[Relaxation techniques and behavioural therapy for the treatment of migraine : Guidelines from the German Migraine and Headache Society]

[Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy in headache disorders]

Primary headaches are among the most common pain disorders. They include migraines (prevalence 15%), tension headaches (up to 80%), and others, including trigeminal autonomic headaches (about 0.2%). Migraine, in particular, leads to significant impairment of personal life and high societal costs. Therefore, the need for effective and sustainable therapeutic procedures is high. This article provides an overview of psychological procedures in headache therapy and critically summarizes the empirical evidence for the effectiveness of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMST) consisting of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy. It can be shown that psychoeducation, relaxation procedures, cognitive behavioral therapy, and biofeedback are psychological procedures from which headache patients can benefit. In the synopsis of multimodal approaches in the treatment of headache, consistently greater effects can be observed when both pharmacological treatment and psychotherapeutic procedures are used. This added value should be regularly taken into account in the treatment of headache disorders. This requires close cooperation between headache specialists and psychotherapists who specialize in the treatment of pain.

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.

[Complementary and supplementary procedures in the treatment of headache]

In Germany, headache is one of the illnesses that most frequently leads to health impairments and to consultation with physicians. Even in children, headache is often associated with restricted activities of daily life. Nevertheless, the level of care for headache disorders is disproportionate to the medical needs. As a result, patients regularly use complementary and supportive therapeutic procedures. This review shows the procedures currently used for primary headache in childhood and adulthood, the methodological approaches and existing scientific evidence. The safety of the therapeutic options is also classified. These methods include physiotherapy, neural therapy, acupuncture, homeopathy, phytotherapy and the intake of dietary supplements. For children and adolescents with headaches, there are studies in the field of dietary supplements for coenzyme Q10, riboflavin, magnesium and vitamin D, which indicate specific effects in the reduction of headaches.

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.

[Consensus statement of the migraine and headache societies (DMKG, ÖKSG, and SKG) on the duration of pharmacological migraine prophylaxis]

Migraine is the most common neurological disorder and can be associated with a high degree of disability. In addition to non-pharmacological approaches to reduce migraine frequency, pharmacological migraine preventatives are available. Evidence-based guidelines from the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG), and German Society for Neurology (DGN), Austrian Headache Society (ÖKSG), and Swiss Headache Society (SKG) are available for indication and application. For therapy-relevant questions such as the duration of a pharmacological migraine prevention, no conclusions can be drawn from currently available study data. The aim of this review is to present a therapy consensus statement that integrates the current data situation and, where data are lacking, expert opinions. The resulting current recommendations on the duration of therapy for pharmacological migraine prophylaxis are shown here.

[Consensus statement of the migraine and headache societies (DMKG, ÖKSG, and SKG) on the duration of pharmacological migraine prophylaxis]

Migraine is the most common neurological disorder and can be associated with a high degree of disability. In addition to non-pharmacological approaches to reduce migraine frequency, pharmacological migraine preventatives are available. Evidence-based guidelines from the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG), and German Society for Neurology (DGN), Austrian Headache Society (ÖKSG), and Swiss Headache Society (SKG) are available for indication and application. For therapy-relevant questions such as the duration of a pharmacological migraine prevention, no conclusions can be drawn from currently available study data. The aim of this review is to present a therapy consensus statement that integrates the current data situation and, where data are lacking, expert opinions. The resulting current recommendations on the duration of therapy for pharmacological migraine prophylaxis are shown here.

Management of medication overuse (MO) and medication overuse headache (MOH) S1 guideline

Introduction

Chronic headache due to the overuse of medication for the treatment of migraine attacks has a prevalence of 0.5–2.0%. This guideline provides guidance for the management of medication overuse (MO) and medication overuse headache (MOH).

Recommendations

Treatment of headache due to overuse of analgesics or specific migraine medications involves several stages. Patients with medication overuse (MO) or medication overuse headache (MOH) should be educated about the relationship between frequent use of symptomatic headache medication and the transition from episodic to chronic migraine (chronification), with the aim of reducing and limiting the use of acute medication. In a second step, migraine prophylaxis should be initiated in patients with migraine and overuse of analgesics or specific migraine drugs. Topiramate, onabotulinumtoxinA and the monoclonal antibodies against CGRP or the CGRP-receptor are effective in patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse. In patients with tension-type headache, prophylaxis is performed with amitriptyline. Drug prophylaxis should be supplemented by non-drug interventions. For patients in whom education and prophylactic medication are not effective, pausing acute medication is recommended. This treatment can be performed in an outpatient, day hospital or inpatient setting. Patients with headache due to overuse of opioids should undergo inpatient withdrawal. The success rate of the stepped treatment approach is 50–70% after 6 to 12 months. A high relapse rate is observed in patients with opioid overuse. Tricyclic antidepressants, neuroleptics (antiemetics) and the administration of steroids are recommended for the treatment of withdrawal symptoms or headaches during the medication pause. Consistent patient education and further close monitoring reduce the risk of relapse.

Underuse of Behavioral Treatments for Headache: a Narrative Review Examining Societal and Cultural Factors

Migraine affects over 40 million Americans and is the world's second most disabling condition. As the majority of medical care for migraine occurs in primary care settings, not in neurology nor headache subspecialty practices, healthcare system interventions should focus on primary care. Though there is grade A evidence for behavioral treatment (e.g., biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and relaxation techniques) for migraine, these treatments are underutilized. Behavioral treatments may be a valuable alternative to opioids, which remain widely used for migraine, despite the US opioid epidemic and guidelines that recommend against them. Identifying and removing barriers to the use of headache behavioral therapy could help reduce the disability as well as the personal and social costs of migraine. These techniques will have their greatest impact if offered in primary care settings to the lower socioeconomic status groups at greatest risk for migraine. We review the societal and cultural challenges that impose barriers to optimal use of non-pharmacological treatment services. These barriers include insufficient knowledge of migraine/headache behavioral treatments and insufficient availability of clinicians trained in non-pharmacological treatment delivery; limited access in underserved communities; financial burden; and stigma associated with both headache and mental health diagnoses and treatment. For each barrier, we discuss potential approaches to minimizing its effect and thus enhancing non-pharmacological treatment utilization.Case ExampleA 25-year-old graduate student with a prior history of headaches in college is attending school in the evenings while working a full-time job. Now, his headaches have significant nausea and photophobia. They are twice weekly and are disabling enough that he is unable to complete homework assignments. He does not understand why the headaches occur on Saturdays when he pushes through all week to get through his examinations that take place on Friday evenings. He tried two different migraine preventive medications, but neither led to the 50% reduction in headache days his doctor had hoped for. His doctor had suggested cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) before initiating the medications, but he had been too busy to attend the appointments, and the challenges in finding an in-network provider proved difficult. Now with the worsening headaches, he opted for the CBT and by the fifth week had already noted improvements in his headache frequency and intensity.

A Biofeedback App for Migraine: Development and Usability Study

Background

Biofeedback is effective in treating migraines. It is believed to have a beneficial effect on autonomous nervous system activity and render individuals resilient to stressors that may trigger a migraine. However, widespread use of biofeedback is hampered by the need for a trained therapist and specialized equipment. Emerging digital health technology, including smartphones and wearables (mHealth), enables new ways of administering biofeedback. Currently, mHealth interventions for migraine appear feasible, but development processes and usability testing remain insufficient.

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate and improve the feasibility and usability of an mHealth biofeedback treatment app for adults with migraine.

Methods

In a prospective development and usability study, 18 adults with migraine completed a 4-week testing period of self-administered therapist-independent biofeedback treatment consisting of a smartphone app connected to wearable sensors (Cerebri, Nordic Brain Tech AS). The app included biofeedback training, instructions for self-delivery, and a headache diary. Two wearable sensors were used to measure surface electromyographic voltage at the trapezius muscle and peripheral skin temperature and heart rate at the right second fingertip. Participants were instructed to complete a daily headache diary entry and biofeedback session of 10 minutes duration. The testing period was preceded by a preusability expectation interview and succeeded by a postusability experience interview. In addition, an evaluation questionnaire was completed at weeks 2 and 4. Adherence was calculated as the proportion of 10-minute sessions completed within the first 28 days of treatment. Usability and feasibility were analyzed and summarized quantitatively and qualitatively.

Results

A total of 391 biofeedback sessions were completed with a median of 25 (IQR 17-28) per participant. The mean adherence rate was 0.76 (SD 0.26). The evaluation questionnaire revealed that functionality and design had the highest scores, whereas engagement and biofeedback were lower. Qualitative preexpectation analysis revealed that participants expected to become better familiar with physical signals and gain more understanding of their migraine attacks and noted that the app should be simple and understandable. Postusability analysis indicated that participants had an overall positive user experience with some suggestions for improvement regarding the design of the wearables and app content. The intervention was safe and tolerable. One case of prespecified adverse events was recorded in which a patient developed a skin rash from the sticky surface electromyography electrodes.

Conclusions

The app underwent a rigorous development process that indicated an overall positive user experience, good usability, and high adherence rate. This study highlights the value of usability testing in the development of mHealth apps.

[Prevention of chronic pain in the German healthcare system : Current state and perspective]

The current healthcare provision in Germany is established, in particular, for the diagnostics and treatment of chronic pain conditions; however, the current aim is to initiate the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches oriented towards the biopsychosocial pain model in the early stages of pain, i.e. before the onset of chronification, for patients with pain and a risk of chronification in order to actively avoid chronification processes. In this context, multiple risk factors play an important role for the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches as well as for the interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy developed for this purpose. The Global Year of the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) 2020 addressed the prevention of (chronic) pain, a welcome opportunity to provide a short review of the evidence for and clinical experiences with timely diagnostic and therapeutic options and to summarize the current framework conditions and scientific recommendations for Germany. At the end of this article the implications for future research are summarized, particularly for the treatment of patients with pain and risk of chronification.

[Psychological treatment of headache in times of COVID-19]

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has substantially changed life worldwide in 2020. This also influences the psychological treatment options of patients with headache.

AIM

The present article intends to illustrate the different psychological forms of treatment for headache patients and their implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Literature review and case reports.

RESULTS

Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, psychological treatment enables the increased stress level in headache patients to be counteracted by using cognitive behavioral therapy and relaxation techniques. The changed living conditions are often unfavorable but sometimes also favorable in the course of disease. It can be shown that even during the pandemic, such favorable changes can be used to support patients to cope with their headache.

CONCLUSION

The digital implementation of psychological approaches makes a major contribution to maintaining psychological treatment of headache patients, so that the individually changed needs can be addressed. With respect to content, stress regulation techniques and increased acceptance gain in importance. Regarding biofeedback there are limitations, which may be overcome by improved technical devices.

[Digitalization in headache therapy]

Hintergrund

Die Digitalisierung bietet Unterstützung und innovative Ansätze in der Diagnostik und Therapie von Kopfschmerzen. Mit dem Digitale-Versorgung-Gesetz gibt es nun erstmals die Möglichkeit, diese auch in die Regelversorgung einzubinden. Allerdings fällt eine Beurteilung der vielfältigen Angebote derzeit schwer; einheitliche Qualitätsstandards und aussagekräftige Studien zur Bewertung der Effektivität und Sicherheit fehlen.

Ziel der Arbeit

Übersicht über aktuelle Ansätze der Digitalisierung in der Kopfschmerzbehandlung und Konkretisierung an zwei Beispielen (App M‑sense und Kopfschmerzregister der Deutschen Migräne- und Kopfschmerzgesellschaft DMKG).

Material und Methoden

Literaturrecherche, Produktinformationen und Darstellung durch die Projektverantwortlichen.

Ergebnisse

Die meisten digitalen Angebote im Kopfschmerzbereich sind aktuell Kopfschmerzkalender, meist als Smartphone-App. Es gibt jedoch auch vielversprechende Erweiterungen (z. B. Triggeranalyse) und neue Ansätze wie digitale Anleitungen zu Entspannung und Ausdauersport, Chatbots für die Patienten sowie Unterstützung der Ärzte durch strukturierte Erhebung von Patientendaten und deren Verarbeitung zu Diagnosezwecken.

Schlussfolgerung

Verschiedene Ansätze der Digitalisierung könnten zukünftig Behandler und Patient effektiv in der Kopfschmerzbehandlung und Therapiebegleitung unterstützen. Allerdings sind qualitativ hochwertige Studien notwendig, um ihren Nutzen und ihre Effektivität zu evaluieren.

User Design and Experience Preferences in a Novel Smartphone Application for Migraine Management: A Think Aloud Study of the RELAXaHEAD Application

OBJECTIVE

Scalable nonpharmacologic treatment options are needed for chronic pain conditions. Migraine is an ideal condition to test smartphone-based mind-body interventions (MBIs) because it is a very prevalent, costly, disabling condition. Progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) is a standardized, evidence-based MBI previously adapted for smartphone applications for other conditions. We sought to examine the usability of the RELAXaHEAD application (app), which has a headache diary and PMR capability.

METHODS

Using the "Think Aloud" approach, we iteratively beta-tested RELAXaHEAD in people with migraine. Individual interviews were conducted, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Using Grounded Theory, we conducted thematic analysis. Participants also were asked Likert scale questions about satisfaction with the app and the PMR.

RESULTS

Twelve subjects participated in the study. The mean duration of the interviews (SD, range) was 36 (11, 19-53) minutes. From the interviews, four main themes emerged. People were most interested in app utility/practicality, user interface, app functionality, and the potential utility of the PMR. Participants reported that the daily diary was easy to use (75%), was relevant for tracking headaches (75%), maintained their interest and attention (75%), and was easy to understand (83%). Ninety-two percent of the participants would be happy to use the app again. Participants reported that PMR maintained their interest and attention (75%) and improved their stress and low mood (75%).

CONCLUSIONS

The RELAXaHEAD app may be acceptable and useful to migraine participants. Future studies will examine the use of the RELAXaHEAD app to deliver PMR to people with migraine in a low-cost, scalable manner.

More Attacks and Analgesic Use in Old Age: Self-Reported Headache Across the Lifespan in a German Sample

Background: Reliable population-based data on the prevalence and characteristics of primary headache across the lifespan are essential. However, robust data are lacking.

Methods: We utilized questionnaire data from a random general population sample in Germany, that comprised 2,478 participants aged ≥14 years. A standardized questionnaire addressing headache and headache treatment was filled in during the face-to-face survey.

Results: The 6-month prevalence of self-reported headache in the total sample amounted to 39.0% (known diagnosis of migraine 7.2%; tension-type headache 12.4%; another diagnosis or unknown diagnosis 23.4%). Age-specific prevalence rates were 37.9% (14–34 years), 44.6% (35–54 years), 38.5% (55–74 years), and 26.9% (≥75 years). Compared to age group 14–34, participants aged 35–54 were more (OR = 1.29, 95%-CI 1.05–1.60, p = 0.018) and those aged ≥75 were less (OR = 0.55, 95%-CI 0.40–0.76, p < 0.001) likely to have any headache. Of the participants with headache, 79.5% reported headache on <4 days per month, 15.6% on 4–14 days per month and 4.9% on >14 days per month. The frequency of headache did not differ significantly between age groups in men [χ(3, N = 384)2 = 1.45, p > 0.05], but in women [χ(3, N = 651)2 = 21.57, p < 0.001]: women aged ≥75 years were over-represented in the group reporting 4–14 headache days per month. The analgesic use (days per month) differed significantly between age groups among participants with headache on <4 days per month and on >14 days per month: 1.8 (14–34 years), 2.5 (35–54 years), 3.2 (55–74 years), and 3.4 (≥75 years), respectively 7.9 (14–34 years), 11.4 (35–54 years), 18.4 (55–74 years), and 22.8 (≥75 years).

Conclusions: In general, the prevalence of headache decreases with age. However, older women suffer from more frequent attacks and older participants take analgesics on more days per month than younger participants. This might put them at risk of medication overuse which may lead to medication overuse headache. More research is needed to understand these specifics in headache frequency and treatment behavior in older people.

Hints on Diagnosing and Treating Headache

BACKGROUND

Headache, like dizziness, is one of the more common presenting complaints in outpatient care and in the emergency room. More than 200 varieties of headache have been described, and the false impression may arise that the diagnosis and treatment of these syndromes is a highly challenging task.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a selective search in PubMed.

RESULTS

In primary headache, the headache is not a symptom but a disease in its own right. There are four types of primary headache: migraine, tension headache, trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia, and other primary headache disorders. By definition, the physical examination is normal, including the neurological examination. Secondary headache, in contrast, is a symptom of another disease (e.g., a tumor or cerebral hemorrhage). Triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) are the drugs usually given for the acute treatment and prophylaxis of migraine. In tension headache, NSAID are given acutely, and tricyclic drugs for prophylaxis. There are various options for the treatment of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia syndromes such as cluster headache and paroxysmal hemicrania. For group 4 headaches (other primary headache disorders), the treatment must be chosen on an individual basis; indomethacin is often effective.

CONCLUSION

If the patient is clearly suffering from none of the four types of primary headache, the problem must be a headache of a secondary nature, potentially reflecting a dangerous underlying disease. The treatment of headache is usually successful and thus highly rewarding for physicians of all medical specialties.

Complementary and Integrative Health Treatments for Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a chronic disabling neurologic condition that can be treated with a combination of both pharmacologic and complementary and integrative health options.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

With the growing interest in the US population in the use of nonpharmacologic treatments, we reviewed the evidence for supplements and behavioral interventions used for migraine prevention.

RESULTS

Supplements reviewed included vitamins, minerals, and certain herbal preparations. Behavioral interventions reviewed included cognitive behavioral therapy, biofeedback, relaxation, the third-wave therapies, acupuncture, hypnosis, and aerobic exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

This article should provide an appreciation for the wide range of nonpharmacologic therapies that might be offered to patients in place of or in addition to migraine-preventive medications.

Treatment of migraine attacks and prevention of migraine: Guidelines by the German Migraine and Headache Society and the German Society of Neurology

In collaboration with some of the leading headache centres in Germany, Switzerland and Austria, we have established new guidelines for the treatment of migraine attacks and the prevention of migraine. A thorough literature research of the last 10 years has been the basis of the current recommendations. At the beginning, we present therapeutic novelties, followed by a summary of all recommendations. After an introduction, we cover topics like drug therapy and practical experience, non-effective medication, migraine prevention, interventional methods, non-medicational and psychological methods for prevention and therapies without proof of efficacy.

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.

[Progressive muscle relaxation according to Jacobson for migraine prophylaxis : Clinical effectiveness and mode of action]

Progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) after Jacobson has been used for migraine prophylaxis since the early 1970s. Migraine patients are assumed to have an enhanced autonomic arousal which can be counterbalanced by systematic relaxation. Relaxation techniques are thought to reduce the activation level, to alter cortical pain processing and to enhance activation in pain-reducing cortical structures in the periaqueductal grey matter. Meta-analyses could show PMR to be just as efficacious as pharmacological treatment options. A beneficial effect can only arise if regular daily exercises of 5-25 min are performed and the exercises are transferred into the daily routine. This review critically summarizes the empirical findings concerning the effects of PMR on migraine. A lack of recent research on this topic was determined. In a study by this group 50 migraine patients and 46 healthy controls were examined. It could be shown that in addition to the clinical efficacy on migraine frequency, changes in cortical information processing, measured by means of the evoked potential contingent negative variation (CNV) could also be determined. The initially increased CNV amplitude became normalized after regular PMR training in migraine patients. With the review of PMR studies on migraine prophylaxis and the results of our own study it could be shown that PMR is an efficacious non-pharmacological treatment option for migraine prophylaxis. In addition to its clinical effects, alterations in cortical stimulation processing in terms of a normalization of the CNV could be documented.

Current Prophylactic Medications for Migraine and Their Potential Mechanisms of Action

A relatively high number of different medications is currently used for migraine prevention in clinical practice. Although these compounds were initially developed for other indications and differ in their mechanisms of action, some general themes can be identified from the mechanisms at play. Efficacious preventive drugs seem to either suppress excitatory nervous signaling via sodium and/or calcium receptors, facilitate GABAergic inhibition, reduce neuronal sensitization, block cortical spreading depression and/or reduce circulating levels of CGRP. We here review such mechanisms for the different compounds.

An update on behavioral treatments in migraine - current knowledge and future options

INTRODUCTION

Besides pharmacological and interventional treatments a variety of non-medical therapeutic options exist for migraine, which has largely been derived from behavioral therapy. Areas covered: For our update we collected available studies via PubMed searches. This review highlights that already consulting of the patient is able to reduce the frequency of migraine attacks. Relaxation techniques, especially progressive muscle relaxation, and various types of biofeedback are effective, as is the implementation of cognitive behavioral therapy. However, recent reviews also point to some existing inconsistencies and methodological limitations. The advent of modern information technology based approaches (e.g. online therapy, smartphone applications) further advanced the arsenal of behavioral treatment regimes. The combination of behavioral treatment options and the combination with pharmacotherapy lead to additive effects. In modern multidisciplinary treatment approaches, behavioral therapy is an indispensable component. Expert commentary: Behavioral treatment in prophylaxis of migraine is as effective as pharmacological treatment with additional effects when pharmacological and behavioral treatment is applied in combination. Novel treatment approaches using online technology and electronic devices offer interesting options that will spread more in the future.