German Language Adaptation of the Headache Management Self-Efficacy Scale (HMSE-G) and Development of a New Short Form (HMSE-G-SF)

German language adaptation of the Cogniphobia Scale for Headache Disorders (CS-HD) and development of a new short form (CS-HD-6)

OBJECTIVE

This study is part of the ODIN-migraine (Optimization of Diagnostic Instruments in migraine) project. It is a secondary, a priori analysis of previously collected data, and aimed to assess the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Cogniphobia Scale for Headache Disorders (CS-HD). We aimed to construct a German-language version and a short version.

BACKGROUND

Cogniphobia is the fear and avoidance of cognitive exertion, which the patient believes triggers or exacerbates headache. High cogniphobia may worsen the course of a headache disorder.

METHODS

The 15-item CS-HD was translated into German and back translated in a masked form by a professional translator. Modifications were discussed and carried out in an expert panel. A cross-sectional online survey including the CS-HD and further self-report questionnaires was conducted in a sample of N = 387 persons with migraine (364/387 [94.1%] female, M = 41.0 [SD = 13.0] years, migraine without aura: 152/387 [39.3%], migraine with aura: 85/387 [22.0%], and chronic migraine: 150/387 [38.8%]).

RESULTS

Exploratory factor analysis resulted in two clearly interpretable factors (interictal and ictal cogniphobia). Confirmatory factor analysis yielded an acceptable to good model fit (χ2(89) = 117.87, p = 0.022, χ2/df = 1.32, RMSEA = 0.029, SRMR = 0.055, CFI = 0.996, TLI = 0.995). Item response theory-based analysis resulted in the selection of six items for the short form (CS-HD-6). Reliability was acceptable to excellent (interictal cogniphobia subscale: ω = 0.92 [CS-HD] or ω = 0.77 [CS-HD-6]; ictal cogniphobia subscale: ω = 0.77 [CS-HD] or ω = 0.73 [CS-HD-6]). The pattern of correlations with established questionnaires confirmed convergent validity of both the CS-HD and the CS-HD-6.

CONCLUSION

Both the CS-HD and the CS-HD-6 have good psychometric properties and are suitable for the assessment of cogniphobia in migraine.

Development and Evaluation of a Smartphone-Based Chatbot Coach to Facilitate a Balanced Lifestyle in Individuals With Headaches (BalanceUP App): Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Primary headaches, including migraine and tension-type headaches, are widespread and have a social, physical, mental, and economic impact. Among the key components of treatment are behavior interventions such as lifestyle modification. Scalable conversational agents (CAs) have the potential to deliver behavior interventions at a low threshold. To our knowledge, there is no evidence of behavioral interventions delivered by CAs for the treatment of headaches.

OBJECTIVE

This study has 2 aims. The first aim was to develop and test a smartphone-based coaching intervention (BalanceUP) for people experiencing frequent headaches, delivered by a CA and designed to improve mental well-being using various behavior change techniques. The second aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of BalanceUP by comparing the intervention and waitlist control groups and assess the engagement and acceptance of participants using BalanceUP.

METHODS

In an unblinded randomized controlled trial, adults with frequent headaches were recruited on the web and in collaboration with experts and allocated to either a CA intervention (BalanceUP) or a control condition. The effects of the treatment on changes in the primary outcome of the study, that is, mental well-being (as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale), and secondary outcomes (eg, psychosomatic symptoms, stress, headache-related self-efficacy, intention to change behavior, presenteeism and absenteeism, and pain coping) were analyzed using linear mixed models and Cohen d. Primary and secondary outcomes were self-assessed before and after the intervention, and acceptance was assessed after the intervention. Engagement was measured during the intervention using self-reports and usage data.

RESULTS

A total of 198 participants (mean age 38.7, SD 12.14 y; n=172, 86.9% women) participated in the study (intervention group: n=110; waitlist control group: n=88). After the intervention, the intention-to-treat analysis revealed evidence for improved well-being (treatment: β estimate=-3.28, 95% CI -5.07 to -1.48) with moderate between-group effects (Cohen d=-0.66, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.33) in favor of the intervention group. We also found evidence of reduced somatic symptoms, perceived stress, and absenteeism and presenteeism, as well as improved headache management self-efficacy, application of behavior change techniques, and pain coping skills, with effects ranging from medium to large (Cohen d=0.43-1.05). Overall, 64.8% (118/182) of the participants used coaching as intended by engaging throughout the coaching and completing the outro.

CONCLUSIONS

BalanceUP was well accepted, and the results suggest that coaching delivered by a CA can be effective in reducing the burden of people who experience headaches by improving their well-being.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017422; https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=DRKS00017422.

Effects of Introvision, a self-regulation method with a mindfulness-based perception technique in migraine prevention: a monocentric randomized waiting-list controlled study (IntroMig Study)

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a brain disorder with recurrent headache attacks and altered sensory processing. Introvision is a self-regulation method based on mindfulness-like perception techniques, developed at the University of Hamburg. Here, we examined the effect of Introvision in migraine prevention.

METHODS

Migraineurs with at least five headache days per month were block-randomized to the experimental group (EG) or waiting list group (WL), the latter starting Introvision training six weeks after the EG. Participants learned Introvision in six weekly on-site group sessions with video-conference support followed by three individual video-conference sessions. Headache diaries and questionnaires were obtained before Introvision training and three months after the last individual Introvision session.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients completed the study. The primary outcome, headache days of the EG after Introvision training compared to those of the WL before the training, showed no significant effect (10.6 ± 7.7, n = 22; vs. 10.9 ± 6.3, n = 29, p = 0.63; Mann-Whitney-U-Test). The secondary outcome, comparing pooled EG and WL data before and after Introvision training, revealed a significant reduction of headache days (from 11.7 ± 6.5 to 9.8 ± 7.0; p = 0.003; Wilcoxon-paired-Test) as well as of acute medication intake and Headache-Impact-Test 6 (HIT-6) scores and increased self-efficacy as quantified by increased FKMS-scores (FKMS: german short form of the Headache Management Self-Efficacy Scale (HMSE)).

CONCLUSION

Although the study did not reach its primary endpoint, several secondary outcome parameters in the pooled (non-controlled) pre-post analysis showed an improvement with a decrease in monthly headache days by 1.9 days/ month. A larger randomized controlled trial has to corroborate these preliminary findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03507400, Registration date 09.03.2018.

Relationship between Self-Efficacy and Headache Impact, Anxiety, and Physical Activity Levels in Patients with Chronic Tension-Type Headache: An Observational Study

Background

Chronic tension-type headache is the primary headache with the highest prevalence. The present study is aimed at analyzing the associations between patient self-efficacy and headache impact with pain characteristics, kinesiophobia, anxiety sensitivity, and physical activity levels in subjects with chronic tension-type headache.

Materials and Methods

An observational descriptive study was carried out. A total sample of 42 participants was recruited at university environment with diagnosis of tension-type headache. Headache characteristics (frequency, intensity, and duration), physical activity levels, pain related-self-efficacy, kinesiophobia, anxiety sensitivity, and headache impact were measured.

Results

The HIT-6 (61.05 ± 6.38) score showed significant moderate positive correlations with the ASI-3 score (17.64 ± 16.22; r = 0.47) and moderate negative correlations with the self-efficacy in the domains of pain management (31.9 ± 10.28; r = -0.43) and coping with symptoms (53.81 ± 14.19; r = -0.47). ASI-3 score had a negative large correlation with self-efficacy in the domains of pain management (r = -0.59), physical function (53.36 ± 7.99; r = -0.55), and coping with symptoms (r = -0.68). Physical activity levels showed positive moderate correlations with the self-efficacy in the domain of physical function (r = 0.41). Linear regression models determined that the self-efficacy and anxiety sensitivity with showed a significant relationship with the HIT-6 score (R 2 = 0.262; p = 0.008) and with the ASI-3 score (R 2 = 0.565; p < 0.001). In addition, no correlations were found between pain intensity, duration or frecuency with psychosocial factors, or headache impact.

Conclusions

The present study showed that patients with chronic tension-type headache had a great negative impact on daily tasks and physical activity levels, which were associated with higher anxiety levels and lower self-efficacy.

Efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for the Prophylaxis of Migraine in Adults: A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Behavioral approaches are central to the preventive treatment of migraine but empirical evidence regarding efficacy and effectiveness is still sparse. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a newly developed migraine-specific, integrative cognitive-behavioral therapy program (miCBT) combining several approaches (trigger and stress management, coping with fear of attacks, relaxation training) by comparing it with a single behavioral approach (relaxation training, RLX) as an active control group and a waiting-list control group (WLC).

Methods

In a three-armed open-label randomized controlled trial, 121 adults with migraine were assigned to either miCBT, RLX or WLC. The outpatient group therapy (miCBT or RLX) consisted of seven sessions each 90 min. Participants who completed the WLC were subsequently randomized to one of the two treatment groups. Primary outcomes were headache days, headache-related disability, emotional distress, and self-efficacy. The baseline was compared to post-treatment, and followed by assessments 4- and 12-months post-treatment to compare miCBT and RLX.

Results

Mixed-model analyses (intention-to-treat sample, 106 participants) showed significantly stronger pre-post improvements in self-efficacy (assessed by the Headache Management Self-Efficacy Scale, HMSE-G-SF) in both treatment groups compared to the WLC (mean difference at post; miCBT: 4.67 [0.55–8.78], p = 0.027; RLX: 4.42 [0.38 to 8.46], p = 0.032), whereas no other significant between-group differences were observed. The follow-up analyses revealed significant within-group improvements from baseline to 12-month follow-up in all four primary outcomes for both treatments. However, between-group effects (miCBT vs. RLX) were not significant at follow-up.

Conclusion

The miCBT has no better treatment effects compared to RLX in migraine-prophylaxis. Both treatments effectively increase patients' self-efficacy.

Trial Registration

German Clinical Trials Register (www.drks.de; DRKS-ID: DRKS00011111).

Brazilian version of headache management self-efficacy scale

Background Headache-management self-efficacy has been associated with pain severity and headache-related disability. Objective The aim of this study was to test the cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of a Brazilian version of the Headache Management Self-Efficacy Scale (HMSE) in a sample of patients coming from three tertiary headache centers in Brazil. Methods 137 migraine outpatients completed the Headache Management Self-Efficacy Scale (HMSE) and measures of psychopathological symptoms, pain catastrophizing, depression, anxiety, quality of life and headache-related disability. Results HMSE-10 showed good reliability (α = 0.84) and adequate corrected item-total correlation, ranging from 0.46 to 0.64. HMSE-10 was positively correlated with 6 of 8 domains of overall health status and negatively correlated with psychopathological symptoms, depression, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, headache-related disability, headache frequency and headache intensity. The difference between the means of the episodic and chronic headache patients had a magnitude of moderate effect in all the study measures, being headache-related disability the largest one found (d = 0.68). Along with headache intensity and depression, Efficacy Scale beliefs were predictors of headache-related disability. Conclusions The Brazilian short version of Headache Management Self-Efficacy Scale (HMSE-10) was revealed as a valid and reliable measure of headache-specific Efficacy Scale beliefs.

Determination of psychosocial factors in cluster headache - construction and psychometric properties of the Cluster Headache Scales (CHS)

BACKGROUND

Cluster headache (CH) is clinically associated with considerable psychosocial burden. However, instruments to assess and characterize psychosocial factors in cluster headache more specifically are lacking. This study aimed to develop a self-report questionnaire, which assesses the broadest possible spectrum of psychosocial factors in cluster headache, the Cluster Headache Scales (CHS).

METHOD

Items of the Cluster Headache Scales were constructed based on a literature review and semi-structured interviews with several experts (including persons with cluster headache). A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to determine the psychometric properties and the factor structure of the Cluster Headache Scales. Data was analyzed using exploratory factor analysis as well as exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM).

RESULTS

In total, n = 342 subjects with cluster headache (mean age 47.8, 63% male, 51% with episodic cluster headache) were included. Factor analysis yielded eight clearly interpretable factors: Medical care, medication side effects, fear of attacks, disability, (auto)aggression, coping, physical activity, and financial burden, which are assessed via 36 items. The internal consistencies of the subscales were acceptable to excellent and ranged between Cronbach's alpha = .76 and .93. The pattern of correlations with related instruments provides first evidence for convergent validity.

CONCLUSION

The CHS represents a reliable and valid self-report instrument for the assessment of psychosocial factors in persons with cluster headache, which appears useful for both clinical practice as well as research.Trial registration: The study was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (www.drks.de, ID-Number: DRKS00016502).

Barriers to Behavioral Treatment Adherence for Headache: An Examination of Attitudes, Beliefs, and Psychiatric Factors

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Nonpharmacological interventions, such as biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, and relaxation techniques are Level-A evidence-based treatments for headache. The impact of these interventions is often equivalent to or greater than pharmacological interventions, with fewer side effects. Despite such evidence, the rate of participation in nonpharmacological interventions for headache remains low. Once obstacles to optimizing use of behavioral interventions, such as local access to nonpharmacological treatment and primary headache providers are traversed, identification of barriers contributing to low adherence is imperative given the high levels of disability and cost associated with treating headache disorders. In this review of factors in adults associated with underuse of nonpharmacological interventions, we discuss psychological factors relevant to participation in nonpharmacological treatment, including attitudes and beliefs, motivation for change, awareness of triggers, locus of control, self-efficacy, acceptance, coping styles, personality traits, and psychiatric comorbidities associated with treatment adherence. Finally, future prospects and approaches to optimizing treatment matching and minimizing adherence issues are addressed.

METHODS

An interdisciplinary team conducted this narrative review. Neuropsychologists conducted a literature search during the month of July 2017 using a combination of the keywords ("headache" or "migraine") and ("adherence" or "compliance") or "barriers to treatment" or various "psychological factors" discussed in this narrative review. Content experts, a psychiatrist, and a complementary and integrative health specialist provided additional commentary and input to this narrative review resulting in integration of additional noteworthy studies, book chapters and books.

RESULTS

Various psychological factors, such as attitudes and beliefs, lack of motivation, poor awareness of triggers, external locus of control, poor self-efficacy, low levels of acceptance, and engagement in maladaptive coping styles can contribute to nonadherence.

CONCLUSIONS

To maximize adherence, clinicians can assess and address an individual's level of treatment acceptance, beliefs that may present as barriers, readiness for change, locus of control, self-efficacy and psychiatric comorbidities. Identification of barriers to adherence as well as the application of relevant assessment and intervention techniques have the potential to facilitate adherence and ultimately improve treatment success.