Ketoprofen for episodic tension-type headache in adults

Self-help interventions for persistent physical symptoms: a systematic review of behaviour change components and their potential effects

Persistent physical symptoms (PPS) remain a challenge in the healthcare system due to time-constrained consultations, uncertainty and limited specialised care capacity. Self-help interventions may be a cost-effective way to widen the access to treatment. As a foundation for future interventions, we aimed to describe intervention components and their potential effects in self-help interventions for PPS. A systematic literature search was made in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. Fifty-one randomised controlled trials were included. Interventions were coded for effect on outcomes (standardised mean difference ≥0.2) related to symptom burden, anxiety, depression, quality of life, healthcare utilisation and sickness absence. The Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy v1 was used to code intervention components. An index of potential was calculated for each BCT within an outcome category. Each BCT was assessed as 'potentially effective' or 'not effective' based on a two-sided test for binomial random variables. Sixteen BCTs showed potential effect as treatment components. These BCTs represented the themes: goals and planning, feedback and monitoring, shaping knowledge, natural consequences, comparison of behaviour, associations, repetition and substitution, regulation, antecedents and identity. The results suggest that specific BCTs should be included in new PPS self-help interventions aiming to improve the patients' physical and mental health.

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.

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).

Framing the numerical findings of Cochrane plain language summaries: two randomized controlled trials

Background

Cochrane systematic review Plain language Summaries (CSR PLSs should serve as a tool for the evidence translation to non-medical population. However, the evidence of optimal type of numerical presentation in CSR PLSs is still scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate readers’ comprehension and preferences for different presentation of findings, including framing and numerical data, in Cochrane systematic review Plain Language Summaries (CSR PLSs).

Methods

We conducted a parallel randomized trial and a crossover randomized trial at the School of Medicine and family practice offices in Split, Croatia. The participants were students and consumers. We assessed possible differences in comprehension, measured by four questions on PLS content, of CSR PLSs depending on the positive or negative framing of results (n = 91) (Trial 1) or using percentages or frequencies for the presentation of results (n = 245) (Trial 2). The outcome measures were comprehension of PLS content, perceived effectiveness of the treatment and readiness to use the treatment (all on 1–10 scales).

Results

In Trial 1 we found no difference in readers’ perception of the effectiveness of the described treatment, desire that the treatment be offered by their family doctor, readiness to use the treatment, or comprehension when CSR PLS results were presented positively or negatively. In Trial 2 we found no difference in CSR PLS comprehension when results were presented as natural frequencies or percentages (BF₁₀ = 0.62, Bayesian t-test for independent samples).

Conclusions

Numerical presentation and framing direction of results appear to have no significant impact on understanding of messages in CSR PLSs.

Trial registration

The trials were registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Protocol registration numbers: Trial 1: NCT03442387; Trial 2: NCT03554252.

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.

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.

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.