Search

Background: New treatments are currently offering new opportunities and challenges in clinical management and research in the migraine field. There is the need of homogenous criteria to identify candidates for treatment escalation as well as of reliable criteria to identify refractoriness to treatment. To overcome those issues, the European Headache Federation (EHF) issued a Consensus document to propose criteria to approach difficult-to-treat migraine patients in a standardized way. The Consensus proposed well-defined criteria for resistant migraine (i.e., patients who do not respond to some treatment but who have residual therapeutic opportunities) and refractory migraine (i.e., patients who still have debilitating migraine despite maximal treatment efforts). The aim of this study was to better understand the perceived impact of resistant and refractory migraine and the attitude of physicians involved in migraine care toward those conditions. Methods: We conducted a web-questionnaire-based cross-sectional international study involving physicians with interest in headache care. Results: There were 277 questionnaires available for analysis. A relevant proportion of participants reported that patients with resistant and refractory migraine were frequently seen in their clinical practice (49.5% for resistant and 28.9% for refractory migraine); percentages were higher when considering only those working in specialized headache centers (75% and 46% respectively). However, many physicians reported low or moderate confidence in managing resistant (8.1% and 43.3%, respectively) and refractory (20.7% and 48.4%, respectively) migraine patients; confidence in treating resistant and refractory migraine patients was different according to the level of care and to the number of patients visited per week. Patients with resistant and refractory migraine were infrequently referred to more specialized centers (12% and 19%, respectively); also in this case, figures were different according to the level of care. Conclusions: This report highlights the clinical relevance of difficult-to-treat migraine and the presence of unmet needs in this field. There is the need of more evidence regarding the management of those patients and clear guidance referring to the organization of care and available opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Headache disorders and psychiatric disorders are both common, while evidence, mostly pertaining to migraine, suggests they are comorbid more often than might be expected by chance. There are good reasons for establishing whether they are: symptoms of comorbid illnesses may summate synergistically; comorbidities hinder management, negatively influencing outcomes; high-level comorbidity indicates that, where one disease occurs, the other should be looked for. The Eurolight project gathered population-based data on these disorders from 6624 participants. Methods: Eurolight was a cross-sectional survey sampling from the adult populations (18-65 years) of 10 EU countries. We used data from six. The questionnaire included headache-diagnostic questions based on ICHD-II, the Headache-Attributed Lost Time (HALT) questionnaire, and HADS for depression and anxiety. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) to show associations between migraine, tension-type headache (TTH) or probable medication-overuse headache (pMOH) and depression or anxiety. Results: pMOH was most strongly associated with both psychiatric disorders: for depression, ORs ( vs no headache) were 5.5 [2.2-13.5] ( p < 0.0001) in males, 5.5 [2.9-10.5] ( p < 0.0001) in females; for anxiety, ORs were 10.4 [4.9-21.8] ( p < 0.0001) and 7.1 [4.5-11.2] ( p < 0.0001). Migraine was also associated with both: for depression, ORs were 2.1 [1.3-3.4] ( p = 0.002) and 1.8 [1.1-3.1] ( p = 0.030); for anxiety 4.2 [2.8-6.3] ( p < 0.0001) and 2.4 [1.7-3.4] ( p < 0.0001). TTH showed associations only with anxiety: ORs 2.5 [1.7-3.7] ( p < 0.0001) for males, 1.5 [1.1-2.1] ( p = 0.021) for females. Participants with migraine carried 19.1 % probability of comorbid anxiety, 6.9 % of depression and 5.1 % of both, higher than the representative general-population sample (14.3, 5.6 and 3.8 %). Probabilities in those with MOH were 38.8, 16.9 and 14.4 %; in TTH, they did not exceed those of the whole sample. Comorbid psychiatric disorder did not add to headache-attributed productive time losses, but weak associations existed ( R = 0.020-0.082) for all headache types between lost productive time and probabilities of depression and, less so, anxiety. Conclusion: In this large study we confirmed that depression and especially anxiety are comorbid more than by chance with migraine, and showed the same is true, but more strongly, with MOH. Arguably, migraine patients and, more certainly, MOH patients should be screened with HADS in pursuit of best outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recurrent and especially chronic headaches are associated with psychiatric comorbidities such as depression and anxiety. Only few studies examined the impact of depression and anxiety on episodic (EH) and chronic headache (CH), and data for Austria are missing at all. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the impact of depression and anxiety on burden and management of EH and CH in patients from eight Austrian headache centres. Methods: We included 392 patients (84.1 % female, mean age 40.4 ± 14.0 years) who completed the Eurolight questionnaire. The treating physician recorded details about ever-before prophylactic medications. We used Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale to assess depression and anxiety and compared patients with anxiety and/or depression to those without. Results: Depression and anxiety were more common in CH than in EH (64 % vs. 41 %, p < 0.0001). Presence compared to absence of depression and anxiety increased the prevalence of poor or very poor quality of life from 0.7 % to 13.1 % in EH and from 3.6 % to 40.3 % in CH ( p = 0.001; p < 0.0001). Depression and anxiety had a statistically significant impact on employment status and on variables related to the burden of headache such as reduced earnings, being less successful in career, or feeling less understood. Neither in EH nor in CH health care use and the ever-before use of prophylactic medication was correlated with anxiety and/or depression. Conclusion: Depression and anxiety have a significant impact on quality of life and increase the burden in patients with EH and CH. Improved multidimensional treatment approaches are necessary to decrease disability on the personal, social and occupational level in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Whether neck pain (NP) is a prodromal migraine symptom or belongs to the migraine attack feature remains controversial. Methods: In order to prospectively record neck pain (NP) and non-headache symptoms and to evaluate the percentage of patients having NP as clear premonitory, non-headache symptom of their migraine, a specific self fulfilled questionnaire was designed to record NP and premonitory symptoms in a migraine cohort. All patients who reported NP anytime during the migraine phase were allocated to 3 groups: A = NP starts with the onset of headache; B = NP starts < 2 h before the onset of headache; C = NP starts 2-48 h before the onset of headache. Results: Data were evaluated from 487 migraineurs with episodic migraine (73.1 % females; 77 % had migraine without aura). 338 patients (69.4 %) reported NP anytime during the migraine phase. 184 patients (group A; 54.4 %) noticed NP with the start of the headache phase; 118 patients (group B; 24.2 %) reported NP within 2 h before the headache phase; 36 patients (group C; 7.4 %) experienced NP 2-48 h before the headache phase. In group B we found a high proportion of typical migraine associated symptoms and NP progressed into the headache phase in 82.2 %. Conclusions: These data indicate that NP is a very common feature of migraine attacks and is more likely to be part of the migraine attack than a prodromal migraine symptom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Episodic and chronic headaches (EH, CH) are highly prevalent disorders. Severely affected patients are usually referred to headache centres. In Austria, at least one headache centre is available in seven of nine states, but detailed multicentre data are missing. Therefore we studied prevalence rates, use of medication and health care services, impact of headaches, and comorbid depression and anxiety. Methods: We included consecutive patients from eight Austrian outpatient headache centres. The patients filled-in the Eurolight questionnaire. In addition, the treating neurologist completed a questionnaire on clinical diagnoses and ever-before prophylactic medications. Results: Of 598 patients screened, 441 questionnaires were analysed (79% female, mean age 41.1 years). According to the Eurolight algorithm, 56.4% of the patients had EH, 38.3% had CH and 5.2% did not give their headache frequency. The prevalence rates of migraine, tension-type headache, and probable medication overuse headache (pMOH) were 48.5%, 6.3% and 15.9%, respectively. The concordance between clinical and Eurolight diagnoses was good for EH and moderate for CH. During the preceding month, acute medication was used by 90.9% of the patients and prophylactic medication by 34%. Ever-before use of five standard prophylactic drugs was recorded in 52.3%. The proportion of patients with current pharmacoprophylaxis did not differ in EH and CH, whereas ever-before use was more common in CH (62.5% was 45,3%, p = 0.02). Patients with CH significantly more often consulted general practitioners and emergency departments, had a lower quality of life and more often signs of depression and anxiety. Conclusion: This study provides comprehensive data from eight Austrian headache centres for the first time. We found a substantial number of patients with CH including pMOH and its association with more common utilization of health care facilities and greater burden. The low use of prophylactic medication requires further examination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We asked whether attempts to introduce headache services in poor countries would be futile on grounds of cost and unsustainability. Using data from a population-based survey in the Republic of Georgia, an exemplary poor country with limited health care, and against the background of headache-attributed burden, we report on willingness to pay (WTP) for effective headache treatment. Consecutive households were visited in areas of Tbilisi (urban) and Kakheti (rural), together representative of Georgian habitation. Biologically unrelated adults were interviewed by medical residents using a structured ICHD-II-based diagnostic questionnaire, the MIDAS questionnaire and SF-36. The bidding-game method was employed to assess WTP. Of 1,145 respondents, 50.0% had episodic headache (migraine and/or tension-type headache) and 7.6% had headache on ≥15 days/month, which was not further diagnosed. MIDAS scores were higher in people with headache on ≥15 days/month (mean 11.2) than in those with episodic headache (mean 7.0; P = 0.004). People with headache had worse scores in all SF-36 sub-scales than those without, but no differences were found between headache types. Almost all (93%) respondents with headache reported WTP averaging USD 8 per month for effective headache treatment. WTP did not correlate with headache type or frequency, or with MIDAS or SF-36 scores. Headache is common and headache-attributed burden is high in Georgia, with a profound impact on HRQoL. Even those less affected indicated WTP for effective treatment, if it were available, that would on average cover costs, which locally are low. Headache services in a poor country are potentially sustainable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim: Migraine headache and vestibular-type vertigo co-occur in the general population about three times more often than expected by chance. Attacks of episodic vertigo (eV) are currently not recognized as migraine equivalents or variants in the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD III). No strong data exist about the prevalence of eV during the phases of a migraine attack. The aim of this study is to analyze the timing association between migraine-related episodic vertigo and the phases of migraine. Methods: The "Migraine and Neck Pain Study" gathered data from nearly 500 adult participants in a questionnaire-based survey. In this prospective, follow-up study we re-analyzed patients with episodic migraine with and without aura who experienced eV anytime around their migraine attacks. For this we defined 3 different time periods. Results: 146/487 (30%) reported eV anytime during the migraine attack; 79/487 (16%) that noticed eV with the start of the headache, 51/487 (10%) within 2 h before the headache and 16/487 (3%) experienced eV 2–48 h before the headache, as a premonitory symptom. 130/487 (26.7%) of our patients can be diagnosed with vestibular or probable vestibular migraine supporting the clinical association of migraine and vertigo. Conclusions: Our results seem to further support the concept that vertigo in migraine is best thought of as an integral manifestation of migraine, rather than a prodromal or aura symptom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Migraine is prevalent everywhere, and disabling. It is also neglected: consequently, it is under-diagnosed and undertreated. We analysed data from the Eurolight study on consultations and utilization of migraine-specific medications as indicators of adequacy of medical care in Europe.Methods: Eurolight was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey in 10 European countries. Sampling was population-based in six (Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain) and from consecutive patients attending general practitioners (GPs) for any reason in three (Austria, France, UK). Additional samples in Netherlands and Spain, and the only sample from Ireland, were recruited by lay headache organisations. We recorded migraine prevalence and frequency, and utilization of medical services and medications (acute and preventative).Results: Among 9247 participants (mean age 43.9 ± 13.9 years, M/F ratio 1:1.4), 3466 (37.6%) were diagnosed with migraine (definite or probable). Of these, 1175 (33.8%) reported frequent migraine (> 5 days/month) and might clearly expect benefit from, and therefore had need of, preventative medication. In population-based samples, minorities of participants with migraine had seen a GP (9.5–18.0%) or specialist (3.1–15.0%), and smaller minorities received adequate treatment: triptans 3.4–11.0%, with Spain outlying at 22.4%; preventative medication (1.6–6.4% of those eligible, with Spain again outlying at 13.7%). Proportions were greater in GP-based samples (13.6–24.5% using triptans, 4.4–9.1% on preventative medication) and among those from lay organisations (46.2–68.2% and 16.0–41.7%). Participants with migraine who had consulted specialists (3.1–33.8%) were receiving the best care by these indicators; those treated by GPs (9.5–29.6%) fared less well, and those dependent on self-medication (48.0–84.2%) were, apparently, inadequately treated.Conclusion: In wealthy European countries, too few people with migraine consult physicians, with proportionately too many of these seeing specialists, and migraine-specific medications are used inadequately even among those who do. These findings represent yet another call for action in Europe to improve care for people with headache. Education of both health-care providers and the public should be central to this action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We developed a 103-item self-reporting questionnaire to assess the burden of primary headache disorders on those affected by them, including headache characteristics, associated disability, co-morbidities, disease-management and quality of life. We validated the questionnaire in five languages with 426 participants (131 in UK, 60 in Italy, 107 in Spain, 83 in Germany/Austria, and 45 in France). After a linguistic and a face-content validation, we tested the questionnaire for comprehensibility, internal consistency and test—retest reliability at an interval of one month. In the different countries, response rates were between 73% and 100%. Test—retest reliability varied between —0.27 to 1.0 depending of the nature of the expected agreement. The internal consistency was between 0.69 and 0.91. The EUROLIGHT questionnaire is suitable for evaluating the burden of primary headache disorders, and can be used in English, German, French, Italian and Spanish. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]