Paracetamol (acetaminophen) for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache in adults

Effectiveness of educational interventions for improving healthcare professionals' information literacy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

It is unclear which educational interventions effectively improve healthcare professionals' information literacy.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions for improving the formulation of answerable clinical questions and the search skills of healthcare professionals.

METHODS

We followed the Cochrane methodology and reported according to the PRISMA statement. The following databases from inception to November 2022: MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Google Scholar search engine, were searched. Randomised controlled trials and crossover trials on any educational interventions were included. Studies on search tools that are obsolete were excluded.

RESULTS

Ten studies that mainly compared the effectiveness of lectures and bedside education to lectures or no intervention for searching of PubMed and/or MEDLINE, were included. There was evidence for improved attitude towards the intervention favouring lecture with self-directed learning over lecture, bedside education, and computer-assisted self-directed learning (RR: 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23; N = 2 studies; 1064 participants; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). There were limited findings on the knowledge, skills, satisfaction, and behaviour outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Future research should include a wider set of outcomes, be reported better and explore the use of digital technology for delivery of educational interventions. Further research should entail well-designed trials with relevant outcomes evaluating novel digital-based educational interventions.

2023 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Headache

DESCRIPTION

Headache medicine and therapeutics evidence have been rapidly expanding and evolving since the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) clinical practice guideline (CPG) for the management of headache. Therefore, the CPG was revised in 2023, earlier than the standard 5-year cycle. This article reviews the 2023 CPG recommendations relevant to primary care clinicians for treatment and prevention of migraine and tension-type headache (TTH).

METHODS

Subject experts from the VA and the DoD developed 12 key questions, which guided a systematic search using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. After reviewing evidence from 5 databases published between 6 March 2019 and 16 August 2022, the work group considered the strength and quality of the evidence, patient preferences, and benefits versus harms on critical outcomes before making consensus recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The revised CPG includes 52 recommendations on evaluation, pharmacotherapy, invasive interventions, and nonpharmacologic interventions for selected primary and secondary headache disorders. In addition to triptans and aspirin-acetaminophen-caffeine, newer calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors (gepants) are options for treatment of acute migraine. Medications to prevent episodic migraine (EM) include angiotensin-receptor blockers, lisinopril, magnesium, topiramate, valproate, memantine, the newer CGRP monoclonal antibodies, and atogepant. AbobotulinumtoxinA can be used for prevention of chronic migraine but not EM. Gabapentin is not recommended for prevention of EM. Ibuprofen (400 mg) and acetaminophen (1000 mg) can be used for treatment of TTH, and amitriptyline for prevention of chronic TTH. Physical therapy or aerobic exercise can be used in management of TTH and migraines.

Evaluating the use of paracetamol to prevent fasting headache during the first week of Ramadan: A randomized, open-label, clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Fasting headaches frequently occur during the first few days of Ramadan, and treatment is challenging because of fasting.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of extended-release paracetamol on preventing fasting headaches.

METHODS

A randomized, open-label clinical trial investigated the efficacy of extended-release paracetamol at a daily dose of 1330 mg in preventing fasting headache. Adults aged 18 years and older were recruited through the Clinical Trial Unit at the King Saud University Medical City. The eligible participants in the study fasted 13.5 h daily during the first week of Ramadan. Participants in the treatment and control arms were followed up to investigate the occurrence, severity, and timing of headache symptoms via self-reporting using a standardized headache diary scale with a daily online link or phone call. The primary outcome was the frequency of headache episodes while fasting during the first week of Ramadan.

RESULTS

A total of 238 participants were enrolled and randomized. Of these, 173 followed the protocol (80 treated, 93 control) for at least the first day and were included in the analysis. Most participants were young and healthy, with a mean age of 32.2 ± 10.2 years. More men were included in the study (102/173; 59.0%), a small proportion of participants were smokers (31/173; 17.9%), and almost all participants reported being coffee drinkers (165/173; 95.4%); nonetheless, these characteristics were evenly distributed between the two groups in the study. The overall incidence of headache episodes was 33.0% (57/173) on day 1 and decreased to 11.3% (18/159) on day 7. On average over the 7 days, no significant effect was observed for the treatment on the incidence of headache, as the findings from the generalized estimating equation model indicated (β = -0.398, p = 0.084; odds ratio = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-1.06). Moreover, there was initially no significant difference in the incidence of headache episodes between the treatment and control groups. However, the treatment group had significantly fewer headache episodes during fasting than the control group on day 3 (4/72 [5.6%] vs. 15/91 [16.5%], p = 0.031; relative risk [RR] = 0.34, 95% CI 0.12-0.97) and day 6 (5/69 [7.2%] vs. 20/90 [22.2%], p = 0.010; RR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.82). No adverse effects were observed during the study period.

CONCLUSION

No significant differences were observed in the occurrence of fasting headaches between the two groups on most days during the study period. Additional studies are required to address fasting headaches during the first week of Ramadan.

The Role of the Combination Paracetamol/Caffeine in Treatment of Acute Migraine Pain: A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Thirty years ago, the first migraine-specific drugs (triptans) appeared. Today two new categories (gepants and ditans) are marketed for acute migraine treatment. That said, is there still a role for conventional therapy? The aim of the present narrative review is to provide an expert overview examining the possible role of the combination paracetamol/caffeine in treatment of acute migraine pain.

METHODS

To understand possible settings for more appropriate use of paracetamol/caffeine (1000 mg/130 mg) in treatment of acute migraine, a structured literature search was performed using the PubMed database by a panel of experts from major Italian headache centers; articles not referring to migraine pain were excluded from this review; review articles were prioritized.

RESULTS

Overall response, even to newer specific and selective trigeminal targeted drugs (TTTs), is not over 60%; thus, there is still room for conventional therapies in acute migraine treatment. The panel identified settings in which the use of paracetamol/caffeine combination to treat acute migraine attacks might offer benefit considering the consolidated use through years, despite the lack of studies directly addressing the efficacy of paracetamol/caffeine in the identified populations: subjects > 65 years of age; presence of cardiovascular (CV) comorbidities; TTTs non-responders; pregnancy and breastfeeding; subjects < 18 years of age; paracetamol/caffeine as add-on therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Paracetamol is included in the World Health Organization (WHO) essential drug list and has a high level of popularity among patients. Caffeine enhances the analgesic effect of other drugs including paracetamol. In early treatment of acute migraine pain, prescribing physicians might consider using the paracetamol/caffeine combination among other options.

Analgesic onset and efficacy of a fast-acting formulation of acetaminophen in a postoperative dental impaction pain model

OBJECTIVES

Speed of onset can be critical to an analgesic's efficacy treating acute pain. To enhance onset, a new oral acetaminophen formulation intended to be fast acting was developed. Two studies evaluated the analgesic onset, efficacy, and safety of this fast-acting acetaminophen (FA-acetaminophen) tablet relative to commercial acetaminophen caplets (ES-acetaminophen) and commercial ibuprofen liquid-filled gelatin capsules (LG-ibuprofen).

METHODS

Two single-center, single-dose, inpatient, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel group design clinical trials were conducted using the postoperative dental impaction pain model. Subjects were healthy men and women aged 17-50 years experiencing moderate-to-severe pain after surgical extraction of at least three impacted third molars. In both studies, four treatment groups were evaluated: 1,000 mg acetaminophen as two 500 mg FA-acetaminophen tablets, 1,000 mg as two 500 mg ES-acetaminophen caplets, 400 mg ibuprofen as two 200 mg LG-ibuprofen capsules, and placebo. To maintain blinding, each subject received six units of study medication. Times to confirmed perceptible pain relief (TCPR) and meaningful pain relief (TMPR) were obtained using the double-stopwatch method. Pain intensity and relief were measured over 6 h following drug administration using a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Time to use of rescue medication (naproxen sodium) and subject global evaluations of study medications at 6 h were collected. Pharmacokinetic blood sampling and safety assessments were performed.

RESULTS

Studies 1 and 2 enrolled 240 and 420 subjects, respectively. No clinically important differences among treatment groups were observed for any demographic or baseline characteristics. Efficacy results showed all active treatments statistically superior to placebo. In Study 1, TCPR was statistically significantly shorter for FA-acetaminophen compared to ES-acetaminophen and LG-ibuprofen. In Study 2, no statistically significant differences in TCPR were noted across the active treatment groups. In Study 1, FA-acetaminophen 1,000 mg provided significantly shorter TMPR compared with LG-ibuprofen but not compared with ES-acetaminophen. In Study 2, no significant differences in TMPR were noted across the active treatment groups. In both Study 1 and 2 at 15 min after administration of study drug, PID and PAR scores were greater for FA-acetaminophen than LG-ibuprofen.

CONCLUSIONS

Both studies suggested FA-acetaminophen had faster onset of action compared to ES-acetaminophen and LG-Ibuprofen. In light of the difference in TCPR and TMPR results between Study 1 and 2, an additional study is needed to further investigate time to analgesic onset of FA-acetaminophen compared with ES-acetaminophen and LG-Ibuprofen.

STUDY REGISTRY NUMBERS

Study 1: NCT02735122; Study 2: NCT03224403.

Health equity, care access and quality in headache - part 2

BACKGROUND

Headache disorders are a global public health concern affecting diverse populations. This review examines headache service organizations in low-, middle-, and high-income countries. It addresses global challenges in pharmacological headache treatment, with a focus on safety, tolerability, reproductive and child health, and outlines disparities in accessing innovative treatments worldwide.

MAIN BODY

Organized headache services are essential due to the wide prevalence and varying severity of headache disorders. The tiered headache service model is globally recognized, although its implementation varies based on financial and workforce considerations. Headache burden affects well-being, causing disability, economic challenges, and work limitations, irrespective of location or income. All nations still require improved diagnosis and treatment, and the majority of countries face obstacles including limited access, awareness, economic barriers, and inadequate health policies. Provided adequate internet availability, telemedicine could help improve health equity by expanding access to headache care, since it can offer patients access to services without lengthy waiting times or extensive travel and can provide healthcare unavailable in underserved areas due to staff shortages. Numerous health disparities restrict global access to many headache medications, especially impacting individuals historically excluded from randomized controlled trials, such as those with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular conditions, as well as pregnant women. Furthermore, despite advancements in researching migraine treatments for young patients, the options for treatment remain limited. Access to headache treatment relies on factors like medication availability, approval, financial coverage, and healthcare provider expertise. Inadequate public awareness leads to neglect by policymakers and undertreatment by patients and healthcare providers. Global access discrepancies are exacerbated by the introduction of novel disease-specific medications, particularly impacting Asian, African, and Latin American nations excluded from clinical trials. While North America and Europe experience broad availability of migraine treatments, the majority of countries worldwide lack access to these therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare disparities, treatment access, and medication availability are concerning issues in headache medicine. Variations in national healthcare systems impact headache management, and costly innovative drugs are widening these gaps. Healthcare practitioners and experts should acknowledge these challenges and work towards minimizing access barriers for equitable global headache care in the future.

Debate: differences and similarities between tension-type headache and migraine

Tension-type headache (TTH) and migraine are two common primary headaches distinguished by clinical characteristics according to the 3^rd edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders. Migraine is identified by specific features such as being more prevalent in females, being aggravated by physical activity, certain genetic factors, having photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, vomiting, or aura, and responding to specific drugs. Nonetheless, TTH and migraine share some common characteristics, such as onset occurring in the 20 s, and being triggered by psychological factors like stress, moderate pain severity, and mild nausea in chronic TTH. Both conditions involve the trigeminovascular system in their pathophysiology. However, distinguishing between TTH and migraine in clinical practice, research, and epidemiological studies can be challenging, as there is a lack of specific diagnostic tests and biomarkers. Moreover, both conditions may coexist, further complicating the diagnostic process. This review aims to explore the similarities and differences in the pathophysiology, epidemiology, burden and disability, comorbidities, and responses to pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments of TTH and migraine. The review also discusses future research directions to address the diagnostic challenges and improve the understanding and management of these conditions.

User initiated symptom assessment with an electronic symptom checker. Study protocol for mixed-methods validation. (Preprint)

BACKGROUND

The national Omaolo digital social welfare and health care service of Finland provides a symptom checker, Omaolo, which is a medical device (based on Duodecim Clinical Decision Support EBMEDS software) with a CE marking (risk class IIa), manufactured by the government-owned DigiFinland Oy. Users of this service can perform their triage by using the questions in the symptom checker. By completing the symptom checker, the user receives a recommendation for action and a service assessment with appropriate guidance regarding their health problems on the basis of a selected specific symptom in the symptom checker. This allows users to be provided with appropriate health care services, regardless of time and place.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes the protocol for the mixed methods validation process of the symptom checker available in Omaolo digital services.

METHODS

This is a mixed methods study using quantitative and qualitative methods, which will be part of the clinical validation process that takes place in primary health care centers in Finland. Each organization provides a space where the study and the nurse triage can be done in order to include an unscreened target population of users. The primary health care units provide walk-in model services, where no prior phone call or contact is required. For the validation of the Omaolo symptom checker, case vignettes will be incorporated to supplement the triage accuracy of rare and acute cases that cannot be tested extensively in real-life settings. Vignettes are produced from a variety of clinical sources, and they test the symptom checker in different triage levels by using 1 standardized patient case example.

RESULTS

This study plan underwent an ethics review by the regional permission, which was requested from each organization participating in the research, and an ethics committee statement was requested and granted from Pirkanmaa hospital district's ethics committee, which is in accordance with the University of Tampere's regulations. Of 964 clinical user-filled symptom checker assessments, 877 cases were fully completed with a triage result, and therefore, they met the requirements for clinical validation studies. The goal for sufficient data has been reached for most of the chief symptoms. Data collection was completed in September 2019, and the first feasibility and patient experience results were published by the end of 2020. Case vignettes have been identified and are to be completed before further testing the symptom checker. The analysis and reporting are estimated to be finalized in 2024.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary goals of this multimethod electronic symptom checker study are to assess safety and to provide crucial information regarding the accuracy and usability of the Omaolo electronic symptom checker. To our knowledge, this will be the first study to include real-life clinical cases along with case vignettes.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/41423.

Post-traumatic Headache: Pharmacologic Management and Targeting CGRP Signaling

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Post-traumatic headache is a common sequela of injury to the head and/or neck. Here, we review the current approach to pharmacologic management of post-traumatic headache and explore the therapeutic promise of targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide signaling to address unmet treatment needs.

RECENT FINDINGS

The scarcity of data from controlled trials has left clinicians to rely on mainly expert opinion for the pharmacologic management of post-traumatic headache. The current view is that a phenotype-guided approach should be used, in which patients are treated according to the primary headache phenotype that their clinical features resemble the most (e.g. migraine, tension-type headache). Moreover, incremental advances are being made in the field that aim to identify possible cellular and molecular drivers of headache persistence. Calcitonin gene-related peptide has emerged as a key drug target which, in turn, has prompted novel insights on the potential importance of early initiation of pharmacologic treatment following the onset of post-traumatic headache. This, in turn, might prevent subsequent persistence and chronification of headache.

Paracetamol use during pregnancy - a call for precautionary action

Paracetamol (N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP), otherwise known as acetaminophen) is the active ingredient in more than 600 medications used to relieve mild to moderate pain and reduce fever. APAP is widely used by pregnant women as governmental agencies, including the FDA and EMA, have long considered APAP appropriate for use during pregnancy when used as directed. However, increasing experimental and epidemiological research suggests that prenatal exposure to APAP might alter fetal development, which could increase the risks of some neurodevelopmental, reproductive and urogenital disorders. Here we summarize this evidence and call for precautionary action through a focused research effort and by increasing awareness among health professionals and pregnant women. APAP is an important medication and alternatives for treatment of high fever and severe pain are limited. We recommend that pregnant women should be cautioned at the beginning of pregnancy to: forego APAP unless its use is medically indicated; consult with a physician or pharmacist if they are uncertain whether use is indicated and before using on a long-term basis; and minimize exposure by using the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible time. We suggest specific actions to implement these recommendations. This Consensus Statement reflects our concerns and is currently supported by 91 scientists, clinicians and public health professionals from across the globe.

Systematic Review of Systemic and Neuraxial Effects of Acetaminophen in Preclinical Models of Nociceptive Processing

Acetaminophen (APAP) in humans has robust effects with a high therapeutic index in altering postoperative and inflammatory pain states in clinical and experimental pain paradigms with no known abuse potential. This review considers the literature reflecting the preclinical actions of acetaminophen in a variety of pain models. Significant observations arising from this review are as follows: 1) acetaminophen has little effect upon acute nociceptive thresholds; 2) acetaminophen robustly reduces facilitated states as generated by mechanical and thermal hyperalgesic end points in mouse and rat models of carrageenan and complete Freund’s adjuvant evoked inflammation; 3) an antihyperalgesic effect is observed in models of facilitated processing with minimal inflammation (eg, phase II intraplantar formalin); and 4) potent anti-hyperpathic effects on the thermal hyperalgesia, mechanical and cold allodynia, allodynic thresholds in rat and mouse models of polyneuropathy and mononeuropathies and bone cancer pain. These results reflect a surprisingly robust drug effect upon a variety of facilitated states that clearly translate into a wide range of efficacy in preclinical models and to important end points in human therapy. The specific systems upon which acetaminophen may act based on targeted delivery suggest both a spinal and a supraspinal action. Review of current targets for this molecule excludes a role of cyclooxygenase inhibitor but includes effects that may be mediated through metabolites acting on the TRPV1 channel, or by effect upon cannabinoid and serotonin signaling. These findings suggest that the mode of action of acetaminophen, a drug with a long therapeutic history of utilization, has surprisingly robust effects on a variety of pain states in clinical patients and in preclinical models with a good therapeutic index, but in spite of its extensive use, its mechanisms of action are yet poorly understood.

Current Understanding of the Pathophysiology and Approach to Tension-Type Headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Description of headache dates back thousands of years, and to date, tension-type headache (TTH) remains the most common form of headache. We will review the history and current understanding of the pathophysiology of TTH and discuss the recommended clinical evaluation and management for this syndrome.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite being the most prevalent headache disorder, TTH pathophysiology remains poorly understood. Patients with TTH tend to have muscles that are harder, more tender to palpation, and may have more frequent trigger points of tenderness than patients without headache. However, cause and effect of these muscular findings are unclear. Studies support both peripheral and central mechanisms contributing to the pain of TTH. Diagnosis is based on clinical presentation, while the focus of evaluation is to rule out possible secondary causes of headache. Treatment options have remained similar over the course of the past decade, with some additional studies supportive of both pharmacological and non-pharmacological options. An approach to TTH has been outlined including historical context, evolution over time, and the best evidence regarding our current understanding of the complex pathophysiology and treatment of this disease.

Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache. 2. Modelling effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementation in Europe: methodology

BACKGROUND

Health economic evaluations support health-care decision-making by providing information on the costs and consequences of health interventions. No universally accepted methodology exists for modelling effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions designed to close treatment gaps for headache disorders in countries of Europe (or elsewhere). Our aim here, within the European Brain Council's Value-of-Treatment project, was to develop headache-type-specific analytical models to be applied to implementation of structured headache services in Europe as the health-care solution to headache.

METHODS

We developed three headache-type-specific decision-analytical models using the WHO-CHOICE framework and adapted these for three European Region country settings (Luxembourg, Russia and Spain), diverse in geographical location, population size, income level and health-care systems and for which we had population-based data. Each model compared current (suboptimal) care vs target care (delivered in accordance with the structured headache services model). Epidemiological and economic data were drawn from studies conducted by the Global Campaign against Headache; data on efficacy of treatments were taken from published randomized controlled trials; assumptions on uptake of treatments, and those made for Healthy Life Year (HLY) calculations and target-care benefits, were agreed with experts. We made annual and 5-year cost estimates from health-care provider (main analyses) and societal (secondary analyses) perspectives (2020 figures, euros).

RESULTS

The analytical models were successfully developed and applied to each country setting. Headache-related costs (including use of health-care resources and lost productivity) and health outcomes (HLYs) were mapped across populations. The same calculations were repeated for each alternative (current vs target care). Analyses of the differences in costs and health outcomes between alternatives and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are presented elsewhere.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents the first headache-type-specific analytical models to evaluate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementing structured headache services in countries in the European Region. The models are robust, and can assist policy makers in allocating health budgets between interventions to maximize the health of populations.

Recent advancements in tension-type headache: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common primary headache disorder with a prevalence of up to 78% in general population and huge expenses in terms of health service. Despite its high incidence and impact on life's quality the knowledge on the pathophysiology and efficacious treatment of TTH was still limited.

AREAS COVERED

In recent years, a series of studies highlighted the heterogeneous nature of this pathology that seems to be determined by a complex interaction between genetic, environmental, and neuromuscular factors, which result in nociceptive system activation. In this setting, alongside the simple analgesic therapies used during the acute attack, a series of therapeutic options based on newly acquired experiences have taken hold.

EXPERT REVIEW

Not having a single substrate or a typical site of pathophysiology, TTH must be analyzed in a global and multidisciplinary way. Herein, we perform a narrative review of the most recent advancement stimulating the concept of this disease as the tip of the iceberg of a more complex individual malaise secondary to different alterations. Strategies based solely on symptomatic drugs should therefore be avoided by experienced personnel and treatment should aim at taking charge of the patient considering the processes behind this complex pathology.

Chinese Herbal Formula Xuefu Zhuyu for Tension-Type Headache with Qi-Stagnation and Blood-Stasis Pattern (CheruXTH): Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common headache disorder. Current treatments for TTH have been reported to be associated with insufficient long-term benefits and unwanted adverse events (AEs). The Chinese herbal formula Xuefu Zhuyu (XFZY) has been utilized in TTH treatment, but the evidence supporting its efficacy remains unclear. This study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of XFZY for TTH.

Methods

This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial will be undertaken in China. A total of 174 eligible participants will be randomly assigned to either an XFZY group or a placebo group (20 ml each dose, three times daily for 4 weeks) at a ratio of 1 : 1. The primary outcome is the change in mean headache intensity measured by a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include the area-under-the headache curve (AUC), headache frequency, rescue medication use, qi-stagnation and blood-stasis pattern measurement, quality of life measured by the EuroQol-5-Dimensions-5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), global evaluation of medication, and health economic indexes. Discussion. The results of the study are expected to provide evidence of high methodological and reporting quality on the efficacy and safety of XFZY for TTH. This trail is registered with ChiCTR1900026716 (registered on 19 October, 2019).

Comparison of blogshots with plain language summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews: a qualitative study and randomized trial

Background

Cochrane, an organization dedicated to the production and dissemination of high-quality evidence on health, endeavors to reach consumers by developing appropriate summary formats of its systematic reviews. However, the optimal type of presentation of evidence to consumers is still unknown.

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate consumer preferences for different summary formats of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs), using both qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Methods

Initially, we conducted three focus groups with medical students (n = 7), doctors (n = 4), and patients (n = 9) in 2017 to explore their health information search habits and preferences for CSR summary formats. Based on those findings, we conducted a randomized trial with medical students at the University of Split School of Medicine, Croatia, and with patients from three Dalmatian family practices to determine whether they prefer CSR blogshots (n = 115) or CSR plain language summaries (PLSs; n = 123).

Results

Participants in the focus groups favored brief and explicit CSR summary formats with fewer numbers. Although we found no difference in participants’ preferences for a specific summary format in the overall sample, subgroup analysis showed that patients preferred blogshots over PLSs in comparison to medical students (P = 0.003, eta squared effect size η² = 0.04).

Conclusion

CSR summaries should be produced in a format that meets the expectations and needs of consumers. Use of blogshots as a summary format could enhance the dissemination of CSRs among patients.

Trial registration

The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03542201. Registered on May 31st 2018.

A Comprehensive Review of Over-the-counter Treatment for Chronic Migraine Headaches

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Migraine headaches are a neurologic disorder characterized by attacks of moderate to severe throbbing headache that are typically unilateral, exacerbated by physical activity, and associated with phonophobia, photophobia, nausea, and vomiting. In the USA, the overall age-adjusted prevalence of migraine in female and male adults is 22.3% and 10.8%, respectively.

RECENT FINDINGS

Migraine is a disabling disease that ranks as the 8th most burdensome disease in the world and the 4th most in women. The overarching hypothesis of migraine pathophysiology describes migraine as a disorder of the pain modulating system, caused by disruptions of the normal neural networks of the head. The activation of these vascular networks results in meningeal vasodilation and inflammation, which is perceived as head pain. The primary goals of acute migraine therapy are to reduce attack duration and severity. Current evidence-based therapies for acute migraine attacks include acetaminophen, four nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), seven triptans, NSAID-triptan combinations, dihydroergotamine, non-opioid combination analgesics, and several anti-emetics. Over-the-counter medications are an important component of migraine therapy and are considered a first-line therapy for most migraineurs. These medications, such as acetaminophen, ibuprofen, naproxen, and aspirin, have shown strong efficacy when used as first-line treatments for mild-to-moderate migraine attacks. The lower cost of over-the-counter medications compared with prescription medications also makes them a preferred therapy for some patients. In addition to their efficacy and lower cost, over-the-counter medications generally have fewer and less severe adverse effects, have more favorable routes of administration (oral vs. subcutaneous injection), and reduced abuse potential. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive evidence-based update of over-the-counter pharmacologic options for chronic migraines.

Variables associated with use of symptomatic medication during a headache attack in individuals with tension-type headache: a European study

Background

Pharmacological treatment of patients with tension-type headache (TTH) includes symptomatic (acute) and prophylactic (preventive) medication. No previous study has investigated variables associated to symptomatic medication intake in TTH. Our aim was to assess the association of clinical, psychological and neurophysiological outcomes with the use and timing of the use of symptomatic medication in TTH.

Methods

A longitudinal observational study was conducted. One hundred and sixty-eight (n = 168) patients with TTH participated. Pain features of the headache (intensity, frequency, duration), burden of headache (Headache Disability Inventory), sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), anxiety/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), trait/state anxiety levels (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and bilateral pressure pain thresholds on the temporalis, C5-C6 joint, second metacarpal and tibialis anterior were assessed. Symptomatic medication intake was also collected for a 6-months follow-up period. Differences between patients using or not using symptomatic medication, depending on self-perceived effectiveness, and time (early during an attack, i.e., the first 5 min, or when headache attack is intense) when the symptomatic medication was taken were calculated.

Results

One hundred and thirty-six (n = 136, 80%) reported symptomatic medication intake for headache (73% NSAIDs). Sixteen (12%) reported no pain relief, 81 (59%) experienced moderate relief and 39 (29%) total pain relief. Fifty-eight (43%) took ‘early medication’ whereas 78 (57%) took ‘late medication’. Patients taking symptomatic medication in general showed lower headache frequency and lower depressive levels than those patients not taking medication. Symptomatic medication was more effective in patients with lower headache history, frequency, and duration, and lower emotional burden. No differences in pressure pain sensitivity were found depending on the self-perceived effectiveness of medication. Patients taking ‘late symptomatic’ medication exhibited more widespread pressure pain sensitivity than those taking ‘early medication’.

Conclusions

This study found that the effectiveness of symptomatic medication was associated with better headache parameters (history, frequency, or duration) and lower emotional burden. Further, consuming early symptomatic medication at the beginning of a headache attack (the first 5 min) could limit widespread pressure pain sensitivity.

Capturing Novel Non-opioid Pain Targets

The relatively high efficacy of opioids, which have associated risks of addiction, tolerance, and dependence, for the management of acute and terminal pain has been a major driver of the opioid crisis, together with the availability, overprescription, and diversion of these drugs. Eliminating opioids without an effective replacement is, however, no solution, as it substitutes one major problem with another. To deal successfully with the opioid crisis, we need to discover novel analgesics whose mechanisms do not involve the mu opioid receptor but that have high analgesic potency and low risk of adverse effects, particularly no abuse liability. The question is how to achieve this. There are several necessary elements; first, we need to understand the nature of pain and the mechanisms responsible for it, and second, we need to adopt novel and unbiased approaches to the identification and validation of pain targets.

Functional Somatic Symptoms

BACKGROUND

Approximately 10% of the general population and around one third of adult patients in clinical populations suffer from functional somatic symptoms. These take many forms, are often chronic, impair everyday functioning as well as quality of life, and are cost intensive.

METHODS

The guideline group (32 medical and psychological professional societies, two patients' associations) carried out a systematic survey of the literature and ana- lyzed 3795 original articles and 3345 reviews. The aim was to formulate empirically based recommendations that were practical and user friendly.

RESULTS

Because of the variation in course and symptom severity, three stages of treatment are distinguished. In early contacts, the focus is on basic investigations, reassurance, and advice. For persistent burdensome symptoms, an extended, simultaneous and equitable diagnostic work-up of physical and psychosocial factors is recommended, together with a focus on information and self-help. In the pres- ence of severe and disabling symptoms, multimodal treatment includes further elements such as (body) psychotherapeutic and social medicine measures. Whatever the medical specialty, level of care, or clinical picture, an empathetic professional attitude, reflective communication, information, a cautious, restrained approach to diagnosis, good interdisciplinary cooperation, and above all active interventions for self-efficacy are usually more effective than passive, organ- focused treatments.

CONCLUSION

The cornerstones of diagnosis and treatment are biopsychosocial ex- planatory models, communication, self-efficacy, and interdisciplinary mangagement. This enables safe and efficient patient care from the initial presentation onwards, even in cases where the symptoms cannot yet be traced back to specific causes.

Health-care utilization for headache disorders in Nepal: a population-based door-to-door survey

BACKGROUND

Headache disorders are an important global public-health problem, but under-diagnosed, undertreated and under-prioritized. Deficiencies in health care for headache, present everywhere, are likely to be greater in poorly-resourced countries. This study reports on health-care utilization for headache in Nepal, a low-income country with high headache burden.

METHODS

We took data from a cross-sectional, nationwide population-based door-to-door survey, with multistage cluster random sampling. Face-to-face structured interviews included enquiry into consultations with professional health-care providers (HCPs), and investigations and treatments for headache. Analysis included associations with sociodemographic variables and indices of symptom severity.

RESULTS

Of 2100 participants, 1794 reported headache during the preceding year (mean age 36.1 ± 12.6 years; male/female ratio 1:1.6). Of these, 58.4% (95% CI: 56.1-60.7%) had consulted at least once in the year with HCPs at any level, most commonly (25.0%) paramedical; 15.0% had consulted pharmacists, 10.8% general physicians and 7.6% specialists (of any type). Participants with probable medication-overuse headache consulted most (87.0%), followed by those with migraine (67.2%) and those with tension-type headache (48.6%; p < 0.001). A minority (11.9%) were investigated, mostly (8.9%) by eye tests. Half (50.8%) had used conventional medications for headache in the preceding month, paracetamol being by far the most common (38.0%), and 10.3% had used herbal therapies. Consultation was positively associated with rural habitation (AOR = 1.5; p < 0.001). Proportions consulting increased in line with all indices of symptom severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Although over half of participants with headache had consulted professional HCPs, this reflects demand, not quality of care. Although 7.6% had seen specialists, very few would have been headache specialists in any sense of this term. High persistent burden, with only half of participants with headache using conventional medications, and these not best chosen, suggests these consultations fell far short of meeting need. Health policy in Nepal should recognise this, since the consequences otherwise are costly: lost health, diminished productivity and damaged national economy. On a positive note, the proportions consulting suggest that capacity exists at multiple levels within the Nepalese health system. With this to build upon, structured headache services in line with international recommendations appear achievable in Nepal. Educational programmes are the essential requirement.

Management of Functional Somatic Syndromes and Bodily Distress

Functional somatic syndromes (FSS), like irritable bowel syndrome or fibromyalgia and other symptoms reflecting bodily distress, are common in practically all areas of medicine worldwide. Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to these symptoms and syndromes vary substantially across and within medical specialties from biomedicine to psychiatry. Patients may become frustrated with the lack of effective treatment, doctors may experience these disorders as difficult to treat, and this type of health problem forms an important component of the global burden of disease. This review intends to develop a unifying perspective on the understanding and management of FSS and bodily distress. Firstly, we present the clinical problem and review current concepts for classification. Secondly, we propose an integrated etiological model which encompasses a wide range of biopsychosocial vulnerability and triggering factors and considers consecutive aggravating and maintaining factors. Thirdly, we systematically scrutinize the current evidence base in terms of an umbrella review of systematic reviews from 2007 to 2017 and give recommendations for treatment for all levels of care, concentrating on developments over the last 10 years. We conclude that activating, patient-involving, and centrally acting therapies appear to be more effective than passive ones that primarily act on peripheral physiology, and we recommend stepped care approaches that translate a truly biopsychosocial approach into actual management of the patient.

Effect profile of paracetamol, Δ9-THC and promethazine using an evoked pain test battery in healthy subjects

BACKGROUND

A battery of evoked pain tasks (PainCart) was developed to investigate the pharmacodynamic properties of novel analgesics in early-phase clinical research. As part of its clinical validation, compounds with different pharmacological mechanisms of actions are investigated. The aim was to investigate the analgesic effects of classic and nonclassic analgesics compared to a sedating negative control in a randomized placebo-controlled crossover study in 24 healthy volunteers using the PainCart.

METHODS

The PainCart consisted of pain tasks eliciting electrical, pressure, heat, cold and inflammatory pain. Subjective scales for cognitive functioning and psychotomimetic effects were included. Subjects were administered each of the following oral treatments: paracetamol (1000 mg), Δ9-THC (10 mg), promethazine (50 mg) or matching placebo. Pharmacodynamic measurements were performed at baseline and repeated up to 10 h postdose.

RESULTS

Paracetamol did not show a significant reduction in pain sensation or subjective cognitive functioning compared to placebo. Promethazine induced a statistically significant reduction in PTT for cold pressor and pressure stimulation. Furthermore, reduced subjective alertness was observed. Δ9-THC showed a statistically significant decrease in PTT for electrical and pressure stimulation. Δ9-THC also demonstrated subjective effects, including changes in alertness and calmness, as well as feeling high and psychotomimetic effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found a decreased pain tolerance due to Δ9-THC and promethazine, or lack thereof, using an evoked pain task battery. Pain thresholds following paracetamol administration remained unchanged, which may be due to insufficient statistical power. We showed that pain thresholds determined using this pain test battery are not driven by sedation.

SIGNIFICANCE

The multimodal battery of evoked pain tasks utilized in this study may play an important role in early-phase clinical drug development. This battery of pain tasks is not sensitive to the effects of sedation alone, and thus suitable to investigate the analgesic potential of novel analgesic compounds.

Clinical update on benefit versus risks of oral paracetamol alone or with codeine: still a good option?

BACKGROUND

After decades of worldwide use of paracetamol/acetaminophen as a popular and apparently safe prescription and over-the-counter medicine, the future role of this poorly understood analgesic has been seriously questioned by recent concerns about prenatal, cardiovascular (CV) and hepatic safety, and also about its analgesic efficacy. At the same time the usefulness of codeine in combination products has come under debate.

METHODS

Based on a PubMed database literature search on the terms efficacy, safety, paracetamol, acetaminophen, codeine and their combinations up to and including June 2016, this clinical update reviews the current evidence of the benefit and risks of oral paracetamol alone and with codeine for mild-to-moderate pain in adults, and compares the respective efficacy and safety profiles with those of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

RESULTS

Whereas there is a clear strong association of NSAID use and gastrointestinal (GI) and CV morbidity and mortality, evidence for paracetamol with and without codeine supports the recommended use even in most vulnerable individuals, such as the elderly, pregnant women, alcoholics, and compromised GI and CV patients. The controversies and widespread misconceptions about the complex hepatic metabolism and potential hepatotoxicity have been corrected by recent reviews, and paracetamol remains the first-line nonopioid analgesic in patients with liver diseases if notes of caution are applied.

CONCLUSION

Due to its safety and tolerability profile paracetamol remained a first-line treatment in many international guidelines. Alone and with codeine it is a safe and effective option in adults, whilst NSAIDs are obviously less safe as alternatives, given the risk of potentially fatal GI and CV adverse effects.

Aspirin for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache in adults

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about 1 person in 5 worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic TTH (two to 14 headache days per month), and chronic TTH (15 headache days per month or more). Aspirin is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of episodic TTH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of aspirin for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache (TTH) in adults compared with placebo or any active comparator.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database from inception to September 2016, and also reference lists of relevant published studies and reviews. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral aspirin for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective, with participants aged 18 years or over, and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. For various outcomes (predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS)), we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNT), one additional harmful outcome (NNH), or to prevent one event (NNTp) for oral aspirin compared to placebo or an active intervention.We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies enrolling adults with frequent episodic TTH; 1812 participants took medication, of which 767 were included in comparisons of aspirin 1000 mg with placebo, and 405 in comparisons of aspirin 500 mg or 650 mg with placebo. Not all of these participants provided data for outcomes of interest in this review. Four studies specified using IHS diagnostic criteria; one predated commonly recognised criteria, but described comparable characteristics and excluded migraine. All participants treated headaches of at least moderate pain intensity.None of the included studies were at low risk of bias across all domains considered, although for most studies and domains this was likely to be due to inadequate reporting rather than poor methods. We judged one study to be at high risk of bias due to small size.There were no data for aspirin at any dose for the IHS preferred outcome of being pain free at two hours, or for being pain free at any other time, and only one study provided data equivalent to having no or mild pain at two hours (very low quality evidence). Use of rescue medication was lower with aspirin 1000 mg than with placebo (2 studies, 397 participants); 14% of participants used rescue medication with aspirin 1000 mg compared with 31% with placebo (NNTp 6.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1 to 12) (low quality evidence). Two studies (397 participants) reported a Patient Global Evaluation at the end of the study; we combined the top two categories for both studies to determine the number of participants who were 'satisfied' with treatment. Aspirin 1000 mg produced more satisfied participants (55%) than did placebo (37%) (NNT 5.7, 95% CI 3.7 to 12) (very low quality evidence).Adverse events were not different between aspirin 1000 mg and placebo (RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.5), or aspirin 500 mg or 650 mg and placebo (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.8 to 2.0) (low quality evidence). Studies reported no serious adverse events.The quality of the evidence using GRADE comparing aspirin doses between 500 mg and 1000 mg with placebo was low or very low. Evidence was downgraded because of the small number of studies and events, and because the most important measures of efficacy were not reported.There were insufficient data to compare aspirin with any active comparator (paracetamol alone, paracetamol plus codeine, peppermint oil, or metamizole) at any of the doses tested.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of aspirin between 500 mg and 1000 mg provided some benefit in terms of less frequent use of rescue medication and more participants satisfied with treatment compared with placebo in adults with frequent episodic TTH who have an acute headache of moderate or severe intensity. There was no difference between a single dose of aspirin and placebo for the number of people experiencing adverse events. The amount and quality of the evidence was very limited and should be interpreted with caution.

Ketoprofen for episodic tension-type headache in adults

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about 1 person in 5 worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache day per month), frequent episodic TTH (2 to 14 headache days per month), and chronic TTH (15 headache days a month or more). Ketoprofen is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of headaches in frequent episodic TTH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of ketoprofen for treatment of episodic TTH in adults compared with placebo or any active comparator.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database up to May 2016, and also reference lists of relevant published studies and reviews. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral ketoprofen for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective, with participants aged 18 years or over, and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used the numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or one additional harmful outcome (NNH) for oral ketoprofen compared to placebo or an active intervention for a range of outcomes, predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS).We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies, all of which enrolled adults with frequent episodic TTH. They all specified using the IHS diagnostic criteria and reported mean baseline pain of at least moderate intensity. While 1253 people with TTH participated in these studies, the numbers available for any analysis were lower than this because outcomes were inconsistently reported and because many participants received active comparators.None of the included studies were at low risk of bias across all domains considered, although for most studies and domains this was likely to be due to inadequate reporting rather than poor methods. We judged one study to be at high risk of bias due to small size.Useful information was available only for ketoprofen 25 mg. For the IHS preferred outcome of being pain-free at two hours the NNT for ketoprofen 25 mg compared with placebo was 9.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.8 to 72) in two studies (272 participants; low quality evidence). The NNT was 3.7 (95% CI 2.6 to 6.3) for pain-free or mild pain at two hours in two studies (272 participants; moderate quality evidence). Fewer people needed rescue medication with ketoprofen 25 mg than with placebo, with a number needed to treat to prevent one event (NNTp) of 6.2 (95% CI 4.3 to 11) in three studies (605 participants; moderate quality evidence). The number of participants reporting any adverse event was higher with ketoprofen 25 mg than placebo (NNH 15, (95% CI 8.7 to 45)) in three studies (651 participants with 66 events; low quality evidence). Most events were of mild to moderate intensity.Ketoprofen 25 mg was not different from paracetamol 1000 mg in two studies with 276 participants for any efficacy outcomes (low to moderate quality evidence); the RR for pain-free at two hours was 1.3 (95% CI 0.9 to 2.0). The number of participants reporting any adverse event was higher with ketoprofen 25 mg than with paracetamol (NNH 17, 95% CI 8.9 to 130)) in two studies (582 participants, 68 events; low quality evidence).Studies reported no serious adverse events.We judged the quality of the evidence comparing ketoprofen 25 mg with placebo or paracetamol 1000 mg as moderate to very low. Where evidence was downgraded it was because of the small number of studies and events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ketoprofen 25 mg provided a small benefit compared with placebo in terms of being pain-free at two hours or having mild or no pain at two hours for people with frequent episodic TTH who have an acute headache of moderate or severe intensity. Its use was associated with more people experiencing adverse events. Ketoprofen 25 mg was not superior to paracetamol 1000 mg for any efficacy outcome.