Find out how integrative therapies for cognitive decline can play a vital role in preserving cognitive health over time.
Welcome. I’m Dr. Alex Jimenez. In this comprehensive educational post, we will embark on a detailed journey into the complex world of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Our focus will be on understanding the current landscape of diagnosis and treatment, from foundational symptomatic medications to the revolutionary frontier of disease-modifying therapies. We will begin by dismantling the traditional, symptom-based methods of diagnosis and introducing the modern ATN (Amyloid, Tau, Neurodegeneration) framework, a biological approach that uses advanced biomarkers such as cerebrospinal fluid analysis, PET scans, and emerging blood tests, including p-tau217. We will explore the “Jack curves,” which illustrate the long presymptomatic phase of the disease, and discuss the critical reality of mixed pathologies, in which multiple neurodegenerative conditions co-exist.
The discussion will then shift to management strategies, covering both symptomatic treatments—cholinesterase inhibitors (e.g., donepezil) and NMDA receptor antagonists (e.g., memantine)—and the new era of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), specifically the amyloid-targeting monoclonal antibodies (aducanumab, lecanemab, donanemab). We will dissect the clinical data, mechanisms of action, efficacy, access logistics, and significant safety considerations, including ARIA (amyloid-related imaging abnormalities) and the influence of APOE4 genetics. A significant portion of our discussion will be dedicated to the often-overlooked neuropsychiatric symptoms—such as agitation, apathy, and psychosis—which profoundly impact patient quality of life and caregiver well-being. We will review assessment tools, non-pharmacological approaches, and the role of pharmacogenetic testing in personalizing treatment.
Throughout this exploration, I will share insights from my clinical practice at Injury Medical Clinic PA (also known as Mission Plaza Injury Medical Clinic) in El Paso, Texas, where we champion an integrative approach. This model, under the medical direction of our collaborative physician, Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD, seamlessly blends traditional medical management with chiropractic care, functional medicine, and personalized rehabilitation to provide holistic, patient-centered support for individuals and families navigating the challenges of dementia. This post is designed to be a comprehensive guide, making complex science accessible and empowering you with knowledge.
Before we dive into the clinical details of cognitive decline, I want to take a moment to explain the philosophy that guides our practice here at Injury Medical Clinic PA. I am Dr. Alex Jimenez, and my journey in healthcare has led me to embrace a truly integrative model. My credentials as a Doctor of Chiropractic (DC) are complemented by my roles as an Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) and a board-certified Family Nurse Practitioner (FNP-BC), along with advanced certifications in functional and integrative medicine (CFMP, IFMCP, ATN, CCST). This diverse background allows me to view patient health through multiple lenses—structural, neurological, metabolic, and systemic.
This vision of integrated care is brought to life through my collaboration with Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas, MD. Dr. Cardenas is a highly respected, board-certified Internist with over four decades of invaluable experience. As our Medical Director and Collaborative Physician, she provides the essential medical oversight that anchors our multidisciplinary approach. Her NPI is #1164426749, and she holds Texas MD License #J2933. This partnership between a chiropractor with advanced practice nursing and functional medicine training and a seasoned internist is a powerful combination, particularly for managing complex conditions such as personal injuries and chronic diseases, including cognitive decline.
At our clinic, we offer a spectrum of services designed to work in synergy:
This collaborative model ensures that when we approach a complex issue like cognitive decline, we are not just looking at one piece of the puzzle. We are evaluating the whole person—their structure, biochemistry, lifestyle, and environment—to build a robust, evidence-based, and compassionate plan of care.
For many years, our approach to diagnosing Alzheimer’s disease was almost entirely based on clinical observation. It was a process of deduction, centered on the what and when of a person’s symptoms. This traditional method relied on identifying measurable impairments in key cognitive domains.
The classic diagnostic criteria focused on a constellation of symptoms that, when pieced together, painted a picture of “probable” Alzheimer’s disease. These included:
Supporting features helped bolster the diagnosis. An insidious onset was crucial—there was no single day or event that marked the illness’s onset. It was a slow, creeping change. Advanced age was, and remains, the single greatest risk factor. This clinical picture allowed us to differentiate, with a reasonable degree of confidence, Alzheimer’s from other major causes of dementia. However, it was an imperfect science, a diagnosis made by exclusion and probability, ultimately only confirmed by autopsy.
The field was revolutionized by the work of researchers such as Dr. Clifford Jack, whose “Jack curves,” first conceptualized over a decade ago, changed our understanding of the disease’s timeline (Jack et al., 2013). These curves provide a stunning visual representation of the biological changes unfolding in the brain long before a person shows any outward signs of cognitive trouble.
This model reveals a crucial truth: Alzheimer’s disease has a long, silent, preclinical phase. The pathological processes begin 15 to 20 years before measurable cognitive impairment emerges. This understanding shifted the focus from late-stage symptom management to the possibility of early detection and intervention.
The core of this new understanding rests on two infamous proteins:
The “Jack curves” show us the order of events: amyloid accumulation begins first, followed by tau pathology, and together, they lead to widespread neuronal death. Only after a significant number of brain cells have been destroyed do the clinical symptoms of cognitive decline—memory loss, confusion, and functional impairment—finally become apparent.
This new biological understanding gave rise to a more structured and precise diagnostic approach known as the ATN framework (Jack et al., 2018). This framework defines Alzheimer’s disease not by its clinical symptoms, but by the presence of its core underlying pathologies.
More recently, the field has been transformed by the development of blood-based biomarkers. These tests can detect amyloid levels in the blood with remarkable accuracy. While not yet considered the gold standard for a definitive diagnosis, they are proving to be powerful screening tools for identifying individuals who may need more definitive testing, such as a PET scan or lumbar puncture.
It is crucial to note that current recommendations advise against using these pathological markers for screening in completely asymptomatic individuals. The presence of amyloid in an older, cognitively normal individual does not definitively mean they will develop Alzheimer’s dementia. The clinical context—the presence of mild cognitive impairment or dementia symptoms—remains essential for interpreting these powerful biological tools.
Blood-based biomarkers are now an integral component of the diagnostic landscape. Practically, what are we seeing?
Importantly, these assays are often reported as ratios rather than single numbers, reflecting the biological interplay between amyloid species (e.g., A?42/A?40) and phosphorylation states of tau. Clinically, this ratio-based approach may enhance specificity for Alzheimer’s pathology compared with standalone metrics.
Where are we headed? Toward panels. Just like lipid profiling includes total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, triglycerides, the emergent paradigm in Alzheimer’s is likely:
In our practice, we educate patients that blood biomarkers can elevate diagnostic confidence but may not be accepted as “gold standard” for therapy qualification—yet. Many systems still require amyloid PET or CSF confirmation before starting monoclonal antibody therapy. That said, the role of blood-based markers is expanding. In select cases, out-of-pocket costs (reported at around a few hundred dollars) can be managed if a patient wants added clarity before pursuing referrals. From an integrative standpoint, biomarkers help us stage disease processes, align timelines, and structure adjunctive care plans targeting inflammation, vascular risk, insulin resistance, and sleep—domains that influence neurodegenerative trajectories.
With a rich understanding of the disease’s biology, we can now turn to the formal clinical evaluation. This is a systematic process that involves several key components, each providing a different piece of the diagnostic puzzle.
When a patient comes to me with concerns about their memory or thinking, my first and most crucial step is to gather a detailed, nuanced symptom history. It’s not enough to acknowledge a complaint of “brain fog” or “forgetfulness.” We need to paint a vivid picture of the patient’s experience. This is the bedrock upon which the entire diagnostic journey is built.
I guide the conversation with a series of targeted questions designed to explore the nuances of their symptoms:
One of the challenging paradoxes of cognitive impairment is that the very condition we are trying to diagnose can affect a person’s ability to report their own symptoms accurately. This is known as anosognosia, or a lack of insight into one’s own condition. Therefore, best practice dictates that we gather information from someone who knows the patient well.
I want to be very clear about this person’s role. I don’t initially refer to them as a “caregiver,” as that label can be premature and may carry connotations the patient isn’t ready for. Instead, I frame it as inviting a trusted partner, spouse, adult child, or close friend to share their observations. I explain to my patient, “We all have blind spots—things we do or say that we don’t even realize. Having someone who spends a lot of time with you share their perspective can give us a more complete picture of what’s going on.”
The key here is that the information flows to me, the clinician, from this secondary historian. It’s a data-gathering exercise, not a forum for me to share my findings with them without the patient’s explicit consent. In my experience, most patients are very open to this. They recognize the value in getting another perspective. This secondary source can often provide crucial details about changes in personality, social behavior, or daily functioning that the patient may minimize or be unaware of.
I always perform a thorough neurological exam. In the early stages of many neurodegenerative conditions, I may not expect to find major, “hard” neurological deficits. Things like deep tendon reflexes, gait, and basic motor strength might appear perfectly normal for quite some time. However, the exam is still critically important. It helps establish a baseline and can reveal subtle signs that might point toward or away from certain diagnoses. For example, the presence of parkinsonian features (like a tremor or rigidity) might suggest a different underlying pathology than pure Alzheimer’s disease, such as Lewy body dementia or Parkinson’s disease dementia.
In my practice, which integrates chiropractic principles, the neurological exam also includes a detailed assessment of the neuromusculoskeletal system. I’m looking at posture, spinal mobility, and nerve function as it relates to the spinal column. Chronic physical stress, poor posture, and spinal misalignments can contribute to a state of systemic inflammation and sympathetic nervous system overdrive (“fight or flight”). This, in turn, can negatively impact brain health and cerebral blood flow. By identifying and addressing these structural issues through targeted chiropractic adjustments, we can help reduce this physiological burden on the body, creating a more favorable internal environment for neurological health.
If there is one tool that can provide an incredibly detailed and objective map of a person’s cognitive strengths and weaknesses, it is formal neuropsychological testing. I consider this an invaluable part of the workup whenever possible. A neuropsychologist administers a comprehensive battery of standardized tests that can take several hours to complete. This isn’t just a simple memory screening; it’s a deep dive that assesses multiple cognitive domains:
The results provide a detailed cognitive profile. This profile can be incredibly helpful in narrowing down the differential diagnosis. For example, a prominent deficit in executive function with relatively preserved memory might point toward a frontotemporal dementia or vascular dementia. In contrast, a primary and severe deficit in recent memory is the classic hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease. I strongly encourage my patients to get this testing done at least once to establish a robust baseline.
After gathering clinical and behavioral data, we turn to technologies that allow us to directly examine the brain’s structure and the body’s biochemistry.
In the primary care and integrative setting, the diagnostic journey for cognitive decline typically begins with structural neuroimaging. My preference is for a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of the brain. An MRI provides a detailed picture of the brain’s anatomy. It allows us to:
Before jumping to highly specialized and expensive tests, it is essential to perform a panel of basic laboratory studies. It is surprising how often cognitive symptoms can be caused or worsened by a treatable metabolic or nutritional issue. This initial panel, often referred to as a “Tier One” workup, is a non-negotiable part of my evaluation if recent labs are not available. It typically includes:
From a functional medicine perspective, I often expand on this basic panel. I might also assess homocysteine levels (an inflammatory marker linked to B vitamin status and vascular risk), Vitamin D (which plays a neuroprotective role), and a full thyroid panel (including Free T3, Free T4, and thyroid antibodies) to get a more complete picture of thyroid function.
The rapid evolution in our understanding and testing capabilities for Alzheimer’s disease has necessitated a new framework for clinicians. In 2025, a group of experts supported by the Alzheimer’s Association published the Detect AD clinical practice guidelines in the journal Alzheimer’s & Dementia. This was the culmination of a multi-year effort to provide clear, evidence-based recommendations for evaluating cognitive impairment, with separate guidance tailored for primary care clinicians and dementia subspecialists.
The guidelines are built around a set of core elements, with communication being the foundation. A central tenet is that the patient’s values and preferences must guide the evaluation. The guidelines strongly recommend that a trusted care partner be involved at every step, and they outline the key steps of the evaluation, which mirror the comprehensive approach we’ve been discussing: history taking, examination, and synthesis/diagnosis. This involves two key determinations:
The Detect AD guidelines provide a very practical decision tree for primary care, guiding the clinician through a logical, tiered sequence of steps, starting with the core evaluation and proceeding to Tier One testing (labs and structural imaging) when indicated. This approach is efficient, patient-centered, and avoids overwhelming patients with a battery of tests right away.
As our diagnostic tools have become more sophisticated, they have revealed a humbling truth: the human brain rarely suffers from just one problem at a time. This concept of co-occurring or mixed pathologies is critical for clinicians, patients, and families to understand. A groundbreaking study published in The Lancet Neurology analyzed data from six large community-based autopsy studies, providing a clear picture of this complexity (Boyle et al., 2021). When we examine the brains of older adults after death, we find that a significant portion have more than one type of neuropathology. It is the exception, not the rule, to find “pure” Alzheimer’s disease.
Here are the common culprits we often find co-existing:
This has profound clinical implications:
For decades, the only pharmacological tools we had for Alzheimer’s disease were those that treated the symptoms. These drugs do not stop or slow the underlying disease progression, but they can provide modest, temporary benefits to cognitive function and daily living.
The first class of drugs approved for Alzheimer’s disease was the acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs). The two most commonly used agents today are donepezil (Aricept) and rivastigmine (Exelon).
These drugs work by inhibiting acetylcholinesterase, the enzyme that breaks down the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Acetylcholine plays a vital role in attention, focus, and memory consolidation. In Alzheimer’s disease, the cholinergic neurons are among the first to degenerate, leading to a deficit of acetylcholine. The AChEIs aim to compensate for this loss by prolonging the availability of acetylcholine and enhancing its effectiveness. This is also why we rigorously avoid anticholinergic medications (found in many over-the-counter sleep aids and allergy medicines), as they block acetylcholine’s effects and can significantly worsen cognition.
It’s been over 25 years since these drugs were first studied. One of the pivotal Phase 3 trials for donepezil found a statistically significant but modest benefit in the groups receiving the drug compared to placebo (Rogers et al., 1998). On average, patients on the 10 mg dose showed a small improvement on cognitive scales, while the placebo group showed a slight decline. The effect was not a cure, but a temporary stabilization or slight improvement over the study period. This is what we tell patients to expect: the goal is to slow the rate of symptomatic progression.
My experience in using these drugs for many years has taught me a lot about managing their practicalities.
The second major class of symptomatic treatments is the NMDA receptor antagonists, which consist of a single drug: memantine (Namenda).
To understand how memantine works, we need to talk about glutamate, the brain’s primary excitatory neurotransmitter. In the Alzheimer’s brain, it is thought that there is a chronic, low-level excess of glutamate, leading to excitotoxicity, where the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors are constantly overstimulated. This allows an excessive influx of calcium into the neuron, triggering a cascade of events that leads to cell death.
Memantine works as a low-affinity, non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist. It gently blocks the NMDA receptor channels, but only when they are being pathologically overstimulated. It does not interfere with the normal signals required for learning and memory. By dampening this chronic excitotoxic noise, memantine is thought to protect neurons from further damage.
The gold standard for treating moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease became the combination of an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (like donepezil) and an NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine). The rationale is that these drugs target two distinct pathological pathways, potentially yielding a synergistic effect.
A landmark study provided the strongest evidence for this approach (Tariot et al., 2004). The results were clear: the combination group demonstrated the least amount of cognitive decline over the study period. However, the most dramatic and clinically meaningful separation between the groups was not in cognition, but in function. The study also measured Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), a person’s ability to perform fundamental self-care tasks.
The data showed that patients on combination therapy maintained their functional independence for longer. This translates directly to a better quality of life for the patient and a reduced burden on caregivers. This is the area where memantine, especially as part of a dual-therapy regimen, truly makes its mark.
While cognitive decline is the hallmark of Alzheimer’s, the neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS), also known as behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), are often the most challenging and distressing aspects of the disease. These are the symptoms that lead to extreme caregiver distress, burnout, and are the primary driver of institutional placement.
The first step is to recognize and assess these symptoms systematically. Validated tools like the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) help us quantify them. These tools are almost universally designed to be completed by a care partner or caregiver, not the patient. This underscores a critical point: you must engage a secondary historian to get a full and accurate picture of what is happening day to day. A patient with dementia often lacks insight into their own behavioral changes (anosognosia).
When you use a comprehensive tool, you’ll be screening for symptoms across several broad categories:
At our clinic, we strongly discourage what I call “lazy prescribing.” The most important thing you can do when confronted with a behavior is to be curious. You must ask at least one more question to understand the why behind the what. A person might be pacing the hallway. Why?
Each of these underlying causes requires a completely different treatment approach. Pacing due to a UTI needs an antibiotic, not an antipsychotic. This is where our integrative model, which includes chiropractic care, becomes so valuable. A patient with dementia may not be able to say, “My back hurts.” Instead, they may express that pain through agitation. As a chiropractor, I can perform a physical assessment to identify sources of musculoskeletal pain. By providing gentle chiropractic adjustments, we can often alleviate the underlying pain that is driving the behavior.
Our approach follows a hierarchical ladder:
One of the most powerful tools we have adopted in our practice is pharmacogenetic testing. This involves a simple cheek swab to analyze a patient’s DNA. The results indicate how an individual’s specific genetic makeup will likely affect their metabolism and response to various medications, including antidepressants and antipsychotics. This allows us to move beyond a “trial and error” approach, reach the right treatment faster, minimize side effects, and empower families with personalized care.
The last few years have marked a monumental shift in the treatment of Alzheimer’s with the arrival of the first disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). These are not symptomatic treatments; they are designed to target the disease’s underlying biology, with the goal of slowing its progression. The current class of DMTs is anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies.
Over the past decade-plus, the Alzheimer’s research community has pursued amyloid as a therapeutic target with remarkable intensity. Moving a drug from early-stage testing to FDA approval is exceptionally difficult. One analysis reported an overall success rate of around 0.4% across all compounds studied over 10 years. This underscores the painstaking complexity of Alzheimer’s pharmacology and contextualizes the significance of recent approvals for lecanemab and donanemab, as well as the earlier accelerated-approval pathway for aducanumab.
These therapies are lab-engineered antibodies administered intravenously. They bind to various forms of amyloid in the brain and facilitate its clearance.
These drugs are not for everyone with Alzheimer’s. The clinical trials were conducted in a very specific population, and current guidelines reflect this:
The most significant risk associated with these therapies is Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA).
Most cases of ARIA are asymptomatic and are detected only on routine safety monitoring MRIs. However, in some cases, ARIA can cause symptoms like headache, confusion, dizziness, and nausea. In rare instances, it can lead to severe and life-threatening complications. Because of this risk, patients require a rigorous monitoring schedule with regular MRI scans, particularly during the first year of treatment.
Certain factors increase the risk of ARIA, most notably the presence of the Apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) gene allele, which is itself a major genetic risk factor for Alzheimer’s disease. The APOE protein is critical in lipid transport and amyloid processing. The E4 isoform is associated with altered amyloid clearance and microvascular fragility. When amyloid-depleting antibodies rapidly shift amyloid, they may stress the blood vessel walls, and the microvasculature of APOE4 carriers may be less resilient. Patients who are homozygous for this gene (carrying two copies, or E4/E4) have a significantly higher risk of developing ARIA and may even be deemed ineligible for therapy in some health systems.
As these therapies rolled out, real-world safety registries began capturing adverse events. Recently, recommendations have tightened, with some guidance now proposing an MRI be performed at the second infusion for all patients. Monoclonal therapies are infusions administered in dedicated centers, which involves significant logistical hurdles, including health system formularies, pre-infusion diagnostic requirements (amyloid PET or CSF), ongoing MRI monitoring, and care partner involvement. Costs can also be substantial, extending beyond drug pricing to scans, visits, and travel.
Faced with this complex array of diagnostic tools and powerful new treatments, where does our integrative model fit in? It serves as the essential foundation upon which these advanced medical interventions are built. Managing Alzheimer’s disease effectively is not just about prescribing a pill or an infusion; it is about supporting the whole person and their entire ecosystem.
Dr. Cardenas’s medical oversight is indispensable. As our collaborative physician and medical director, she brings expertise in internal medicine that is critical for managing complex comorbidities, overseeing the prescribing of pharmacological agents, ensuring rigorous safety monitoring for DMTs is properly executed, and managing the intricate interplay between dementia medications and other treatments.
My role, as a Doctor of Chiropractic and Functional Medicine Practitioner, is to build resilience in the body’s other systems. This is where our integrative philosophy shines.
Drawing from our clinical experience and public observations shared on my professional platforms:
For ongoing clinical insights, see my practice and professional posts:
In conclusion, the landscape of Alzheimer’s disease is more complex and more hopeful than ever before. We are moving from an era of simply observing symptoms to one of biologically defining and modifying the disease. This progress brings powerful new treatments that require careful patient selection and rigorous medical management, a role expertly filled by physicians like Dr. Cardenas.
However, these technological advances do not diminish the profound importance of foundational, holistic care. Our integrative model, which combines expert medical oversight with the principles of chiropractic and functional medicine, provides the comprehensive, person-centered framework necessary to support individuals and families on this journey. By addressing structural integrity, metabolic health, inflammation, and the psychosocial needs of the entire family unit, we aim not just to slow the disease but to enhance the quality of life, dignity, and resilience of every person we have the privilege of caring for.
The path forward is one of hope, grounded in science and delivered with compassion. By integrating the best of all disciplines, we can provide our patients with the most comprehensive, personalized, and effective care possible as they navigate the challenges of cognitive change.
Disclaimer: Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, provides this information for educational purposes only. It is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.
SEO Tags:
Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, integrative care, chiropractic, functional medicine, Dr. Alex Jimenez, Dr. Maria Cardenas, El Paso, TX, ATN framework, biomarkers, amyloid, tau, Lecanemab, Leqembi, Donepezil, Memantine, mixed pathology, neurodegeneration, cognitive decline, personal injury, brain health, geriatric care, ARIA, disease-modifying therapy, p-tau217, Lumipulse assay, APOE4 genetics, amyloid PET, MRI monitoring, integrative chiropractic care, multidisciplinary clinic, Injury Medical Clinic, Mission Plaza Injury Medical Clinic, Dr. Maria Guadalupe Cardenas MD, dementia staging, CDR scale, autonomic regulation, glymphatic clearance, sleep optimization, gut-brain axis, vascular health, insulin resistance, cost-effectiveness, rehabilitation, evidence-based neurology, shared decision-making, donepezil, memantine, neuropsychiatric symptoms, agitation in dementia, pharmacogenetic testing, amyloid targeted therapy, combination therapy Alzheimer’s, activities of daily living, caregiver support, Lewy Body Dementia, Frontotemporal Dementia, clinical dementia rating, MMSE, ADAS-Cog, pain management in dementia, non-pharmacological interventions, Injury Medical Clinic PA, Cognitive Decline, Alzheimer’s Disease Diagnosis, Neuropsychological Testing, Detect AD Guidelines, Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors, Symptom History, Secondary Historian, Neuroimaging for Dementia, Mild Cognitive Impairment, Dementia Treatment, Biomarkers for Alzheimer’s, Systemic Inflammation, Neurological Exam
General Disclaimer, Licenses and Board Certifications *
Professional Scope of Practice *
The information herein on "Integrative Therapies for Better Health from Cognitive Decline" is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional or licensed physician and is not medical advice. We encourage you to make healthcare decisions based on your research and partnership with a qualified healthcare professional.
Blog Information & Scope Discussions
Welcome to El Paso's Premier Wellness and Injury Care Clinic & Wellness Blog, where Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, FNP-C, a Multi-State board-certified Family Practice Nurse Practitioner (FNP-BC) and Chiropractor (DC), presents insights on how our multidisciplinary team is dedicated to holistic healing and personalized care. Our practice aligns with evidence-based treatment protocols inspired by integrative medicine principles, similar to those on this site and on our family practice-based chiromed.com site, focusing on naturally restoring health for patients of all ages.
Our areas of multidisciplinary practice include Wellness & Nutrition, Chronic Pain, Personal Injury, Auto Accident Care, Work Injuries, Back Injury, Low Back Pain, Neck Pain, Migraine Headaches, Sports Injuries, Severe Sciatica, Scoliosis, Complex Herniated Discs, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain, Complex Injuries, Stress Management, Functional Medicine Treatments, and in-scope care protocols.
Our information scope is multidisciplinary, focusing on musculoskeletal and physical medicine; wellness; contributing etiological viscerosomatic disturbances within clinical presentations; associated somato-visceral reflex clinical dynamics; subluxation complexes; sensitive health issues; and functional medicine articles, topics, and discussions.
We provide and present clinical collaboration with specialists from various disciplines. Each specialist is governed by their professional scope of practice and licensure jurisdiction. We use functional health & wellness protocols to treat and support care for musculoskeletal injuries or disorders.
Our videos, posts, topics, and insights address clinical matters and issues that directly or indirectly relate to our clinical scope of practice.
Our office has made a reasonable effort to provide supportive citations and has identified relevant research studies that support our posts. We provide copies of supporting research studies upon request to regulatory boards and the public.
We understand that we cover matters that require an additional explanation of how they may assist in a particular care plan or treatment protocol; therefore, to discuss the subject matter above further, please feel free to ask Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC, or contact us at 915-850-0900.
We are here to help you and your family.
Blessings
Dr. Alex Jimenez DC, MSACP, APRN, FNP-BC*, CCST, IFMCP, CFMP, ATN
email: coach@elpasofunctionalmedicine.com
Multidisciplinary Licensing & Board Certifications:
Licensed as a Doctor of Chiropractic (DC) in Texas & New Mexico*
Texas DC License #: TX5807, Verified: TX5807
New Mexico DC License #: NM-DC2182, Verified: NM-DC2182
Multi-State Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN*) in Texas & Multi-States
Multi-state Compact APRN License by Endorsement (42 States)
Texas APRN License #: 1191402, Verified: 1191402 *
Florida APRN License #: 11043890, Verified: APRN11043890 *
Colorado License #: C-APN.0105610-C-NP, Verified: C-APN.0105610-C-NP
New York License #: N25929, Verified N25929
License Verification Link: Nursys License Verifier
* Prescriptive Authority Authorized
ANCC FNP-BC: Board Certified Nurse Practitioner*
Compact Status: Multi-State License: Authorized to Practice in 40 States*
Graduate with Honors: ICHS: MSN-FNP (Family Nurse Practitioner Program)
Degree Granted. Master's in Family Practice MSN Diploma (Cum Laude)
Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC*, CFMP, IFMCP, ATN, CCST
(Board Certified: Family Practice Nurse Practitioner—Multistate)*
(Licensed Nurse Practitioner & Chiropractor - Multistate)*
Clinical Director
Digital Business Card
Dr. Maria Cardenas, MD
(Board Certified: Internal Medicine)
(Licensed Medical Doctor)
Medical Director, Clinical Director & Collaborative Physician
NPI # 1164426749
MD License #: J2933
Licenses and Board Certifications:
MD: Medical Doctor
DC: Doctor of Chiropractic
APRNP: Advanced Practice Registered Nurse
FNP-BC: Family Practice Specialization (Multi-State Board Certified)
RN: Registered Nurse (Multi-State Compact License)
CFMP: Certified Functional Medicine Provider
MSN-FNP: Master of Science in Family Practice Medicine
MSACP: Master of Science in Advanced Clinical Practice
IFMCP: Institute of Functional Medicine
CCST: Certified Chiropractic Spinal Trauma
ATN: Advanced Translational Neutrogenomics
Memberships & Associations:
TCA: Texas Chiropractic Association: Member ID: 104311
AANP: American Association of Nurse Practitioners: Member ID: 2198960
ANA: American Nurse Association: Member ID: 06458222 (District TX01)
TNA: Texas Nurse Association: Member ID: 06458222
NPI: 1205907805
| Primary Taxonomy | Selected Taxonomy | State | License Number |
|---|---|---|---|
| No | 111N00000X - Chiropractor | NM | DC2182 |
| Yes | 111N00000X - Chiropractor | TX | DC5807 |
| Yes | 363LF0000X - Nurse Practitioner - Family | TX | 1191402 |
| Yes | 363LF0000X - Nurse Practitioner - Family | FL | 11043890 |
| Yes | 363LF0000X - Nurse Practitioner - Family | CO | C-APN.0105610-C-NP |
| Yes | 363LF0000X - Nurse Practitioner - Family | NY | N25929 |
Dr. Alex Jimenez, DC, APRN, FNP-BC*, CFMP, IFMCP, ATN, CCST
(Board Certified: Family Practice Nurse Practitioner—Multistate)*
(Licensed Nurse Practitioner & Chiropractor - Multistate)*
Clinical Director
Digital Business Card
Dr. Maria Cardenas, MD
(Board Certified: Internal Medicine)*
(Licensed Medical Doctor)*
Medical Director, Clinical Director & Collaborative Physician
NPI # 1164426749
MD License #: J2933