirmed that the defendant remains responsible for the full consequences that flowed from the event, even if a healthier person would have been less affected.

Clinicians therefore build a timeline rather than relying on a single film. Key questions include:

Was the patient asymptomatic or only mildly symptomatic in the same region before the fall?
Did new or sharply increased pain, radiating symptoms, or functional loss begin immediately or within days?
Do prior records show a gap in treatment or only distant, resolved complaints?

A patient who worked full days, walked without limitation, and sought no care for the lumbar spine for years, then developed leg pain and positive nerve-tension signs after a fall, presents a different picture from someone already under active treatment for the identical level. Comparison imaging, when available, can show new neural contact or increased herniation size, but absence of prior films does not defeat the case when history, exam, and response to care align.

Acute Symptoms and the Clinical Timeline

Acute disc-related symptoms after a fall typically include sudden or rapidly progressive axial pain that worsens with sitting, bending, coughing, or Valsalva maneuvers, plus radicular pain in a dermatomal pattern. Delayed onset is possible but must be carefully documented; the strongest records note the fall, the immediate or early symptoms, and the progression. Inflammatory mediators released from disrupted annular fibers and nuclear material can sensitize nearby nerve roots, turning a previously compensated segment into a pain generator.

In clinic, history is paired with functional testing and, when indicated, timed inflammatory or metabolic panels ordered under Dr. Cardenas’s medical direction. Elevated markers dated to the post-fall period help isolate traumatic aggravation from baseline age-related change. Objective electronic notes that meet Colossus-style documentation standards record the mechanism (rapid deceleration or axial load of the fall), the anatomical level, and the temporal link. This creates a continuous record that supports both clinical decisions and Letters of Protection.

Neurological Findings That Anchor the Diagnosis

A careful neurological examination localizes the problem and distinguishes it from purely degenerative stiffness. For a lumbar disc herniation, clinicians look for:

Positive straight-leg-raise or femoral-nerve-stretch tests that reproduce the patient’s radiating pain.
Dermatomal sensory changes (for example, lateral foot numbness with L5 involvement).
Myotomal weakness (ankle dorsiflexion or great-toe extension weakness).
Reflex asymmetry (diminished ankle jerk with S1).

When three of the four classic findings (dermatomal pain, sensory deficit, reflex change, motor weakness) are present, the clinical diagnosis of radiculopathy is supported (StatPearls, 2023). Cervical findings follow the same logic: Spurling’s test, reduced biceps or triceps reflexes, and arm sensory or motor deficits that match the imaged level.

MRI is the preferred study for soft-tissue detail. Signs supporting an acute component include high T2 signal within the annulus (high-intensity zone), focal edema, or asymmetric disc-space signal change, especially when accompanied by ligamentous or soft-tissue injury at the same level. Muscle edema on T2 or STIR sequences can indicate acute denervation, though this is less common. Chronic findings such as advanced disc-space narrowing, large bridging osteophytes, and fatty muscle atrophy suggest longer-standing change. Importantly, an annular fissure or high-intensity zone alone does not prove the date of injury; clinical correlation remains essential.

Electrodiagnostic studies (EMG/NCS) can confirm active denervation when performed at the appropriate interval, but a normal study does not rule out symptomatic nerve-root irritation. The exam and symptom pattern still carry substantial weight.

Integrating Care for Root-Cause Healing

Once the picture of traumatic aggravation is clear, treatment focuses on reducing inflammation, restoring motion, and protecting the nervous system without unnecessary risk. Chiropractic adjustments improve segmental alignment and mobility, decreasing mechanical stress on the aggravated disc and facet joints. Patients often report better sleep, easier walking, and reduced reliance on pain medication. Neurofunctional acupuncture and electroacupuncture modulate pain pathways and support nervous-system recovery. The dual-licensed model offers advanced options—including MLS Class IV laser, extracorporeal shockwave, and carefully selected regenerative or orthobiologic approaches—to target tissue healing when conservative care alone is insufficient. Dr. Cardenas provides medical direction for complex metabolic factors that can slow recovery.

These approaches embody beneficence by addressing the mechanical and inflammatory drivers of symptoms. They embody non-maleficence by favoring non-invasive, drug-sparing methods that lower the chance of surgery or long-term opioid exposure. Autonomy is preserved through clear education: patients understand the difference between baseline degeneration and post-fall change, review their imaging and exam findings, and participate in decisions about care intensity and duration. Coordination with any existing medical team remains seamless.

Documentation produced in this setting—digital imaging reports, functional outcome measures, timed laboratory results, and detailed progress notes—gives treating providers and attorneys objective evidence of proximate causation. The fall’s biomechanical forces (axial load, flexion-compression, or shear) are linked to the specific disc level that now shows neural irritation and matching clinical deficits. Pre-existing wear may have lowered the injury threshold, but the eggshell rule and the clinical timeline show the fall caused the current disability.

Patients who complete a structured course of care frequently regain the ability to sit longer, walk farther, and sleep through the night. The same records that guide that recovery also withstand scrutiny when the question is whether the problem is new, old, or an old problem made newly disabling by a fall.

Chiropractic Care for Healing After Trauma | El Paso, TX

References

NASS, ASSR, & ASNR. (2014). Lumbar disc nomenclature: Version 2.0. The Spine Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.022

StatPearls. (2023). Lumbar disc herniation. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK560878/

Loop 375 Disc Compression and Injury Claims Explained

by Dr Alex Jimenez DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP | Auto Accident Injuries, Back Pain, Herniated Disc, Imaging & Diagnostics, Lawyers, Med-Legal Corner, Spinal Decompression Treatments

Segmental Disc Compression Patterns Generated by Loop 375 Lateral Impacts

Abstract

Loop 375 lateral impacts in El Paso generate rapid, side-directed force vectors that compress lumbar segments, tear the annulus, and accelerate disc height loss visible on structural MRI. These patterns create clear mechanism-to-injury linkages that support clinical and proximate causation for lumbar claims. At Injury Medical Clinic PA, the dual-licensed team of Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, and collaborating medical director Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, documents these objective findings with Colossus-compliant notes, functional testing, and imaging timelines. Non-invasive care—chiropractic decompression and ESWT—restores disc hydration and height, reduces surgical risk, and keeps patients in control of their recovery decisions. The resulting impairment ratings are packaged inside the medical-legal causation documentation framework at https://dralexjimenez.com.

Highway-side impacts on El Paso’s Loop 375 do more than crumple doors. They deliver concentrated lateral force vectors that simultaneously load lumbar discs in compression, shear, and side-bending. The result is a recognizable pattern of segmental disc compression: annular fissures, progressive height loss, and altered load-sharing that shows up clearly on structural MRI. For personal-injury attorneys and patients, this pattern clearly links crash mechanics to documented objective injury.

How Lateral Force Vectors Create Segmental Compression

In a typical Loop 375 side-impact or side-swipe, the struck vehicle’s occupant experiences a rapid lateral acceleration. The lumbar spine, already bearing axial load, is forced into lateral bending while the upper body lags. Finite-element and cadaver studies show that axial compression plus lateral bending produces peak stresses along the posterolateral annulus—the same region where clinical annular tears most often appear.

The outer annulus, whose fibers run nearly vertical in the posterolateral quadrant, is mechanically weakest in this direction. Once a tear begins, nuclear material can migrate, and the disc loses height. Sequential MRI demonstrates the progression: an initially bright T2 fissure evolves into a broader annular disruption accompanied by measurable reduction in disc height at the involved segment (commonly L4–L5 or L5–S1).

MRI Correlation That Withstands Scrutiny

Structural MRI is the cornerstone of objective documentation. High-resolution T2 sequences reveal hyperintense annular fissures; sagittal and axial measurements quantify disc-height loss relative to adjacent normal levels. When these imaging findings are correlated with the known crash kinematics—ΔV, principal direction of force, and seat-belt usage—the clinical causation statement becomes precise: the lateral impact produced the observed segmental compression pattern and annular disruption.

Digital diagnostic imaging, functional range-of-motion and strength testing, and detailed electronic notes are packaged so they align with Colossus valuation factors. These records also support Letters of Protection and provide a clear timeline that patients and counsel can share.

Beneficence: Restoring Disc Hydration and Height

The clinical goal is root-cause recovery, not symptom suppression. Non-surgical spinal decompression creates negative intradiscal pressure that draws nuclear material centrally and allows water and nutrients to re-enter the disc. When low-energy extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) is combined with controlled traction, animal and clinical data show improved disc height, rehydration, and favorable remodeling of the annular matrix.

At the clinic, Dr. Jimenez (DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP; Texas License #1191402, Prescriptive Authority #59628, NPI 1205907805) integrates these mechanical therapies with targeted regenerative options under the medical direction of Dr. Cardenas, MD (Board Certified Internal Medicine, Texas License #J2933, NPI 1164426748). The combination addresses both the structural compression and any concurrent metabolic or inflammatory factors that slow healing.

Non-Maleficence: Delaying or Avoiding Surgery

Invasive procedures carry risks of infection, hardware, and adjacent-segment disease. By restoring disc height and reducing annular stress through decompression and ESWT, many patients experience durable pain relief and improved mobility without immediate surgical intervention. This approach minimizes iatrogenic harm while still producing the objective measurements insurers and defense counsel expect.

Autonomy: Patient-Owned Imaging and Decision Making

Patients retain full access to their imaging timeline and functional data. They review the mechanism-to-injury linkage with both the clinical team and their attorney, then choose the care pathway that fits their goals. Coordination with existing medical providers remains seamless; the clinic’s dual-licensure model keeps chiropractic, acupuncture/electroacupuncture, and advanced medical diagnostics within one coordinated plan.

Future-Care Projections That Drive Case Value

Documented residual disc-height loss and annular disruption support projections for ongoing decompression sessions, periodic ESWT, and monitoring MRI. These future-care items are stated in plain language and tied directly to the original lateral-impact mechanism, so they withstand Colossus review and support appropriate impairment ratings.

The resulting impairment ratings are packaged inside the medical-legal causation documentation framework at https://dralexjimenez.com.

Detailed Biomechanics of Loop 375 Lateral Impacts

Loop 375’s high-speed corridors and frequent lane-change geometry produce a distinctive set of force vectors. When a vehicle is struck broadside or sideswiped, the occupant’s torso is accelerated laterally while the pelvis remains partially restrained by the seat. The resulting moment arm loads the lumbar spine in combined compression, lateral bending, and shear.

Peak annular stresses concentrate at the posterolateral annulus of L4–L5 and L5–S1. In vitro studies using complex loading protocols that include lateral bending demonstrate endplate junction failures and isolated outer-annulus disruptions—exactly the lesions seen clinically after side impacts.

These mechanics explain why patients present with segmental rather than diffuse disc changes. The MRI shows focal height loss and annular high-intensity zones at the levels that experienced the greatest lateral moment. Correlating the police report’s principal direction of force with these segmental findings supplies the proximate-causation statement required for both medical and legal purposes.

Structural MRI Protocols and Quantification

Standard lumbar MRI protocols are augmented with thin-slice T2 sequences and precise mid-sagittal height measurements. Disc height is compared with the adjacent normal disc and with published normative data. We grade annular tears by radial extent and T2 signal intensity. When serial imaging is available, the timeline shows progressive height loss beginning after the documented impact rather than from age-related change alone.

These measurements are entered into the electronic record in a Colossus-ready format: diagnosis codes, objective findings, and functional limitations appear in structured fields. The same images are released to counsel so the patient retains ownership of the visual evidence.

Clinical Examination and Functional Correlates

The physical examination maps MRI findings to clinical signs: restricted lateral flexion, positive straight-leg or femoral-nerve tension, and segmental motion restriction. Instrumented strength and range-of-motion testing quantifies the deficit. These functional data corroborate imaging and show that segmental compression produces real activity limitations—information that directly influences impairment ratings and future care needs.

Multidisciplinary Treatment: Decompression and ESWT

Chiropractic decompression tables apply computer-controlled distraction forces that cycle between hold and rest phases, generating negative intradiscal pressures sufficient to retract nuclear material and promote rehydration. ESWT delivers acoustic energy that, when combined with traction, down-regulates matrix-degrading enzymes and stimulates annular repair.

Sessions are scheduled according to the severity of height loss and annular disruption. We track progress with clinical scores and, when indicated, follow-up MRI. The dual-licensed model allows Dr. Jimenez to integrate these mechanical therapies with medical oversight from Dr. Cardenas, ensuring concurrent management of any metabolic factors.

Spinal Decompression in Depth | El Paso, TX

Bioethical Framework in Practice

Beneficence is realized when disc height and hydration improve and patients regain mobility and sleep. Non-maleficence is served by prioritizing non-invasive options that delay or eliminate the need for fusion or discectomy. Autonomy is preserved because every patient receives a clear explanation of the mechanism, imaging findings, and expected outcomes of each treatment choice; the patient retains possession of the imaging timeline and shares it with counsel at the patient’s direction.

Documentation That Survives Defense Scrutiny

Every encounter generates Colossus-compliant electronic notes that link the original crash kinematics to current objective findings. Digital imaging is archived with measurement annotations. Functional testing results are dated and signed. The complete package supports both the Letter of Protection and the impairment rating that is later incorporated into the medical-legal causation report hosted at https://dralexjimenez.com.

Impairment Ratings and Future-Care Projections

Residual disc-height loss and annular disruption are translated into AMA Guides impairment percentages when appropriate. Future-care projections specify the number and frequency of decompression and ESWT sessions needed to maintain restored height and prevent further annular progression. These projections are written in plain language and tied explicitly to the Loop 375 lateral-impact mechanism.

Coordination with Legal Counsel and Existing Providers

The clinic supplies counsel with a concise mechanism-to-injury summary, annotated imaging, and the functional data set. When a patient already has a primary-care or specialty physician, the dual-licensure team coordinates with that relationship rather than replacing it, preserving continuity while adding the structural and regenerative expertise needed for the injury claim.

Multidisciplinary Call to Action and Reference List

Patients injured in Loop 375 lateral impacts and their attorneys can obtain a coordinated evaluation that links crash mechanics to MRI-documented segmental disc compression, restores disc height non-surgically through decompression and ESWT, and packages the entire record for legal use.

Call to Action
Schedule a comprehensive evaluation at Injury Medical Clinic PA in El Paso. Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, and Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, will map the force vectors of your collision to your current MRI findings, design a drug-free plan to restore disc hydration and height, and prepare the objective documentation your counsel needs. Contact the clinic or visit https://dralexjimenez.com to begin.

References

Che, Y.-J., Guo, J.-B., Wang, Y.-F., Zhu, L.-M., Zhou, C.-X., & Liu, Y.-L. (2021). Low energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy combined with low tension traction can better reshape the microenvironment in degenerated intervertebral disc regeneration and repair. The Spine Journal, 21(1), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2020.08.004
Ghavam, K., & Standring, S. (2023). Annular disc tear. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459235/
Disc injury and spine loads in low-to-moderate-severity frontal impacts. (2025). PMC. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12457475/
Stress evaluation along the posterior annular circumferential tears on the L5-S1 spinal unit as an index of tear progression. (2025). ScienceDirect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X25000261
Influence of complex loading conditions on intervertebral disc failure. (2016). PubMed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27187053/
Posttraumatic changes of the intervertebral disc. (2017). In Wheeless’ Textbook of Orthopaedics. https://www.wheelessonline.com/ISSLS/section-17-chapter-7-posttraumatic-changes-of-the-intervertebral-disc/
Regional variations of mechanical responses of IVD to 7 different motions: An in vivo study combined with FEA and DFIS. (2024). ScienceDirect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S175161612400417X
Effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on different types of lumbar disc herniation. (2024). ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385851112

Car Exit Back Pain Management for Commuters

by Dr Alex Jimenez DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP | Back Pain, Chiropractic, Chiropractic Examination, Chiropractic News, El Paso Chiropractic News, Electroacupuncture Therapy, Hip Pain & Disorders, Imaging & Diagnostics, Lower Back Pain, Physical Rehabilitation, Posture, Professionals, Spinal Decompression Treatments, Spinal Hygiene, Treatments, Work Related Injuries

Why Getting Out of the Car Can Hurt More Than the Drive Itself

Abstract

Getting out of the car can hurt more than the drive because your hips stay flexed, your lumbar spine stiffens, trunk rotation is limited, and the first stand creates a sudden load change. This post explains seat position and road vibration without blaming one bad posture. It covers why the first steps may sting, how a chiropractic exam assesses sit-to-stand, and how hip mobility, trunk work, and spinal decompression can make exiting easier.

The parking brake clicks. The engine is off. For forty minutes the drive felt tolerable. Then you step onto the pavement in El Paso, and your lower back seizes up. Network engineers between sites, field technicians hauling kits, Amazon drivers on stop after stop, and hybrid employees finishing a commute describe the same surprise. The seat was fine. The exit was not.

Why the Drive Can Feel Fine

Sitting is acceptable, and one slumped inch is not the whole story. Reviews of posture and low back pain have not found a single causal pose that explains clinical pain (Swain et al., 2020). When researchers measure sitting time, many adults report an immediate rise in back discomfort, even though that does not prove sitting causes a lasting episode (De Carvalho et al., 2020).

A car seat adds its pattern. Hips stay bent. The lumbar spine often rests toward flexion. The trunk barely rotates because the belt, the console, and traffic keep you facing forward. A field technician may twist once for a meter. An Amazon driver may twist at every stop for a tote. A hybrid worker may not twist until the garage. Less variety means that tissues remain in a single length for an extended period.

De Carvalho and Callaghan (2011) measured lumbar posture and passive stiffness during two hours of simulated driving. Beach and colleagues (2005) found that passive flexion stiffness can rise after prolonged sitting, especially in men after about an hour. A spine that has been quiet in flexion may not love a sudden stand.

What Changes While You Are Still Buckled

Prolonged hip flexion. Hip flexors, including the iliopsoas, stay shortened while you drive. After a long sit, the hip may not extend easily. The pelvis can tip, and the lumbar joints take motion; the hip did not yield

Lumbar stiffness. Discs slowly lose some fluid under sustained load. Ligaments and capsules creep into the seated shape. Stiffness means motion is not shared evenly. One level may catch.

Reduced trunk rotation. A belted seat removes most of that. When you rotate to unbuckle, reach for a bag, or step out sideways, that turn is a new demand.

Seat position. A seat that is too far back forces you to round your body to reach the wheel. A seat too low sharpens the hip angle and hardens the stance. None of these is the sole cause. Together they change how load is shared between disc, facet, hip, and muscle.

Vibration. Road vibration is separate from posture. A systematic review linked whole-body vibration with higher odds of low back pain and sciatica, with some concern about publication bias (Burström et al., 2015). Vibration does not diagnose a disc. It is one more input during a long shift.

The First Steps Are a Different Task

Sitting and standing are not the same job. Intradiscal pressure changes with posture and load. Unsupported sitting can produce higher intradiscal pressure than easy standing, though the number depends on how you sit (Roman-Liu et al., 2023).

Sit-to-stand requires hip extension, knee extension, a forward weight shift, and then trunk rise. People with low back pain often coordinate the lumbar spine and hip differently during this task (Shum et al., 2005). If the hip is stiff, the low back may extend early.

That is why the first steps can hurt more than the drive:

The spine must change shape under body weight.
Hip extension is requested before the hip is ready.
Rotation returns all at once as you pivot out.
A bag, scanner, or tote is often added at the stand.
Cold air or a hot cab can make stiff tissue feel sharper.

Amazon drivers repeat this exit dozens of times. Network engineers may do it fewer times, but they still have to cover highway miles and then work in a ladder or crawl space. Hybrid employees may do it once, then sit again at a desk. The pattern is the same. The dose is not.

This Is Not One Bad Posture

Blaming the slouch oversimplifies a mixed evidence base (Swain et al., 2020). Two coworkers can share a truck, and only one limps to the tailgate. A useful exam asks what the exit demands, not whether your shoulders looked perfect at a red light.

Red flags need a same-day medical look: new bowel or bladder changes, saddle numbness, progressive leg weakness, fever, unexplained weight loss, or pain after a crash.

How a Back-Focused Exam Looks at the Exit

At El Paso Back Clinic, the question is mechanical. Can you stand without a catch?

Does one hip stop early?
Does lumbar motion hinge at one segment?
Does leg pain start after the stand, or did it ride the whole drive?

Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP, brings chiropractic assessment and board-certified family nurse practitioner training to that visit. He holds Texas APRN license #1191402 and prescriptive authority #59628 (NPI 1205907805). Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, is board-certified in internal medicine and has more than 40 years of experience (Texas license #J2933, NPI 1164426748) and provides medical direction at Injury Medical Clinic PA.

A typical function check may include:

Sit-to-stand from seat height, then with arms crossed
Hip extension and rotation, side to side
Lumbar flexion, extension, and rotation
A short walk right after the sit
A nerve screen if pain travels below the knee
Questions on routes, ladder days, commute length, and group benefits

The goal is not a posture label. The goal is to see which link fails when the load changes.

Making the Transition Easier

Chiropractic care aims to restore segmental motion so the first steps are shared instead of hinged. Soft-tissue work can ease hip flexors and glute guards from the drive.

Scoot forward so both feet plant before you stand.
Lean the trunk forward as one unit, then rise. Do not twist and stand at once.
Take three slow steps before you lift a bag or tote.
On a longer stop, gently extend each hip for a few breaths.
If the low back prefers extension, skip a deep toe-touch after the drive.

The trunk has to accept load while the hips extend. Hip hinges with a light load, short carries, slow pivots, and step-ups help rebuild the exit you already do for work.

For disc-related lumbago or leg symptoms after the drive, targeted spinal decompression can reduce load long enough to retrain the stand. Add electroacupuncture when pain blocks sleep or the next shift. MLS laser or shockwave therapy is considered when the complaint is more tendon than disc. An image-guided epidural, when medically directed, is a later window for radicular pain, not the first habit.

These options are chosen for their benefit and for restraint. Non-invasive care can lower the chance that a stiff exit becomes a long medication course or an early surgical talk. You remain the decision-maker.

A Simple Exit Routine

Use this technique on a commute, a field loop, or a delivery block.

Set the seat so you are not reaching, with your hips near knee height if the cab allows.
Every 20 to 30 minutes, shift the pelvis. Change is the point.
Feet out, then stand, then reach.
Carry the bag on the side that does not twist a painful hip.
If the third step still grabs after two weeks, have the transition checked.

Many tech, logistics, and hybrid employers in El Paso offer group plans that include chiropractic and coordinated medical visits. Work injuries and crash-related exits are documented differently from a commute ache, and that distinction protects you.

Call if the catch spreads down a leg, if stairs feel weak, or if you plan the day around which door hurts less. You need a spine and hips that can change shape when the door opens.

Call 915-850-0900 or visit 11860 Vista Del Sol, Suite 128. Ask how group insurance applies to a sit-to-stand evaluation.

Back Pain Chiropractic Care | El Paso, TX:

References

Beach, T. A. C., Parkinson, R. J., Stothart, J. P., & Callaghan, J. P. (2005). Effects of prolonged sitting on the passive flexion stiffness of the in vivo lumbar spine. The Spine Journal, 5(2), 145–154.

Burström, L., Nilsson, T., & Wahlström, J. (2015). Whole-body vibration and the risk of low back pain and sciatica: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 88(4), 403–418.

De Carvalho, D. E., & Callaghan, J. P. (2011). Passive stiffness changes in the lumbar spine and effect of gender during prolonged simulated driving. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 41(6), 617–624.

De Carvalho, D. E., de Luca, K., Funabashi, M., Breen, A., Wong, A. Y. L., Johansson, M. S., Ferreira, M. L., Swab, M., Kawchuk, G. N., Adams, J., & Hartvigsen, J. (2020). Association of exposures to seated postures with immediate increases in back pain: A systematic review of studies with objectively measured sitting time. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 43(1), 1–12.

Roman-Liu, D., Kamińska, J., & Tokarski, T. (2023). Differences in lumbar spine intradiscal pressure between standing and sitting postures: A comprehensive literature review. PeerJ, 11, Article e16176.

Shum, G. L. K., Crosbie, J., & Lee, R. Y. W. (2005). Effect of low back pain on the kinematics and joint coordination of the lumbar spine and hip during sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit. Spine, 30(17), 1998–2004.

Swain, C. T. V., Pan, F., Owen, P. J., Schmidt, H., & Belavy, D. L. (2020). No consensus on causality of spine postures or physical exposure and low back pain: A systematic review of systematic reviews. Journal of Biomechanics, 102, Article 109312.

One-Sided Carrying Back Pain and Asymmetrical Loading

by Dr Alex Jimenez DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP | Chiropractic, Chiropractic Examination, El Paso Chiropractic News, Exercise, Hip Pain & Disorders, Imaging & Diagnostics, Lower Back Pain, Mobility & Flexibility, Posture, Professionals, Spinal Decompression Treatments, Spinal Hygiene, Spine Care, Treatments, Work Related Injuries

The One-Sided Carry: What a Laptop Bag, Tool Case, or Work Tote Can Do to Your Back and Hips

Abstract: A laptop bag, tool case, or work tote may feel harmless because each trip is short. But carrying the same load on the same side can change how your trunk, shoulder, hips, and legs share the work. This article explains asymmetrical loading, what clinicians look for, and practical ways to redistribute load and build capacity.

The Bag Is Not “Putting Your Spine Out”

Picture a network engineer leaving a parking lot with a laptop bag over the right shoulder. The bag is not extremely heavy, and the walk is only ten minutes. Yet by Thursday, the right shoulder feels elevated, the left low back feels tight, and one hip seems tired on stairs.

That pattern does not prove the bag has “misaligned” the spine. A better explanation is compensation.

When weight hangs on one side, the body has to keep the center of mass controlled while walking. The trunk may lean or stiffen, one shoulder may elevate, the pelvis may shift, and the hips may produce different forces from side to side. Classic biomechanical research found that asymmetric load carriage changed trunk muscle demands and hip and knee moments during walking (DeVita et al., 1991). Human bodies tolerate asymmetry every day. Concern grows when repetition exceeds a person’s strength, endurance, recovery, or tissue tolerance.

Why Repetition Matters More Than One Carry

Load-carriage research shows that load size and placement can alter posture, walking mechanics, and balance. A systematic review of backpack studies found changes such as more trunk flexion, altered hip and ankle motion, shorter strides, and higher cadence while carrying loads (Liew et al., 2016). Another systematic review found that load carriage can reduce postural stability, with load magnitude and placement influencing the effect (Martin et al., 2023).

These studies do not mean every worker carrying a bag will develop pain. They support a practical idea: the body adapts to repeated demands.

Think about the total “dose”:

How heavy is the bag?
How far do you carry it?
How many times per shift?
Do you always use the same side?
Are you climbing stairs or walking uneven ground?
Are you already fatigued from sitting, lifting, driving, or poor sleep?
Do you have enough trunk, hip, and shoulder endurance for the task?

A moderate load repeated many times can become more meaningful than one unusually heavy carry.

What Your Trunk and Hips Do With an Uneven Load

Carrying involves a coordinated system that includes the rib cage, spinal muscles, pelvis, hips, legs, and feet.

Trunk compensation

If a bag pulls downward on the right, your body may lean, brace, or rotate to keep its center of mass controlled. Some people stiffen through the torso; others allow more side-to-side motion. Either strategy can increase fatigue.

Shoulder elevation

A slipping strap can encourage shoulder hiking. Over time, neck and shoulder muscles may stay active longer than necessary, contributing to fatigue, tightness, headaches, or discomfort between the shoulder blades.

Hip loading

The hips help control the pelvis every time one foot leaves the ground. With an uneven load, one side may need to work differently to stabilize the body. Asymmetric carrying has been shown to change hip moments during walking, although the response depends on load, placement, speed, and the individual (DeVita et al., 1991).

Walking changes

People often shorten their stride, adjust cadence, change pelvic movement, or spend more time stabilizing when loads increase. These are normal adaptations, not proof of damage. Problems are more likely when the strategy becomes uncomfortable, inefficient, or difficult to recover from.

Signs the Carrying Pattern Deserves Attention

Occasional muscle fatigue is not automatically a medical problem. However, repeated symptoms that follow a predictable carrying pattern deserve a closer look.

Useful clues include:

pain that builds during or after carrying;
one shoulder consistently feeling higher or more tense;
aching on one side of the low back or outer hip;
symptoms that improve when the bag is removed or sides are changed;
reduced walking tolerance;
numbness, tingling, or weakness;
pain that changes how you climb stairs, bend, or lift.

Severe pain after trauma, progressive weakness, loss of bowel or bladder control, saddle-region numbness, fever, unexplained weight loss, or other major neurological or systemic symptoms require timely medical evaluation.

What a Chiropractic Assessment Should Actually Examine

At El Paso Back Clinic, the goal should not be to look at a shoulder bag and declare that the spine is “out.” A useful assessment asks what tissues and movements are struggling and why.

A clinician may examine spinal and hip range of motion, tenderness, neurological findings, gait, single-leg balance, trunk endurance, hip strength, shoulder mechanics, and how the patient carries. The examination may also consider work demands, prior injuries, training level, footwear, and recovery.

Watching the patient walk with the actual laptop bag or tool case can be especially informative.

Does the trunk lean?
Does the shoulder hike?
Does pain appear after several minutes?
Can symptoms improve by changing strap position, load distribution, or carrying side?

That information turns treatment from a generic back-pain plan into a task-specific rehabilitation strategy.

Treatment Should Improve Capacity, Not Create Dependence

For mechanical back or hip symptoms, chiropractic care may be one part of a broader plan to improve movement and reduce pain. Current guidance for chronic primary low back pain supports individualized nonsurgical care that can include education, structured exercise, and selected physical therapies such as spinal manipulation (World Health Organization, 2023).

The practical goal is to help the patient tolerate real life again.

A plan may include:

chiropractic manipulation or mobilization when appropriate;
hip and thoracic mobility work;
trunk endurance exercises;
progressive hip-abductor and gluteal strengthening;
loaded carries that gradually rebuild tolerance;
gait and stair training;
shoulder and scapular endurance work;
work-specific lifting and carrying practice.

If persistent musculoskeletal pain or muscle guarding limits rehabilitation, acupuncture or electroacupuncture may sometimes be added as an adjunct after appropriate evaluation. Evidence suggests electroacupuncture may reduce nonspecific low-back pain when combined with standard care, although certainty is limited and it should not replace diagnosis, exercise, or progressive conditioning (Hsieh et al., 2024).

Move Better, Live Better Chiropractic Care | El Paso, TX

Smarter Carrying Strategies You Can Use Today

The simplest fix is often not “stop carrying.” It is improving how you manage the load.

First, remove items you do not need. Bags can slowly collect chargers, tools, notebooks, bottles, and backup equipment.

Second, keep the load close to your body. A load that swings far from the trunk creates more movement to control.

Third, use two straps when practical. A well-fitted backpack can distribute load more evenly than a one-shoulder tote. For heavier occupational equipment, waist or hip support may help redistribute part of the load depending on the design.

Fourth, switch sides if the task requires one-handed or one-shoulder carrying. Changing sides doesn’t eliminate the load, but it reduces repetition of the same pattern.

Fifth, break long carries into shorter trips when possible. A rolling case or cart may be smarter than carrying everything at once.

Finally, build capacity. Stronger hips, trunk muscles, shoulders, and legs make carrying less costly. Progressive conditioning also respects autonomy: instead of telling patients their bodies are fragile, it teaches them how to prepare for the work they choose to do.

Coordinated Care for Back and Hip Symptoms in El Paso

Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, CFMP, IFMCP, combines chiropractic and medical training to evaluate mechanical, neurological, and broader health contributors to pain. When medical complexity requires oversight, he collaborates with Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, a board-certified internal medicine physician with more than 40 years of experience.

That integrated model supports three principles. Beneficence means choosing care that restores function and addresses the likely cause. Non-maleficence means starting with appropriate noninvasive, drug-free strategies when reasonable while recognizing when imaging, medication, injections, or referral may be needed. Autonomy means explaining findings clearly so the patient can decide how to proceed and coordinate with an existing medical team.

A laptop bag, tool case, or work tote is rarely the whole story. The useful question is whether repeated one-sided loading is exceeding your current capacity. When assessment, load redistribution, chiropractic care, rehabilitation, and progressive conditioning match your job’s actual demands, the goal isn’t just to feel better on the treatment table. It is to walk, carry, climb, work, and recover with confidence.

References

DeVita, P., Hong, D., & Hamill, J. (1991). Effects of asymmetric load carrying on the biomechanics of walking. Journal of Biomechanics, 24(12), 1119–1129.

Hsieh, D., Chen, Y.-C., Chang, H.-C., Wei, C.-C., & Lee, T.-H. (2024). Efficacy of electroacupuncture compared to standard and manual needling therapy for nonspecific low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cureus, 16(10), e72577.

Liew, B., Morris, S., & Netto, K. (2016). The effect of backpack carriage on the biomechanics of walking: A systematic review and preliminary meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 32(6), 614–629.

Martin, J., Kearney, J., Nestrowitz, S., Burke, A., & Sax van der Weyden, M. (2023). Effects of load carriage on measures of postural sway in healthy, young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Applied Ergonomics, 106, 103893.

World Health Organization. (2023). WHO guideline for non-surgical management of chronic primary low back pain in adults in primary and community care settings. World Health Organization.

« Older Entries

IFM's Find A Practitioner tool is the largest referral network in Functional Medicine, created to help patients locate Functional Medicine practitioners anywhere in the world. IFM Certified Practitioners are listed first in the search results, given their extensive education in Functional Medicine

Online Booking & Appointments 24/7*

Certified Functional Medicine Doctor El Paso — Certified Functional Medicine Provider*
All providers work within legal jurisdiction and have an established clinical scope of practice.*

COMPLETE ONLINE HISTORY 24/7*

Clinic Locations

Additional Areas Of Care Offered

EVENTS CALENDAR: LIVE EVENTS & WEBINARS

Mission Injury Clinic PA — **Mission Personal Injury Clinic PA**

11860 Vista Del Sol, Suite 128, El Paso, Tx 79936

Call Today: 915-412-6677

Book Online 24/7

Dr. Alexander David Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC

Provider NPI: 1205907805

Injury Medical Clinic, P.A.
11860 Vista Del Sol, Suite 128
El Paso, Texas 79936
P: 915-412-6677

DEA Registrations:

DEA #: ACTIVE (Provided As Required)
DEA Classification: Full Prescriptive Authority

Nurse Practitioner Licenses:

Texas: APRN/FNP License No.: 1191402
New Mexico: FNP License No.: 90560
Florida: APRN/FNP License No.: APRN11043890
Colorado: C-APN License No.: C-APN.0105610-C-NP
Georgia: APRN GAA-NP License No.: GAA-NP005701
New York: RN License No.: N25929

Registered Nurse Licenses:

Multi-State Compact License (Texas Primary)
43. State Compact License: ACTIVE

Chiropractic Licenses:

Texas: Chiropractic License No.: 5809
New Mexico: Chiropractic License No.: DC2182
_______________________________________________________

Medical License:

Dr. Maria Cardenas, MD (Internal Medicine)

Provider NPI: 1164426748

Texas: Medical License No.: J2933

DEA Registrations:

DEA #: ACTIVE (Provided As Required)
DEA Classification: Full Prescriptive Authority

Dr. Alexander David Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC

Provider NPI: 1205907805

Injury Medical Clinic, P.A.
11860 Vista Del Sol, Suite 128
El Paso, Texas 79936
P: 915-412-6677

DEA Registrations:

DEA #: ACTIVE (Provided As Required)
DEA Classification: Full Prescriptive Authority

Nurse Practitioner Licenses:

Texas: APRN/FNP License No.: 1191402
New Mexico: FNP License No.: 90560
Florida: APRN/FNP License No.: APRN11043890
Colorado: C-APN License No.: C-APN.0105610-C-NP
Georgia: APRN GAA-NP License No.: GAA-NP005701
New York: RN License No.: N25929

The Injury & Trauma Rehabilitation Specialists

PUSHasRx® Trauma Rehabilitation Center

Health, Wellness & Nutrition Specialists

Changing Back Pain Diagnoses Reflect Better Clinical Insight

Why Changing Back Pain Diagnoses During Rehabilitation May Reflect Better Clinical Understanding

Visit One: The Acute Phase and a Provisional Working Diagnosis

Visit Two: Swelling Subsides and Symptoms Clarify

Visit Three: Imaging Confirms, and the Diagnosis Is Refined

Documenting the Clinical Reasoning

Careful Documentation also Serves the Three Bioethical Pillars that Guide Care

References

Lumbar MRI Accident Causation and Legal Implications

What a Lumbar Spine MRI Can and Cannot Tell a Jury About an Accident-Related Disc Injury

How MRI Shows Lumbar Disc Herniations and Nerve Root Compression

Degenerative Findings That Commonly Appear on MRI

Why the MRI Alone Does Not Establish Age or Cause

The Role of Clinical Correlation and Multidisciplinary Documentation

What Makes the Clinic Unique

References

Back Pain After Accident: Why Pain Location Matters

Why the Location of Back Pain Matters When an Accident Injury Is Disputed

Back Pain Is a Symptom, Not a Diagnosis

Why the Location of Back Pain Matters

Pain Patterns Are Helpful—but They Are Not Perfect Maps

What a Spinal Examination Looks For

Do the Symptoms Match the Structural Diagnosis?

An MRI Finding Is Not Automatically Proof of Accident Causation

What If the Pain Pattern Does Not Fit?

Connecting the Accident Mechanism to the Symptoms

Functional Limitations Add Another Layer of Evidence

What Makes Injury Medical Chiropractic and Functional Medicine Clinic Different?

When Back Pain Needs More Urgent Evaluation

The Bottom Line: Location Helps Build the Clinical Story

References

Disc Changes After Fall: Legal Implications to Consider

A New Injury or an Old Problem? Understanding Disc Changes After a Fall

How Pre-Existing Degeneration Is Separated from Traumatic Aggravation

Acute Symptoms and the Clinical Timeline

Neurological Findings That Anchor the Diagnosis

Integrating Care for Root-Cause Healing

References

Loop 375 Disc Compression and Injury Claims Explained

Segmental Disc Compression Patterns Generated by Loop 375 Lateral Impacts

Abstract

How Lateral Force Vectors Create Segmental Compression

MRI Correlation That Withstands Scrutiny

Beneficence: Restoring Disc Hydration and Height

Non-Maleficence: Delaying or Avoiding Surgery

Autonomy: Patient-Owned Imaging and Decision Making

Future-Care Projections That Drive Case Value

Detailed Biomechanics of Loop 375 Lateral Impacts

Structural MRI Protocols and Quantification

Clinical Examination and Functional Correlates

Multidisciplinary Treatment: Decompression and ESWT

Bioethical Framework in Practice

Documentation That Survives Defense Scrutiny

Impairment Ratings and Future-Care Projections

Coordination with Legal Counsel and Existing Providers

Multidisciplinary Call to Action and Reference List

References

Car Exit Back Pain Management for Commuters

Why Getting Out of the Car Can Hurt More Than the Drive Itself

Abstract

Why the Drive Can Feel Fine

What Changes While You Are Still Buckled

The First Steps Are a Different Task

This Is Not One Bad Posture

How a Back-Focused Exam Looks at the Exit

Making the Transition Easier

A Simple Exit Routine

References

One-Sided Carrying Back Pain and Asymmetrical Loading

The One-Sided Carry: What a Laptop Bag, Tool Case, or Work Tote Can Do to Your Back and Hips

The Bag Is Not “Putting Your Spine Out”

Why Repetition Matters More Than One Carry

What Your Trunk and Hips Do With an Uneven Load

Trunk compensation

Shoulder elevation

Hip loading

Walking changes

Injury Medical Clinic, P.A.
11860 Vista Del Sol, Suite 128
El Paso, Texas 79936
P: 915-412-6677

DEA #: ACTIVE (Provided As Required)
DEA Classification: Full Prescriptive Authority

Texas: APRN/FNP License No.: 1191402
New Mexico: FNP License No.: 90560
Florida: APRN/FNP License No.: APRN11043890
Colorado: C-APN License No.: C-APN.0105610-C-NP
Georgia: APRN GAA-NP License No.: GAA-NP005701
New York: RN License No.: N25929

Multi-State Compact License (Texas Primary)
43. State Compact License: ACTIVE

Texas: Chiropractic License No.: 5809
New Mexico: Chiropractic License No.: DC2182
_______________________________________________________

Provider NPI: 1164426748

Texas: Medical License No.: J2933

DEA #: ACTIVE (Provided As Required)
DEA Classification: Full Prescriptive Authority

Injury Medical Clinic, P.A.
11860 Vista Del Sol, Suite 128
El Paso, Texas 79936
P: 915-412-6677

DEA #: ACTIVE (Provided As Required)
DEA Classification: Full Prescriptive Authority

Texas: APRN/FNP License No.: 1191402
New Mexico: FNP License No.: 90560
Florida: APRN/FNP License No.: APRN11043890
Colorado: C-APN License No.: C-APN.0105610-C-NP
Georgia: APRN GAA-NP License No.: GAA-NP005701
New York: RN License No.: N25929

Multi-State Compact License (Texas Primary)
43. State Compact License: ACTIVE

Texas: Chiropractic License No.: 5809
New Mexico: Chiropractic License No.: DC2182
_______________________________________________________

Provider NPI: 1164426748

Texas: Medical License No.: J2933

DEA #: ACTIVE (Provided As Required)
DEA Classification: Full Prescriptive Authority