Search

The Global Campaign against Headache, as a collaborative activity with the World Health Organization (WHO), was formally launched in Copenhagen in March 2004. In the month it turns 18, we review its activities and achievements, from initial determination of its strategic objectives, through partnerships and project management, knowledge acquisition and awareness generation, to evidence-based proposals for change justified by cost-effectiveness analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Headache and facial pain are among the most common, disabling and costly diseases in Europe, which demands for high quality health care on all levels within the health system. The role of the Danish Headache Society is to educate and advocate for the needs of patients with headache and facial pain. Therefore, the Danish Headache Society has launched a third version of the guideline for the diagnosis, organization and treatment of the most common types of headaches and facial pain in Denmark. The second edition was published in Danish in 2010 and has been a great success, but as new knowledge and treatments have emerged it was timely to revise the guideline. The recommendations for the primary headaches and facial pain are largely in accordance with the European guidelines produced by the European Academy of Neurology. The guideline should be used a practical tool for use in daily clinical practice for primary care physicians, neurologists with a common interest in headache, as well as other health-care professionals treating headache patients. The guideline first describes how to examine and diagnose the headache patient and how headache treatment is organized in Denmark. This description is followed by sections on the characteristics, diagnosis and treatment of each of the most common primary and secondary headache disorders and trigeminal neuralgia. The guideline includes many tables to facilitate a quick overview. Finally, the particular challenges regarding migraine and female hormones as well as headache in children are addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic post-traumatic headache (CPTH) after mild head injury can be difficult to manage. Research is scarce and successful interventions are lacking. To evaluate the effect of a group-based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) intervention in relation to headache, pain perception, psychological symptoms and quality of life in patients with CPTH. Methods: Ninety patients with CPTH according to ICHD-2 criteria were enrolled from the Danish Headache Center into a randomized, controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned to either a waiting list group or to a nine-week CBT group intervention. At baseline and after 26 weeks all patients completed the Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire, SF-36, SCL-90-R and a headache diary. Results: The CBT had no effect on headache and pressure pain thresholds and only a minor impact on the CPTH patients’ quality of life, psychological distress, and the overall experience of symptoms. The waiting-list group experienced no change in headache but, opposed to the treatment group, a significant decrease in somatic and cognitive symptoms indicating a spontaneous remission over time. Conclusions: Our primarily negative findings confirm that management of patients with CPTH still remains a considerable challenge. Psychological group therapy with CBT might be effective in an earlier stage of CPTH and in less severely affected patients but our findings strongly underline the need for randomized controlled studies to test the efficacy of psychological therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) often resists to prophylactic pharmaceutical treatments resulting in patients’ life damage. In this rare but pragmatic situation escalation to invasive management is needed but framing criteria are lacking. We aimed to reach a consensus for refractory CCH definition for clinical and research use. The preparation of the final consensus followed three stages. Internal between authors, a larger between all European Headache Federation members and finally an international one among all investigators that have published clinical studies on cluster headache the last five years. Eighty-five investigators reached by email. Proposed criteria were in the format of the International Classification of Headache Disorders III-beta (description, criteria, notes, comments and references). Following this evaluation eight drafts were prepared before the final. Twenty-four (28.2%) international investigators commented during two rounds. Refractory CCH is described in the present consensus as a situation that fulfills the criteria of ICHD-3 beta for CCH with at least three severe attacks per week despite at least three consecutive trials of adequate preventive treatments. The condition is rare, but difficult to manage and invasive treatments may be needed. The consensus addresses five specific clinical and paraclinical diagnostic criteria followed by three notes and specific comments. Although refractory CCH may be not a separate identity these specific diagnostic criteria should help clinicians and investigators to improve patient’s quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The medical treatment of patients with chronic primary headache syndromes (chronic migraine, chronic tension-type headache, chronic cluster headache, hemicrania continua) is challenging as serious side effects frequently complicate the course of medical treatment and some patients may be even medically intractable. When a definitive lack of responsiveness to conservative treatments is ascertained and medication overuse headache is excluded, neuromodulation options can be considered in selected cases. Here, the various invasive and non-invasive approaches, such as hypothalamic deep brain stimulation, occipital nerve stimulation, stimulation of sphenopalatine ganglion, cervical spinal cord stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation are extensively published although proper RCT-based evidence is limited. The European Headache Federation herewith provides a consensus statement on the clinical use of neuromodulation in headache, based on theoretical background, clinical data, and side effect of each method. This international consensus further gives recommendations for future studies on these new approaches. In spite of a growing field of stimulation devices in headaches treatment, further controlled studies to validate, strengthen and disseminate the use of neurostimulation are clearly warranted. Consequently, until these data are available any neurostimulation device should only be used in patients with medically intractable syndromes from tertiary headache centers either as part of a valid study or have shown to be effective in such controlled studies with an acceptable side effect profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prevalence of cluster headache is 0.1% and cluster headache is often not diagnosed or misdiagnosed as migraine or sinusitis. In cluster headache there is often a considerable diagnostic delay - an average of 7 years in a population-based survey. Cluster headache is characterized by very severe or severe orbital or periorbital pain with a duration of 15-180 minutes. The cluster headache attacks are accompanied by characteristic associated uni-lateral symptoms such as tearing, nasal congestion and/or rhinorrhoea, eyelid oedema, miosis and/or ptosis. In addition, there is a sense of restlessness and agitation. Patients may have up to eight attacks per day. Episodic cluster headache (ECH) occurs in clusters of weeks to months duration, whereas chronic cluster headache (CCH) attacks occur for more than 1 year without remissions. Management of cluster headache is divided into acute attack treatment and prophylactic treatment. In ECH and CCH the attacks can be treated with oxygen (12 L/min) or subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg. For both oxygen and Sumatriptan ther e are two randomized, placebo-controlled trials demon-strating efficacy. In both ECH and CCH, verapamil is the prophylactic drug of choice. Verapamil 360 mg/day was found to be superior to placebo in one clinical trial. In clinical practice, daily doses of480-720mg are mostly used. Thus, the dose of verapamil used in cluster headache treatment may be double the dose used in cardiology, and with the higher doses the PR interval should be checked with an ECG. At the start of a cluster, transitional preventive treatment such as corticosteroids or greater occipital nerve blockade can be given. In CCH and in long-standing clusters of ECH, lithium, methysergide, topiramate, valproic acid and ergotamine tartrate can be used as add-on prophylactic treatment. In drug-resistant CCH, neuromodulation with either occipital nerve stim-ulation or deep brain stimulation of the hypothalamus is an alternative treatment strategy. For most cluster headache patients there are fairly good treatment options both for acute attacks and for prophylaxis. The big problem is the diagnosis of cluster headache as demonstrated by the diagnostic delay of 7 years. How-ever, the relatively short-lasting attack of pain in one eye with typical asso-ciated symptoms should lead the family doctor to suspect cluster headache resulting in a referral to a neurologist or a headache centre with experience in the treatment of cluster headache. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Framing education on headache disorders into the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The European Headache Federation stands ready. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension (IIH) is characterized by an elevation of intracranial pressure (ICP no identifiable cause. The aetiology remains largely unknown, however observations made in a number of recent clinical studies are increasing the understanding of the disease and now provide the basis for evidence-based treatment strategies.Methods: The Embase, CDSR, CENTRAL, DARE and MEDLINE databases were searched up to 1st June 2018. We analyzed randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews that investigate IIH.Results: Diagnostic uncertainty, headache morbidity and visual loss are among the highest concerns of clinicians and patients in this disease area. Research in this field is infrequent due to the rarity of the disease and the lack of understanding of the underlying pathology.Conclusions: This European Headache Federation consensus paper provides evidence-based recommendations and practical advice on the investigation and management of IIH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Factors associated with development of medication-overuse headache (MOH) in migraine patients are not fully understood, but with respect to prevention, the ability to predict the onset of MOH is clinically important. The aims were to examine if personality characteristics, disability and physical activity level are associated with the onset of MOH in a group of migraine patients and explore to which extend these factors combined can predict the onset of MOH.Methods: The study was a single-center prospective observational study of migraine patients. At inclusion, all patients completed questionnaires evaluating 1) personality (NEO Five-Factor Inventory), 2) disability (Migraine Disability Assessment), and 3) physical activity level (Physical Activity Scale 2.1). Diagnostic codes from patients’ electronic health records confirmed if they had developed MOH during the study period of 20 months. Analyses of associations were performed and to identify which of the variables predict onset MOH, a multivariable least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic regression model was fitted to predict presence or absence of MOH.Results: Out of 131 participants, 12 % (n=16) developed MOH. Migraine disability score (OR=1.02, 95 % CI: 1.00 to 1.04), intensity of headache (OR=1.49, 95 % CI: 1.03 to 2.15) and headache frequency (OR=1.02, 95 % CI: 1.00 to 1.04) were associated with the onset of MOH adjusting for age and gender. To identify which of the variables predict onset MOH, we used a LASSO regression model, and evaluating the predictive performance of the LASSO-mode (containing the predictors MIDAS score, MIDAS-intensity and -frequency, neuroticism score, time with moderate physical activity, educational level, hours of sleep daily and number of contacts to the headache clinic) in terms of area under the curve (AUC) was weak (apparent AUC=0.62, 95% CI: 0.41-0.82).Conclusion: Disability, headache intensity and frequency were associated with the onset of MOH whereas personality and the level of physical activity were not. The multivariable LASSO model based on personality, disability and physical activity is applicable despite moderate study size, however it can be considered as a weak classifier for discriminating between absence and presence of MOH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paracetamol (N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP), otherwise known as acetaminophen) is the active ingredient in more than 600 medications used to relieve mild to moderate pain and reduce fever. APAP is widely used by pregnant women as governmental agencies, including the FDA and EMA, have long considered APAP appropriate for use during pregnancy when used as directed. However, increasing experimental and epidemiological research suggests that prenatal exposure to APAP might alter fetal development, which could increase the risks of some neurodevelopmental, reproductive and urogenital disorders. Here we summarize this evidence and call for precautionary action through a focused research effort and by increasing awareness among health professionals and pregnant women. APAP is an important medication and alternatives for treatment of high fever and severe pain are limited. We recommend that pregnant women should be cautioned at the beginning of pregnancy to: forego APAP unless its use is medically indicated; consult with a physician or pharmacist if they are uncertain whether use is indicated and before using on a long-term basis; and minimize exposure by using the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible time. We suggest specific actions to implement these recommendations. This Consensus Statement reflects our concerns and is currently supported by 91 scientists, clinicians and public health professionals from across the globe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]