Potential of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire as a public health initiative and in clinical practice

Headache in patients with non-functioning pituitary adenoma before and after transsphenoidal surgery - a prospective study

PURPOSE

To study the long-term effect of transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) on headache in patients with non-functioning pituitary adenoma (NFPA) and identify factors predicting headache relief following TSS.

METHODS

We evaluated headache in 101 consecutive patients with NFPA who underwent TSS from September 2015 to December 2021, preoperatively and 12-months post-surgery, by using the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Health-related quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the EQ-5D visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS).

RESULTS

Of 101 patients, 27 (27%) experienced disabling preoperative headache. Among these, the median total MIDAS score improved from 60 (interquartile range (IQR): 19-140) to 10 (IQR: 0-49) (P = 0.004). Additionally, headache frequency over a 90-day period decreased from 45 (IQR: 25-83) to 6 (IQR: 3-36) days (P = 0.002), and headache intensity decreased from 5 (IQR: 4-7) to 4 (IQR: 2-7) (P = 0.016) at 12-months post-surgery. At 12 months post-surgery, 18 (67%) of 27 patients with preoperatively disabling headache showed clinically relevant improvement of their headache, 4 (15%) showed deterioration, and 5 (19%) remained unchanged. In patients with clinically relevant improvement of their headache, the EQ-VAS score improved from 50 (IQR: 30 - 7) to 80 (IQR: 65-86) (P < 0.001). Of the 74 patients with no preoperative headache, 11 (15%) developed postoperative headache. We identified no clinical factors predicting postoperative headache relief.

CONCLUSION

The study supports that clinically significant and long-lasting improvements of disabling headache and QoL can be achieved with TSS in a substantial number of patients with NFPA.

Is erenumab an efficient alternative for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine in Spain? Results of a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

The reimbursement of erenumab in Spain and other European countries is currently restricted because of the cost of this novel therapy to patients with migraine who have experienced previous failures to traditional preventive treatments. However, this reimbursement policy should be preferably based on cost-effectiveness studies, among other criteria. This study performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of erenumab versus topiramate for the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine (EM) and versus placebo for chronic migraine (CM).

METHODS

A Markov model with a 10-year time horizon, from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System, was constructed based on data from responder and non-responder patients. A responder was defined as having a minimum 50% reduction in the number of monthly migraine days (MMD). A hypothetical cohort of patients with EM with one or more prior preventive treatment failures and patients with CM with more than two treatment failures was considered. The effectiveness score was measured as an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost per migraine day (MD) avoided. Data from clinical outcomes and patient characteristics were obtained from erenumab clinical trials (NCT02066415, STRIVE, ARISE, LIBERTY and HER-MES). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to validate the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

After a 10-year follow-up, the estimated QALYs were 5.88 and 6.11 for patients with EM treated with topiramate and erenumab, respectively. Erenumab showed an incremental cost per patient of €4,420 vs topiramate. For CM patients, erenumab resulted in 0.756 QALYs gained vs placebo; and an incremental cost of €1,814. Patients treated with erenumab achieved reductions in MD for both EM and CM (172 and 568 MDs, respectively). The incremental cost per QALY gained with erenumab was below the Spanish threshold of €30,000/QALY for both health and societal perspectives (EM €19,122/QALY and CM €2,398/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

Erenumab is cost-effective versus topiramate as a preventive treatment for EM and versus placebo for patients with CM from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

Retrospective Observational Study Amidst Myriad Conundrums and Myths of Pediatric Headaches: A Critique on Diagnostics and Effectiveness of Interventions

Objective To study the etiological profile of pediatric headaches (PH) in a tertiary child neurology clinic and to determine the utility of diagnostics, interventions, and long-term prognosis. Methods Children (ages 4-15) observed over four years were recruited retrospectively. In primary headaches, the headache frequency and impact on quality of life (QOL) parameters at pre-treatment (T1) were compared post-treatment at follow-up (T2). Results Of the 311 eligible patients, 285 had primary headaches (Tension-Type Headache {TTH}: 156; Migraine: 129), and 26 had secondary headaches. The mean (±SD) onset age was 10 (±3) years with a male-to-female ratio of 2.3:1. Migraine was more common in children aged less than seven years (17/28) and TTH in older patients (146/283). The most common causes of secondary headache were intracranial hypertension (ICH) in 11/26 patients (four idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), four following aseptic meningitis, three with cortical vein thrombosis), and ophthalmologic causes in 7/26 (of these five had convergence insufficiency). Hypertension was a rare cause of secondary headaches (2/26 patients). Neuroimaging was performed in 173/311 (56%), primarily for parental anxiety (160/173; 92%), and was abnormal in only four. At T2 (Median time to follow-up: 29 months; Interquartile range: 22-37 months), data were collected in 207/285 patients with primary headaches (TTH: 109; Migraine: 98). In both migraine and TTH groups, there were statistically significant reductions (p-value <0.0001) in headache frequency and QOL parameters. Conclusion In our study, TTH was the most common cause of PH. Neuroimaging was normal in most cases. Psychological interventions were effective but underutilized. The symptoms of primary headaches improved significantly over time, despite poor adherence to prophylactic medications.

Identification of risk groups for mental disorders, headache and oral behaviors in adults during the COVID-19 pandemic

The dramatically changing situation during COVID-19 pandemic, is anticipated to provoke psycho-emotional disturbances and somatization arising from the current epidemiological situation that will become a significant problem for global and regional healthcare systems. The aim of this study was to identify the predictors, risk factors and factors associated with mental disorders, headache and potentially stress-modulated parafunctional oral behaviors among the adult residents of North America and Europe as indirect health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. This may help limit the long-term effects of this and future global pandemic crises. The data were collected from 1642 respondents using an online survey. The results demonstrated increased levels of anxiety, depression, headache and parafunctional oral behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic in both North American and European residents. The results of this study facilitated the definition of the group most predicted to experience the aforementioned secondary effects of the pandemic. This group included females younger than 28.5 years old, especially those who were single, less well educated and living in Europe. In case of this and other global crises this will allow faster defining the most vulnerable groups and providing rapid and more targeted intervention.

Validity and reliability of the Portuguese version of the modified Migraine Disability Assessment

BACKGROUND

Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) is a useful tool to measure headache-related disability. Modified MIDAS with 4-week recall period reduces recall bias and improves accuracy of the results. This study aimed at validating mMIDAS in Portuguese.

METHODS

Studied population consisted of adult migraine patients attending a headache outpatient clinic. Reliability was assessed by internal consistency and reproducibility in a 3-week test-retest. Content validity was evaluated by two expert panels. Construct validity was tested by comparing mMIDAS-P index in socioeconomic and clinical patient groups and scale unidimensionality was evidenced by factor analysis. Criterion validity was tested using EQ-5D-5L and HADS.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients, 88% female, mean age of 44 years, participated. They had, in average, 9.7 headache days in previous month, pain averaging 7.5/10. About 69.9% were on a migraine prophylactic treatment, and 42.4% had severe disability; 29.4 and 13.0% showed, respectively, moderate/severe anxiety and depression. Content validity showed that mMIDAS-P is simple and clinically useful. It did not show to be determined by patient's sociodemographic characteristics and it was correlated with depression scale and EQ-5D-5L. Test-retest demonstrated high reproductive reliability and good internal consistency.

CONCLUSION

mMIDAS-P is valid and reliable. We strongly recommend it for clinical and research use.

Influence of headache pain intensity and frequency on migraine-related disability in chronic migraine patients treated with OnabotulinumtoxinA

Background

There is a need to establish which are the more relevant headache-related outcomes that have an impact on our patient’s lives to accurately evaluate treatment response in daily clinical practice.

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the relevance of clinical trial endpoints in clinical real-life disability improvement in response to migraine preventive treatment with OnabotulinumtoxinA.

Methods

This is an observational prospective study. We included patients with chronic migraine fulfilling ICHD-3beta/3 criteria. We prospectively collected data of 8 headache-related and acute medication use endpoints recommended by the Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of chronic migraine. We evaluated their impact on disability improvement after 6 months of treatment with OnabotulinumtoxinA. We defined as a responder in disability, patients with ≥50% MIDAS score reduction after 2 cycles of treatment following PREEMPT protocol. We performed an analysis to measure the impact of improvement in the evaluated outcome measures according to perceived disability in clinical practice.

Results

We included 395 patients (85.1% women, mean age 46.7 ± 12.6 years). Mean headache frequency at baseline was 26.5 ± 5.2 headache days/month. After 6 months, 49.1% of patients were headache-related disability responders. From all outcome measures collected, variables independently associated to disability improvement were headache days reduction (p = 0.02) and ≥ 50% pain intensity reduction (p = 0.04). A ≥ 50% reduction in headache frequency or pain intensity showed similar influence on disability improvement after treatment.

Conclusions

Headache pain intensity is as important as frequency when evaluating the clinical response and impact on patient headache-related disability after migraine preventive treatment with OnabotulinumtoxinA.

Epidemiology of Migraine

Headache disorders cause significant disability. The public and most health professionals tend to perceive migraine as a minor or trivial complaint. In the past decade, important epidemiologic studies enjoining extensive surveys, pathophysiologic and genetic insights, and revised headache classification paradigms have produced clear evidence of the public health importance of headache disorders. The Global Campaign to reduce the burden of headache worldwide known as "Lifting the Burden" was launched in 2004 by the World Health Organization, the International Headache Society, the World Headache Alliance, and the European Headache Federation. This paper reviews salient progress in the neuroepidemiology of migraine headaches.

Supraorbital Rim Syndrome: Definition, Surgical Treatment, and Outcomes for Frontal Headache

Background:

Supraorbital rim syndrome (SORS) is a novel term attributed to a composite of anatomically defined peripheral nerve entrapment sites of the supraorbital rim region. The SORS term establishes a more consistent nomenclature to describe the constellation of frontal peripheral nerve entrapment sites causing frontal headache pain. In this article, we describe the anatomical features of SORS and evidence to support its successful treatment using the transpalpebral approach that allows direct vision of these sites and the intraconal space.

Methods:

A retrospective review of 276 patients who underwent nerve decompression or neurectomy procedures for frontal or occipital headache was performed. Of these, treatment of 96 patients involved frontal surgery, and 45 of these patients were pure SORS patients who underwent this specific frontal trigger site deactivation surgery only. All procedures involved direct surgical approach through the upper eyelid to address the nerves of the supraorbital rim at the bony rim and myofascial sites.

Results:

Preoperative and postoperative data from the Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire were analyzed with paired t test. After surgical intervention, Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire scores decreased significantly at 12 months postoperatively (P < 0.0001).

Conclusions:

SORS describes the totality of compression sites both at the bony orbital rim and the corrugator myofascial unit for the supraorbital rim nerves. Proper diagnosis, full anatomical site knowledge, and complete decompression allow for consistent treatment. Furthermore, the direct, transpalpebral surgical approach provides significant benefit to allow complete decompression.

Migraine and its psychiatric comorbidities

Migraine is a highly prevalent and disabling neurological disorder associated with a wide range of psychiatric comorbidities. In this manuscript, we provide an overview of the link between migraine and several comorbid psychiatric disorders, including depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. We present data on psychiatric risk factors for migraine chronification. We discuss the evidence, theories and methods, such as brain functional imaging, to explain the pathophysiological links between migraine and psychiatric disorders. Finally, we provide an overview of the treatment considerations for treating migraine with psychiatric comorbidities. In conclusion, a review of the literature demonstrates the wide variety of psychiatric comorbidities with migraine. However, more research is needed to elucidate the neurocircuitry underlying the association between migraine and the comorbid psychiatric conditions and to determine the most effective treatment for migraine with psychiatric comorbidity.

Attitudes and Burden of disease among Self-Considered Migraineurs — a Nation-wide Population-based Survey in Sweden

The authors have earlier reported a 1-year prevalence of 13.2 ± 1.9% for migraine in Sweden. This is a subsequent extensive postal survey of the burden of disease and attitudes among migraineurs in a sample ( n = 423, 23% men and 77% women, aged 18-74 years) randomly recruited from all main regions of the country, representative of adults in the general Swedish population with self-considered migraine. Results are presented only from participants who after analysis of symptoms were found to fulfil the International Headache Society's migraine criteria. In order to assess headache duration open-mindedly, the strict time criterion 4-72 h was deliberately disregarded as an inclusion criterion. Individuals who did not consider themselves to have migraine were excluded. Less than half of the group (45%) had received a diagnosis of migraine from a physician. Accordingly, a large number of individuals that would not have come to attention in a clinic-based study have been included. The mean attack frequency was 1.3 per month, and the number of attacks per year in Swedish adults is approximately 10 million. A minority (27%) of sufferers have a majority (68%) of all attacks. The mean attack duration was 19 h. A considerable number of individuals reported attacks < 4 h (15.8%) or > 72 h (6.4%). Less than half of the individuals recovered completely between the attacks. Despite this, only every fourth (27%) participant was currently consulting a physician (6% regularly; 21% occasionally). Most of the migraineurs reported absence from school or work, a negative influence of migraine on the most important aspects of life, and an interest in testing other treatments for migraine during the last year. Of those ( n = 231) migraineurs who had consulted a physician, about 60% were satisfied with information given or treatment offered. This implies, however, that there is still room for improvement in the management of migraine in Sweden.

Disability, anxiety and depression associated with medication-overuse headache can be considerably reduced by detoxification and prophylactic treatment. Results from a multicentre, multinational study (COMOESTAS project)

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to investigate whether headache-related disability, depression and anxiety can be reduced by detoxification and prophylactic treatment in patients with medication-overuse headache (MOH).

METHODS

Patients with MOH were included from six centres in Europe and Latin America in a seven-month cohort study. Before and six months after treatment, the degree of disability was measured by the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire, while anxiety and depression were measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

RESULTS

A total of 694 patients with MOH were included, of whom 492 completed the study. Headache days were reduced by 58.4% from 23.6 to 9.8 days per month at six months ( P < 0.001). The MIDAS score was reduced by 57.1% from baseline 59.9 to 25.7 ( P < 0.001). Number of patients with depression was reduced by 50.7% from 195 to 96 and number of those with anxiety was reduced by 27.1% from 284 to 207 (both P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Disability, depression and anxiety were considerably reduced in patients with MOH by detoxification and prophylactic treatment. This emphasises the urgent need for increased awareness about avoiding overuse of headache medications and demonstrates that not only headache frequency but also disability are remarkably improved by adequate intervention.

Acute treatment of migraines

Migraine is a prevalent and disabling brain disorder that costs billions of dollars annually in direct healthcare costs, and school and work absenteeism and presenteeism. The objective of acute treatment is a cost-effective, rapid restoration of functional ability, with minimal recurrence and adverse effects. The acute treatment of migraine includes specific drugs, which currently all have vasoconstrictive effects (dihydroergotamine and triptans), and nonspecific drugs that include paracetamol (acetaminophen), combination analgesics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), dopamine antagonists, narcotics and corticosteroids. NSAIDs have both peripheral and central effects on reversing migraine, and so may represent the best alternative for patients who cannot use triptans and ergots due to vascular contraindications. Narcotics and habituating medications should be avoided in the acute treatment of migraine, as the risk for transformation to chronic daily headache is excessively high at a relatively infrequent rate of exposure.

Migraine treatment in developmental age: guidelines update

There is a serious lack of controlled studies on the pharmacological treatment of primary migraine in the developmental age; there is, consequently, an urgent need for new, evidence-based approaches to this long-neglected field of research. Moreover, previous studies have stated that the placebo response is greater in pediatric patients than in adults and that a reduction in the attack frequency in the absence of any pharmacological treatment is observed more frequently in pediatric migraine patients than in adults. Besides these preliminary considerations, the shorter duration of migraine attacks and other characteristic semeiological features of the clinical picture in children are such that the design of randomized controlled trial (RCT) is more problematic in the developmental age than in the adult. Bearing in mind all these weak points, the aim of this review was to summarize and update recent guidelines for the treatment of primary migraine in children and adolescents. The most recent guidelines are those published by the Italian Society for the study of Headache, the French Society for the study of Migraine and Headache, and the American Academy of Neurology. We have incorporated into these guidelines the results from the few, recent RCTs, clinical controlled trials, open-label studies, meta-analyses and reviews that have been published since 2004; owing to the lack of strong evidence in this field of research, we have sometimes even mentioned pilot non-controlled studies, case series and expert opinions. Lastly, evidence was classified and the recommendations were categorized according to different levels.

What is the impact of physician communication and patient understanding in the management of headache?

Migraine is a common and debilitating condition. Despite the burden of disease and increasing availability of effective treatment, migraine management is unsatisfactory. Evidence in other chronic conditions indicates that effective physician communication results in better patient understanding and health outcomes.The current literature review was intended to evaluate evidence regarding the relationship of effective physician-provider communication to health outcomes and patient satisfaction among patients with migraine. The authors searched MEDLINE((R)) (1966-June 2007) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant publications. The search strategy combined the concepts of "headache disorders" and "physician-patient relations". 912 abstracts were identified, and 80 (9%) of them were included for data abstraction.There were no studies that met our eligibility criteria. Therefore we revised the eligibility criteria to allow for the inclusion of non-migraine primary headache disorders or the role of non-physician health care providers. Twelve published papers met the revised criteria. The findings from the limited evidence available suggests, but does not prove, that improvements in physician-patient communication could result in a significant decrease in the burden of suffering and health care resource utilization associated with migraine. More research is needed to assess the explicit role of physician-patient communication in the management of migraine.

Traditional acupuncture in migraine: a controlled, randomized study

OBJECTIVE

To check the effectiveness of a true acupuncture treatment according to traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in migraine without aura, comparing it to a standard mock acupuncture protocol, an accurate mock acupuncture healing ritual, and untreated controls.

BACKGROUND

Migraine prevalence is high and affects a relevant rate of adults in the productive phase of their life. Acupuncture has been increasingly advocated and used in Western countries for migraine treatment, but the evidence of its effectiveness still remains weak. A large variability of treatments is present in published studies and no acupoint selection according to TCM has been investigated so far; therefore, the low level of evidence of acupuncture effectiveness might partly depend on inappropriate treatment.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A prospective, randomized, controlled study was performed in 160 patients suffering from migraine without aura, assessed according to the ICD-10 classification. The patients were divided into the following 4 groups: (1) group TA, treated with true acupuncture (according to TCM) plus Rizatriptan; (2) group RMA, treated with ritualized mock acupuncture plus Rizatriptan; (3) group SMA, treated with standard mock acupuncture plus Rizatriptan; (4) group R, without prophylactic treatment with relief therapy only (Rizatriptan). The MIDAS Questionnaire was administered before treatment (T0), at 3 (T1) and 6 months (T2) from the beginning of treatment, and the MIDAS Index (MI) was calculated. Rizatriptan intake was also checked in all groups of patients at T0, T1, and T2. Group TA and RMA were evaluated according to TCM as well; then, the former was submitted to true acupuncture and the latter to mock acupuncture treatment resembling the same as TA. The statistical analysis was conducted with factorial ANOVA and multiple tests with a Bonferroni adjustment.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients completed the study (33 dropouts): 32 belonged to group TA, 30 to group RMA, 31 to group SMA, and 34 to group R. Before treatment the MI (T(0)) was moderate to severe with no significant intergroup differences. All groups underwent a decrease of MI at T(1) and T(2), with a significant group difference at both T(1) and T(2) compared to T(0) (P < .0001). Only TA provided a significant improvement at both T(1) and T(2) compared to R (P < .0001). RMA underwent a transient improvement of MI at T(1). The Rizatriptan intake paralleled the MI in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TA was the only treatment able to provide a steady outcome improvement in comparison to the use of only Rizatriptan, while RMA showed a transient placebo effect at T1.

The cycle of migraine: Patients' quality of life during and between migraine attacks

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in therapy, the prevalence of migraine has remained constant over the past 17 years. The current diagnostic procedure for migraine does not take into account the entire cycle of migraine, which includes both the pain of the acute attack and the worry between attacks.

OBJECTIVES

This review discusses the effects of migraine on health-related quality of life. The focus is on the impact of migraine between attacks and more successful clinical management of the complete cycle of migraine in both the neurology and primary care settings.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE (January 1997-January 2007) was conducted to determine the impact of migraine on quality of life and the need for and use of migraine preventive treatment. The search terms were migraine prevention, migraine prophylaxis, bead-ache and quality of life, migraine disability, and head-ache disability. The inclusion of specific studies was based on subjective, comparative evaluation and standard levels of evidence. Older publications were included to provide a historical perspective.

RESULTS

Worry in expectation of the next migraine attack can have negative effects on the family and social lives and work productivity of patients with migraine. The benefits of preventive pharmacotherapy for migraine may be measured over time in terms of changes in the frequency of acute attacks, impact of acute treatment on headache recurrence within the next 24 hours, and reduction in overall functional impairment. Optimizing the acute treatment outcome and reducing the frequency of episodes may help alleviate the cycle of migraine. The clinical assessment of migraine should include multiple dimensions. Several questionnaires, such as the Migraine Disability Assessment and the 6-item Headache Impact Test, have been developed to help clinicians assess the dimensions of migraine. These questionnaires should be used in conjunction with open communication techniques that elicit any underlying worry associated with migraines. Preventive therapies that have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration include the neurostabilizers divalproex sodium and topiramate, and the beta-blockers timolol and propranolol. Despite not being approved for this indication, the antidepressant amitriptyline has shown levels of evidence of efficacy in preventing migraine in controlled trials similar to those for the approved medications.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of whether patients with migraine may benefit from preventive therapy should include the use of open communication techniques to uncover possible impairment between attacks.

Improved migraine management in primary care: results of a patient treatment experience study using zolmitriptan orally disintegrating tablet

The 'Zomig Appropriate for Primary care' programme was developed to address the needs of primary care physicians (PCPs) to improve migraine management. As part of the programme, an international, open-label, 6-month clinical study was performed. The study included new and tangible outcome variables relevant to PCPs and recruited patients presenting in primary care with an established migraine diagnosis. Patients treated up to three migraine attacks per month with zolmitriptan orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) 2.5 mg. All other migraine attacks occurring during the study period were treated with the patient's usual migraine medication (including other triptans). Questionnaires were used to record patient treatment experiences at the study end. The primary end-point was the proportion of patients wanting to continue using zolmitriptan ODT. Some 595 patients treated 7171 migraine attacks with zolmitriptan ODT. Of the 504 patients who completed the 6-month questionnaire, 380 (75.4%) wished to continue using zolmitriptan ODT. The results of the study indicate that patient-orientated end-points are more motivational and meaningful to physicians than traditional end-points used in controlled clinical trials, allowing them to make informed decisions regarding migraine management.

Migraine care among different ethnicities: do disparities exist?

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate whether, in a primary care setting, Caucasians (C) and African Americans (AA) with moderately to severely disabling migraines differed in regards to: utilizing the health-care system for migraine care, migraine diagnosis and treatment, level of mistrust in the health-care system, perceived communication with their physician, and perceived migraine triggers.

BACKGROUND

Research has documented ethnic disparities in pain management. However, almost no research has been published concerning potential disparities in utilization, diagnosis, and/or treatment of migraine. It is also important to consider whether ethnic differences exist for trust and communication between patients and physicians, as these are essential when diagnosing and treating migraine.

METHODS

Adult patients with headache (n = 313) were recruited from primary care waiting rooms. Of these, 131 (AA = 77; C = 54) had migraine, moderate to severe headache-related disability, and provided socioeconomic status (SES) data. Participants completed measures of migraine disability (MIDAS), migraine health-care utilization, diagnosis and treatment history, mistrust of the medical community, patient-physician communication (PPC), and migraine triggers. Analysis of covariance (controlling for SES and recruitment site), chi-square, and Pearson product moment correlations were conducted.

RESULTS

African Americans were less likely to utilize the health-care setting for migraine treatment (AA = 46% vs. C = 72%, P < .001), to have been given a headache diagnosis (AA = 47% vs. C = 70%, P < .001), and to have been prescribed acute migraine medication (AA = 14% vs. C = 37%, P < .001). Migraine diagnosis was low for both groups, and <15% of all participants had been prescribed a migraine-specific medication or a migraine preventive medication despite suffering moderate to severe levels of migraine disability. African Americans had less trust in the medical community (P < .001, eta2 = 0.26) and less positive PPC (P < .001, eta2 = 0.11). Also, the lower the trust and communication, the less likely they were to have ever seen (or currently be seeing) a doctor for migraine care or to have been prescribed medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine utilization, diagnosis, and treatment were low for both groups. However, this was especially true for African Americans, who also reported lower levels of trust and communication with doctors relative to Caucasians. The findings highlight the need for improved physician and patient education about migraine diagnosis and treatment, the importance of cultural variation in pain presentation, and the importance of communication when diagnosing and treating migraine.

Changing Physician Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs About Migraine: Evaluation of a New Educational Intervention

OBJECTIVE

Use a presurvey of primary care providers (PCPs) enrolled in a continuing medical education (CME) program on headache management to ascertain their existing knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding migraine and use a postsurvey to determine the extent to which the CME program has brought participant knowledge, attitudes, and skills closer to conformance with best evidence.

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common and debilitating condition, which PCPs may not always manage satisfactorily. In an effort to improve management, the American Headache Society has developed a CME program called BRAINSTORM that encourages PCPs to adopt the US Headache Consortium Guidelines for headache care.

METHODS

A 20-item questionnaire was developed that covered the essential elements of migraine care. The questionnaire was administered before and after a BRAINSTORM presentation to 254 consenting primary care clinicians attending a medical meeting at 1 of 6 sites. A control group of 112 comparable physicians who did not attend the presentation completed the same questionnaire. Prepresentation scores of attendees were compared to scores of nonattendees to assess the generalizability of results. Prepresentation scores on selected questions were used to assess participant baseline knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs. Pre- and postpresentation scores for attendees at all sites were compared using the Mantel-Haenszel statistic to assess the effectiveness of the BRAINSTORM CME. Pre- and postpresentation scores were compared by site using the Breslow-Day test to evaluate any differential impact based on CME location.

RESULTS

Prepresentation scores of attendees and nonattendees were found to be similar. No significant difference in performance was noted across sites. A chi-square analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between pre- and postpresentation scores for 16 of the test's 20 questions. In the pretest, all participants scored <66% on 2 questions related to prevalence, impact, and pathophysiology of migraine, 2 questions pertaining to history taking/physical examination, and 3 migraine management questions. Attendee scores improved to >66% posttest on all except 2 questions related to prevalence, impact, and pathophysiology of migraine.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that PCPs need to acquire greater understanding about the epidemiology and pathophysiology of migraine and may require guidance in history taking and physical examination of migraine patients. Improvement in scores posttest confirms that the BRAINSTORM program has a significant immediate impact on the knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of participants. The program could be strengthened to improve emphasis in some areas where posttest scores showed no improvement.

Topiramate improves health-related quality of life when used to prevent migraine

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures among patients receiving topiramate (TPM) 100 mg/d in two divided doses for migraine prevention in three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 26-week trials with similar protocols and study populations.

BACKGROUND

Migraine substantially impairs HRQoL and work productivity before, during, and after attacks. Approximately 50% of patients with migraine could be recommended for preventive therapies, yet only 3% to 5% of patients receive them. TPM is an effective and generally well-tolerated migraine prophylactic (preventive) therapy for adults, as demonstrated in several randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. The most common adverse events in double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of TPM in migraine prevention are paresthesia, fatigue, anorexia, nausea, taste alteration, and diarrhea.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The Migraine-Specific Questionnaire (MSQ, version 2.1) was used to assess the effect of TPM 100 mg/d on the functionality and HRQoL of randomized intent-to-treat (ITT) and study-completer populations pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. MSQ scores (0 to 100, higher score indicates better functioning) were assessed for the following three domains: role restriction (examines the degree to which performance of daily activities is limited by migraine), role prevention (examines the degree to which performance of daily activities is interrupted by migraine), and emotional function (examines feelings of frustration and helplessness due to migraine). Between-group differences from baseline in mean MSQ domain scores for TPM 100 mg/d and placebo were compared using a mixed-effects model with piecewise linear regression. Effect sizes were calculated to estimate the magnitude of change in HRQoL that can be associated with TPM therapy.

RESULTS

TPM 100 mg/d significantly improved all three MSQ domains compared with placebo for both the ITT (TPM, n = 372; placebo, n = 362) and study-completer (TPM, n = 220; placebo, n = 216) populations (P < .001 for all three domains, both populations). Effect sizes for TPM 100 mg/d varied from 0.40 to 0.78, indicating that the changes in MSQ scores for TPM 100 mg/d were moderate and may be clinically significant.

CONCLUSION

TPM 100 mg/d has been shown to be effective in the prevention of migraine headache in adults. As the MSQ results from the three randomized, placebo-controlled trials indicate, HRQoL is significantly improved for up to 6 months following initiation of treatment.

Patients' decision-making for migraine and chronic daily headache management. A qualitative study

The objective of this study was to gain insight into the patients' decision-making for migraine and chronic daily headache management. Patients were recruited by theoretical sampling in Surrey (UK). Semi-structured and tape-recorded interviews (n = 13) were conducted, transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed according to the grounded theory methodology. Thirteen patients (8 migraine and 5 chronic daily headache) described their management. All patients employed multiple behaviours to manage their headaches. From the patients' descriptions emerged their decision-making. Based on experience, perceptions and new information, the decision-making process involved four stages: headache severity, evaluation, decision making and behaviours. Although the participants were passive with regards to certain management strategies, overall they were actively involved in treating and preventing their headaches. Furthermore, they were active decision-makers in choosing appropriate management. Migraine and chronic daily headache patients are actively involved in managing their headaches. They are key decision-makers and should not be overlooked as a resource for effective management.

A six-item short-form survey for measuring headache impact: the HIT-6

BACKGROUND

Migraine and other severe headaches can cause suffering and reduce functioning and productivity. Patients are the best source of information about such impact.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a new short form (HIT-6) for assessing the impact of headaches that has broad content coverage but is brief as well as reliable and valid enough to use in screening and monitoring patients in clinical research and practice.

METHODS

HIT-6 items were selected from an existing item pool of 54 items and from 35 items suggested by clinicians. Items were selected and modified based on content validity, item response theory (IRT) information functions, item internal consistency, distributions of scores, clinical validity, and linguistic analyses. The HIT-6 was evaluated in an Internet-based survey of headache sufferers (n = 1103) who were members of America Online (AOL). After 14 days, 540 participated in a follow-up survey.

RESULTS

HIT-6 covers six content categories represented in widely used surveys of headache impact. Internal consistency, alternate forms, and test-retest reliability estimates of HIT-6 were 0.89, 0.90, and 0.80, respectively. Individual patient score confidence intervals (95%) of app. +/-5 were observed for 88% of all respondents. In tests of validity in discriminating across diagnostic and headache severity groups, relative validity (RV) coefficients of 0.82 and 1.00 were observed for HIT-6, in comparison with the Total Score. Patient-level classifications based in HIT-6 were accurate 88.7% of the time at the recommended cut-off score for a probability of migraine diagnosis. HIT-6 was responsive to self-reported changes in headache impact.

CONCLUSIONS

The IRT model estimated for a 'pool' of items from widely used measures of headache impact was useful in constructing an efficient, reliable, and valid 'static' short form (HIT-6) for use in screening and monitoring patient outcomes.

Acute Treatment of Migraine Headache

Migraine is a common, chronic neurologic disorder that affects approximately 12% of the adult population in Western countries. Once migraine is diagnosed, illness severity must be assessed. Clinicians and patients should then work together to develop a treatment plan based on patient needs and preferences. The goals of treatment usually include reducing the intensity and duration of acute attacks, minimizing the frequency of attacks, minimizing headache-related disability and maximizing health-related quality of life, and avoiding headache escalation and medication misuse. Management of migraine is divided into pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches. Pharmacologic approaches are subdivided into preventive treatment, taken on a daily basis whether or not headache is present, and acute drugs taken to treat individual attacks as they arise. Acute treatments are further divided into nonspecific agents, which work for all types of pain, and migraine-specific treatments. The US Headache Consortium Guidelines recommend stratified care based on the level of disability to help physicians individualize treatment. Using this approach means that simple analgesics are appropriate as first-line acute treatments for less-disabled patients; if simple analgesics are unsuccessful, treatment is escalated for high-end therapies (eg, triptans). For those with high disability levels, migraine-specific acute therapies, such as the triptans, are recommended as the initial treatment, with preventive drugs in selected patients. A variety of behavioral interventions are helpful. The clinician has an armamentarium of ever-expanding variety of medications. With experience, clinicians can match individual patient needs with the specific characteristics of a drug to optimize therapeutic benefit.

Use of the Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire in children and adolescents with headache: an Italian pilot study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the suitability of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire for assessing disability in children and adolescents with headache and to obtain preliminary information about disability in different primary headaches.

BACKGROUND

During the last decade, researchers have begun to employ standardized methodologies to investigate the global impact of primary headaches. Disease-specific instruments have been developed to measure headache-related disability. The MIDAS Questionnaire, which is the most extensively studied of these instruments, was designed to assess the overall impact of headaches over the 3 months before compilation. The MIDAS Questionnaire is an optimal tool to assess headache-related disability in adults.

METHODS

Ninety-five patients aged 7 to 17 years with tension-type headache, migraine, or both completed the validated Italian form of the MIDAS questionnaire on 2 occasions. Test-retest reliability was assessed by the Spearman rank correlation test. The Cronbach alpha assessed internal consistency. The patients answered questions about the adequacy of the questionnaire.

RESULTS

The Cronbach alpha was.8. Correlation coefficients were generally high for the overall MIDAS score and for the items investigating disability in school and in family/leisure activities; they were lower for the items about housework. Most patients thought that the MIDAS Questionnaire was useful (98.9%) and that it captured the impact of their headaches (58.9%); 41% thought that questions about disability in housework were useless, 44.2% suggested adding questions regarding inability to do homework. All primary headaches had a considerable impact on daily activities, but patients with migraine tended to have lower headache frequencies and lower total disability time; those with tension-type headache suffered more days in which activities, although performed, were substantially impaired.

CONCLUSIONS

The MIDAS Questionnaire is useful for assessing disability in children and adolescents with different primary headaches. Minimal changes in the phrasing and content of the items would be sufficient to render the MIDAS specific for the younger population with headache.

New guidelines for the management of migraine in primary care

Despite repeated initiatives over the past decade, migraine remains under-recognised, under-diagnosed and under-treated in everyday clinical practice. The Migraine in Primary Care Advisors (MIPCA) group has produced new guidelines for migraine management to attempt to rectify this situation. MIPCA is a group of physicians, nurses, pharmacists and other healthcare professionals dedicated to the improvement of headache management in primary care, who have also worked closely with the Migraine Action Association (the UK patients' group) in the development of these guidelines. The principles of the new MIPCA guidelines are: To arrange specific consultations for headache. To institute a system of detailed history taking, patient education and buy-in at the outset of the consultation. To utilise a new screening algorithm for the differential diagnosis of headache, which can be confirmed by further questioning, if necessary. To institute a process of management that is individualised for each patient, using a new algorithm. Assessing the impact on the patient's daily life is a key aspect of diagnosis and management. To prescribe only treatments that have objective evidence of favourable efficacy and tolerability. To utilise prospective follow-up procedures to monitor the success of treatment. To organise a team approach to headache management in primary care.