Search

Background: Headache is one of the most prevalent and disabling conditions. Its optimal management requires a coordinated and comprehensive response by health systems, but there is still a wide variability that compromises the quality and safety of the care process., Purpose: To establish the basis for designing a care pathway for headache patients through identifying key subpathways in the care process and setting out quality and clinical safety standards that contribute to providing comprehensive, adequate and safe healthcare., Method: A qualitative research study based on the consensus conference technique. Eleven professionals from the Spanish National Health System participated, seven of them with clinical experience in headache and four specialists in healthcare management and quality. First, identification of the key subpathways in the care process for headache, barriers/limitations for optimal quality of care, and quality and safety standards applied in each subpathway. Second, two consecutive consensus rounds were carried out to assess the content of the subpathway level descriptors, until the expert agreement was reached. Third, findings were assessed by 17 external healthcare professionals to determine their understanding, adequacy and usefulness., Results: Seven key subpathways were identified: (1) primary care, (2) emergency department, (3) neurology department, (4) specialised headache unit, (5) hospitalisation, (6) outpatients and (7) governance and management. Sixty-seventh barriers were identified, the most frequent being related to diagnostic errors (36,1%), resource deficiency (25%), treatment errors (19,4%), lack of health literacy (13,9%) and inadequate communications with care transitions (5,6%). Fifty-nine quality and 31 safety standards were defined. They were related to evaluation (23.3%), patient safety (21.1%), comprehensive care (12.2%), treatment (12.2%), clinical practice guidelines (7.8%), counselling (6.7%), training (4.4%) and patient satisfaction (3.3%)., Conclusions: This proposal incorporates a set of indicators and standards, which can be used to define a pathway for headache patients and determine the levels of quality., Competing Interests: Competing interests: This study has been sponsored by Novartis, but no laboratory professional has been involved in the design of the work, recruitment of professionals, data collection and analysis, or in the interpretation of the results. The authors of the paper have developed the entire process of execution of the study independently., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Visits due to headaches are the most frequent cause of demand for neurological treatment in primary care and neurology services. Headache units improve the quality of care, reduce waiting lists, facilitate access to new treatments of proven efficacy and optimise healthcare expenditure. However, these units have not been implemented on a widespread basis in Spain due to the relatively low importance attributed to the condition and also the assumption that such units have a high cost., Aim: To define the structure and minimum requirements of a headache unit with the intention of contributing to their expansion in hospitals in Spain., Subjects and Methods: We conducted a consensus study among professionals after reviewing the literature on the structure, functions and resources required by a headache unit designed to serve an area with 350,000 inhabitants., Results: Eight publications were taken as a reference for identifying the minimum resources needed for a headache unit. The panel of experts was made up of 12 professionals from different specialties. The main resource required to be able to implement these units is the professional staff (both supervisory and technical), which can mean an additional cost for the first year of around 107,287.19 euros., Conclusions: If we bear in mind the direct and indirect costs due to losses in labour productivity per patient and compare them with the estimated costs involved in implementing these units and their expected results, everything points to the need for headache units to become generalised in Spain.

Background: Headache is one of the most prevalent diseases. The Global Burden of Disease Study ranks it as the seventh most common disease overall and the second largest neurological cause of disability in the world. The "Do Not Do" recommendations are a strategy for increasing the quality of care and reducing the cost of care for headache. This study aimed to identify specific low-value practices in headache care, determine their frequency, and estimate the cost overrun that they represent, in order to establish "Do not Do" recommendations specifically for headache by consensus and according to scientific evidence., Methods: This was a mixed methods research study that combined qualitative consensus-building techniques, involving a multidisciplinary panel of experts to define the "Do Not Do" recommendations in headache care, and a retrospective observational study with review of a randomized set of patient records from the past 6 months in four hospitals, to quantify the frequency of these "Do Not Do" practices. We calculated the sum of direct costs of medical consultations, medicines, and unnecessary diagnostic tests., Results: Seven "Do Not Do" recommendations were established for headache. In total, 3507 medical records were randomly reviewed. Low-value practices had a highly variable occurrence, depending on the hospital and type of headache. Overall, 34.1% of low-value practices were related to treatment, 21% were related to overuse of imaging in consultation, and 19% were related to emergency care. The estimated cost of low-value practices in the four hospitals was 203,520.47 euros per 1000 patients., Conclusions: This study identified low-value headache practices that need to be eradicated and provided data on their frequency and cost overruns.

Objective: To assess the quality of the therapeutic approach in Specialized Headache Units in Spain., Methods: An observational (prospective) study was conducted. Anonymized data of 313 consecutive patients during a defined period of time were analyzed and a comparison of performance in 13 consensual quality indicators between Specialized Headache Units and neurology consultations was calculated. Specialized Units and neurology consultations represented the type of provision that Spaniards receive in hospitals., Results: The consensus benchmark standard was reached for 8/13 (61%) indicators. Specialized Headache Units performed better in the indicators, specifically in relation to accessibility, equity, safety, and patient satisfaction. Patients attended in Specialized Headache Units had more complex conditions., Conclusion: Although there is variability among Specialized Headache Units, the overall quality was generally better than in traditional neurology consultations in Spain.

COVID-19 is a highly infectious viral disease caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. While it was initially regarded as a strictly respiratory illness, the impact of COVID-19 on multiple organs is increasingly recognized. The brain is among the targets of COVID-19, and it can be impacted in multiple ways, both directly and indirectly. Direct brain infection by SARS-CoV-2 may occur via axonal transport via the olfactory nerve, eventually infecting the olfactory cortex and other structures in the temporal lobe, and potentially the brain stem. A hematogenous route, which involves viral crossing of blood-brain barrier, is also possible. Secondary mechanisms involve hypoxia due to respiratory failure, as well as aberrant immune response leading to various forms of encephalopathy, white matter damage, and abnormal blood clotting resulting in stroke. Multiple neurological symptoms of COVID-19 have been described. These involve anosmia/ageusia, headaches, seizures, mental confusion and delirium, and coma. There is a growing concern that in a number of patients, long-term or perhaps even permanent cognitive impairment will persist well after the recovery from acute illness. Furthermore, COVID-19 survivors may be at increased risk for developing neurodegenerative diseases years or decades later. Since COVID-19 is a new disease, it will take months or even years to characterize the exact nature, scope, and temporal extent of its long-term neurocognitive sequelae. To that end, rigorous and systematic longitudinal follow-up will be required. For this effort to succeed, appropriate protocols and patient registries should be developed and put in place without delay now.