Search

Abstract Background and aim Migraine is a common disabling conditions which, globally, affects 15.2% of the population. It is the second cause of health loss in terms of years lived with disability, the first among women. Despite being so common, it is poorly recognised and too often undertreated. Specialty centres and neurologists with specific expertise on headache disorders have the knowledge to provide specific care: however, those who do not regularly treat patients with migraine will benefit from a synopsis on the most relevant and updated information about this condition. This paper presents a comprehensive view on the hallmarks of migraine, from genetics and diagnostic markers, up to treatments and societal impact, and reports the elements that identify migraine specific features. Main results The most relevant hallmark of migraine is that it has common and individual features together. Besides the known clinical manifestations, migraine presentation is heterogeneous with regard to frequency of attacks, presence of aura, response to therapy, associated comorbidities or other symptoms, which likely reflect migraine heterogeneous genetic and molecular basis. The amount of therapies for acute and for prophylactic treatment is really wide, and one of the difficulties is with finding the best treatment for the single patient. In addition to this, patients carry out different daily life activities, and might show lifestyle habits which are not entirely adequate to manage migraine day by day. Education will be more and more important as a strategy of brain health promotion, because this will enable reducing the amount of subjects needing specialty care, thus leaving it to those who require it in reason of refractory condition or presence of comorbidities. Conclusions Recognizing the hallmarks of migraine and the features of single patients enables prescribing specific pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. Medical research on headaches today particularly suffers from the syndrome of single-disease approach, but it is important to have a cross-sectional and joint vision with other close specialties, in order to treat our patients with a comprehensive approach that a heterogeneous condition like migraine requires.

Abstract Background Migraine lacks biomarkers that can trace the biological pathways of the disease and predict the effectiveness of treatments. Monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway – including erenumab – offer the opportunity of investigating potential migraine biomarkers due to their specific mechanism of action in preventing both episodic (EM) and chronic (CM) migraine. Our study aims at evaluating the expression levels of circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) according to migraine type, before and after treatment with erenumab and based on treatment response, in order to identify miRNAs with potential role as epigenetic biomarkers. Methods The study included women aged 25–50 years with EM or CM treated with erenumab according to clinical indications. MiRNAs expression levels were assessed before (baseline) and after a 16-week treatment with erenumab, 140 mg every four weeks (post-treatment). An extensive miRNAs profiling was performed by qRT-PCR in small, pooled groups of ≤ 8 women each, classified according to migraine frequency (EM and CM) and the degree of response to erenumab. The expression levels of selected miRNAs were also validated using single miRNA assays in each woman with EM and CM. Results During the study, 36 women with migraine (19 with EM and 17 with CM) out of 40 who were initially screened, performed the assessment of miRNA expression at baseline and post-treatment, Erenumab treatment significantly improved migraine burden in both EM and CM. MiRNA profiling revealed differential expression levels of a wide set of miRNAs (hsa-let-7d-3p, hsa-miR-106b-3p, hsa-miR-122-5p, hsa-miR-143-3p, hsa-miR-144-3p, hsa-miR-16-5p, hsa-miR-181a-5p, hsa-miR-221-3p, hsa-miR-25-3p, hsa-miR-29b-2-5p, hsa-miR-326, miR-363-3p, hsa-miR-424-5p, hsa-miR-485-3p, hsa-miR-532-5p, hsa-miR-543, hsa-miR-629-5p, hsa-miR-660-5p, hsa-miR-92a-3p) depending on treatment response. Among them, single miRNA assays confirmed the progressive decrease of hsa-miR-143-3p expression levels in relation to increasing response to erenumab in women with EM (7 with low, 6 with medium, and 6 with high response; p = 0.02). Additionally, single assays showed higher hsa-miR-34a-5p and hsa-miR-382-5p expression levels at baseline in women with CM compared with those with EM (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.0007, respectively), as well as their expression level decrease in women with CM from baseline to follow-up (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02, respectively). Conclusions Our study suggests that targeting the CGRP pathway in migraine changes the expression levels of certain miRNAs. These miRNA levels are linked to the levels of response to CGRP receptor blockage. Future research challenges include assigning specific functions to the modulated miRNAs to unravel pathways modulated by the disease and the treatment. Trial registration The study was registered in clinicaltrials.gov with code NCT04659226 and in the Novartis database with code CAMG334AIT05T.

Abstract Background Controlled and real-world evidence have demonstrated the efficacy of calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (MABs) in migraine. However, data on the over-one-year sustained effectiveness of CGRP MABs in resistant chronic migraine (CM) is sparse. Methods This is a two-year real-world prospective analysis of an ongoing single centre audit conducted in patients with resistant CM. Patients received monthly erenumab for six months before assessing its effectiveness. Responders were considered those who achieved at least 30% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) by month 6, compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes were also analysed, including changes of the Headache Impact Test version 6 (HIT-6). Results One hundred sixty-four patients [135 (82.3%) females; mean age 46 SD 14) years] were included in the audit and 160 patients analysed. Patients had failed a mean of 8.4 preventive treatments at baseline. At month 6, 76 patients (48%) were 30% responders to erenumab, 50 patients (31%) were 50% responders and 25 (15%) were 75% responders. The mean reduction in MMD at month 6 was 7.5 days compared to baseline (P

Abstract Migraine is a complex condition in which genetic predisposition interacts with other biological and environmental factors determining its course. A hyperresponsive brain cortex, peripheral and central alterations in pain processing, and comorbidities play a role from an individual biological standpoint. Besides, dysfunctional psychological mechanisms, social and lifestyle factors may intervene and impact on the clinical phenotype of the disease, promote its transformation from episodic into chronic migraine and may increase migraine-related disability. Thus, given the multifactorial origin of the condition, the application of a biopsychosocial approach in the management of migraine could favor therapeutic success. While in chronic pain conditions the biopsychosocial approach is already a mainstay of treatment, in migraine the biomedical approach is still dominant. It is instead advisable to carefully consider the individual with migraine as a whole, in order to plan a tailored treatment. In this review, we first reported an analytical and critical discussion of the biological, psychological, and social factors involved in migraine. Then, we addressed the management implications of the application of a biopsychosocial model discussing how the integration between non-pharmacological management and conventional biomedical treatment may provide advantages to migraine care.

Abstract Background Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could counteract the pathophysiological triggers of migraine attacks by modulating cortical excitability. Several pilot randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the efficacy of tDCS for migraine prevention. We reviewed and summarized the state of the art of tDCS protocols for migraine prevention, discussing study results according to the stimulations parameters and patients’ populations. Main body We combined the keywords ‘migraine’, ‘headache’, ‘transcranial direct current stimulation’, and ‘tDCS’ and searched Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science, from the beginning of indexing to June 22, 2021. We only included RCTs comparing the efficacy of active tDCS with sham tDCS to decrease migraine frequency, intensity, and/or acute drug utilization. The risk of bias of each RCT was assessed by using the RoB-2 tool (Cochrane Collaboration). Thirteen RCTs (from 2011 to 2021) were included in the review. The included patients ranged from 13 to 135. RCTs included patients with any migraine (n=3), chronic migraine (n=6), episodic migraine (n=3) or menstrual migraine (n=1). Six RCTs used cathodal and five anodal tDCS, while two RCTs compared the efficacy of both cathodal and anodal tDCS with that of sham. In most of the cathodal stimulation trials, the target areas were the occipital regions, with reference on central or supraorbital areas. In anodal RCTs, the anode was usually placed above the motor cortical areas and the cathode on supraorbital areas. All RCTs adopted repeated sessions (from 5 to 28) at variable intervals, while the follow-up length spanned from 1 day up to 12 months. Efficacy results were variable but overall positive. According to the RoB-2 tool, only four of the 13 RCTs had a low risk of bias, while the others presented some concerns. Conclusions Both anodal and cathodal tDCS are promising for migraine prevention. However, there is a need for larger and rigorous RCTs and standardized procedures. Additionally, the potential benefits and targeted neurostimulation protocols should be assessed for specific subgroups of patients.

BackgroundLiterature suggests an association between patent foramen ovale (PFO) and migraine, mostly migraine with aura (MA). Previous data suggest that air microembolism through PFO can lead to bioelectrical abnormalities detectable at electroencephalogram (EEG) in patients with MA, thus suggesting a pathophysiological mechanism for the MA-PFO association. However, those data lack replication.MethodsPatients with MA or migraine without aura (MO) and large PFO underwent a 19-channel EEG recording before and after injection of air microbubbles. We compared EEG power before and after microbubble injection for each electrode location, for each frequency band (theta: 5–7 Hz; alpha: 8–12 Hz; beta: 13–30 Hz; lower gamma: 31–45 Hz), and for total global power (the average of EEG power at each location and frequency band).ResultsWe included 10 patients, four with MA and six with MO; six patients had medium-to-high migraine frequency (four or more monthly migraine days), while four had low frequency (one monthly migraine day). EEG power changes after air microembolism varied across patients. Considering the overall group, total global EEG power did not change; however, EEG power in the higher frequency ranges (beta and lower gamma) increased in patients with MA.ConclusionsWe did not replicate the effects of air microembolism previously reported in patients with migraine. Aura status, migraine frequency, and medications might influence patients' response to microembolism. More refined EEG measurements are needed to clarify the dynamic role of PFO on migraine occurrence.

Abstract Background In postgraduate intensive care nursing courses, high-fidelity simulation is useful to prepare students to guarantee safe and quality care of critically ill patients. Surprisingly, this issue has not attracted sufficient attention in the literature, and it is not clear whether the linear application of the traditional high-fidelity simulation method based on prebriefing, the simulation session and debriefing, can serve as empirical reference in postgraduate students’ education. The aim of this study was to investigate the lived experiences of postgraduate students receiving multiple exposures to an innovative high-fidelity simulation design based on Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory. Methods A phenomenological study was conducted at an Italian University involving a purposive sample of 15 nursing students attending the postgraduate intensive care course. Audio-recorded face-to-face in-depth interviews were held by a researcher in a dedicated room complemented with non-verbal communication outlined in the field notes. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcribed data. Results Three themes and ten categories were derived from the data analysis. The themes included pragmatic learning experience, the emotional path, and confidence. Conclusions Multiple exposure to high-fidelity simulation was lived as a pragmatic learning experience enhancing the students’ ability to apply theory into practice. This novel approach also contributed to the transition from negative to positive feelings and improved students’ confidence about technical and non-technical skills when caring for a critically ill patient.

Abstract Gradual replacement of the mercury thermometers with alternative devices is ongoing around the world in a bid to protect human health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury. However, to reduce the risks of misdiagnosis, unnecessary treatments, and omission of care in pediatric populations, more evidence on the reliability of alternative thermometers is needed. The aim of this comparative observational study was to detect any differences in temperature measurements between the use of the axillary mercury thermometer and the alternative techniques. Temperature values in degree Celsius (°C) were measured in a group of Albanian children aged up to 14 years using mercury and digital axillary thermometers, as well as forehead and tympanic infrared thermometers. The digital axillary device, compared with the mercury one, showed no clinically significant difference in the mean values (− 0.04 ± 0.29 °C) and the narrowest 95% level of agreement (+ 0.53 °C to − 0.62 °C) in the paired comparisons. For cut-off point of 37.5 °C, the digital axillary thermometer showed the highest levels of sensitivity (72.5%) and specificity (99.1%) in detecting fever. This study indicates that the digital axillary thermometer may be the better option since it adequately balances accuracy, safety, and children’s comfort.

Abstract Background Primary headache disorders are common and burdensome conditions. They are associated to several comorbidities, such as cardiovascular or psychiatric ones, which, in turn, contribute to the global burden of headache. The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive description of the pooled prevalence of comorbidities of primary headache disorders using a meta-analytical approach based on studies published between 2000 and 2020. Methods Scopus was searched for primary research (clinical and population studies) in which medical comorbidities were described in adults with primary headache disorders. Comorbidities were extracted using a taxonomy derived from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. We compared prevalence of comorbidities among headache sufferers against general population using GBD-2019 estimates, and compared comorbidities’ proportions in clinical vs. population studies, and by age and gender. Results A total of 139 studies reporting information on 4.19 million subjects with primary headaches were included: in total 2.75 million comorbidities were reported (median per subject 0.64, interquartile range 0.32–1.07). The most frequently addressed comorbidities were: depressive disorders, addressed in 51 studies (pooled proportion 23 %, 95 % CI 20–26 %); hypertension, addressed in 48 studies (pooled proportion 24 %, 95 % CI 22–26 %); anxiety disorders addressed in 40 studies (pooled proportion 25 %, 95 % CI 22–28 %). For conditions such as anxiety, depression and back pain, prevalence among headache sufferers was higher than in GBD-2109 estimates. Associations with average age and female prevalence within studies showed that hypertension was more frequent in studies with higher age and less females, whereas fibromyalgia, restless leg syndrome, and depressive disorders were more frequent in studies with younger age and more female. Conclusions Some of the most relevant comorbidities of primary headache disorders – back pain, anxiety and depression, diabetes, ischemic heart disease and stroke – are among the most burdensome conditions, together with headache themselves, according to the GBD study. A joint treatment of headaches and of these comorbidities may positively impact on headache sufferers’ health status and contribute to reduce the impact of a group of highly burdensome diseases.

ObjectiveCranial autonomic symptoms (CAS), including conjunctival injection, tearing, nasal congestion or rhinorrhea, eyelid edema, miosis or ptosis, and forehead or facial sweating ipsilateral to headache, are often reported by patients with migraine during headache attacks. CAS is a consequence of the activation of the trigeminovascular system, which is the target of monoclonal antibodies acting on the CGRP pathway. Therefore, we hypothesized that patients with CAS might have higher trigeminovascular activation than those without CAS leading to a better response to anti-CGRP treatments.MethodsWe performed a prospective analysis including patients with episodic or chronic migraine treated with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (i.e., erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab) between 2019 and 2021. The observation period included a 12-week baseline before treatment with anti-CGRP antibodies and a 12-week treatment follow-up. We evaluated the prevalence of CAS in our cohort and compared disease characteristics and treatment response (i.e., 12-week monthly headache days and 0–29, 30–49, 50–74, 75–99, and 100% monthly headache days reduction from baseline) among patients with and without CAS using the χ2 test, Kruskal–Wallis test, and Mann–Whitney U-test.ResultsOut of 136 patients, 88 (65%) had CAS. Both patients with and without CAS reported a significant decrease in monthly headache days from baseline. During the 12-week follow-up, the median difference in monthly headache days from baseline was higher in patients with CAS (-10, IQR−15 to−6) than in those without CAS (6, IQR 12 to 3; P = 0.009). However, the proportions of patients with 0 to 29, 30 to 49, 50 to 74, 75 to 99, and 100% response rates did not differ between the two groups.ConclusionsIn our cohort, the presence of CAS was associated with a greater response to monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway. CAS could be a clinical marker of trigeminovascular activation and thus be related to a better response to CGRP treatments.

Abstract 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 Background Triptans and erenumab are both migraine-specific agents acting on the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway. Therefore, response to triptans might be associated with response to erenumab. Main body In our study, consecutive patients referring to the Headache Centers of the Abruzzo region from January 2019 to March 2020 and treated with erenumab were interviewed about past use and efficacy of triptans. Triptan users were classified as ‘triptan responders’ if they were headache-free 2 h after treating ≥3 migraine attacks with ≥1 triptan. We considered patients as ‘erenumab responders’, if they had a ≥ 50% mean reduction in monthly migraine days between the 4th and the 6th month from treatment start compared with baseline. Of 91 triptan users, 73 (80.2%) were triptan responders and 58 (63.7%) were erenumab responders. The odds ratio of being erenumab responder was 3.64 (95% CI, 1.25–10.64) for triptan users as compared to non-users. (P = 0.014). Besides, starting erenumab improved triptan response in both erenumab responders and non-responders. Conclusions Our data of an association between response to triptans and response to erenumab can be useful for patient advice and to improve the understanding of migraine pathophysiology and treatment.

BackgroundMigraine is a recurrent headache disorder that has a still unclear pathophysiology, involving several circuits of both the central and peripheral nervous system. Monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene-related (CGRP) pathway (CGRP-MAbs) are the first drugs specifically designed for migraine; those drugs act peripherally on the trigeminal ganglion without entering the blood-brain barrier. Conversely, neuromodulation techniques such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) act centrally by increasing or decreasing the neuronal firing rate of brain cortical areas. The aim of the study will be to evaluate whether tDCS, in addition to CGRP-MAbs, is an effective add-on treatment in reducing headache frequency, intensity and acute medication use in patients with migraine. To demonstrate the biological effects of tDCS, the electroencephalographic (EEG) power changes after tDCS will be assessed.MethodsWe will include patients with migraine on treatment with CGRP-MAbs and reporting ≥8 monthly migraine days. During a prospective 28-day baseline period, patients will fill in a headache diary and questionnaires to evaluate migraine-related disability, anxiety and depressive symptoms, sleep quality, and health-related quality of life. Subjects will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to active or sham tDCS. The stimulation protocol will consist in five daily sessions, the cathodes will be applied bilaterally above the occipital areas, with the reference anode electrodes positioned above the primary motor areas. Before the first, and immediately after the last stimulation session, patients will perform a 10-min resting EEG recording. During a 28-day follow-up period following tDCS, patients will have to fill in a headache diary and questionnaires identical to those of the baseline period.DiscussionThis trial will evaluate the efficacy of an add-on treatment acting on the brain in patients with migraine, who are already treated with peripherally acting drugs, showing how tDCS acts in restoring the dysfunctional brain networks typical of the migraine patient.Clinical Trial RegistrationNCT05161871.

Abstract Background Most patients treated with erenumab in clinical practice have chronic migraine (CM). We assessed the rate and possible predictors of conversion from CM to episodic migraine (EM) in a real-life study. Main body We performed a subgroup analysis of patients treated with erenumab from January 2019 to February 2020 in the Abruzzo region, central Italy. Treatment was provided according to current clinical practice. For the purpose of the present study, we included patients fulfilling the definition of CM for the three months preceding erenumab treatment and with at least 6 months of follow-up after treatment. We assessed the rate of conversion to EM from baseline to Months 4–6 of treatment and during each month of treatment. To test the clinical validity of conversion to EM, we also assessed the decrease in monthly headache days (MHDs), acute medication days, and median headache intensity on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). We included in our study 91 patients with CM. At Months 4–6, 62 patients (68.1%) converted from CM to EM; the proportion of converters increased from Month 1 to Month 5. In the overall group of patients, median MHDs decreased from 26.5 (IQR 20–30) to 7.5 (IQR 5–16; P

IntroductionAssessing the impact of migraine preventive treatments on acute medication consumption is important in clinical evaluation. The number of acute medication intakes per each monthly migraine day (MMD) could provide insights on migraine burden and represent a new proxy of treatment effectiveness in clinical trials and real-life studies. We evaluated the effect of monoclonal antibodies acting on calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway on the consumption of migraine acute medication in real-life.MethodsIn two headache centers in Prague (CZ), we included and followed up to 6 months consecutive patients treated with MoAbs acting on CGRP (erenumab or fremanezumab). For each month of treatment, we reported monthly drug intake (MDI) in doses of any medication, migraine-specific (MS), and non-migraine-specific (non-MS) medications, and computed a ratio between MMDs and MDI, i.e., Migraine Medication Index (MMI) for MS and non-MS medications.ResultsWe included 90 patients (91.1% women) with a median age of 47 [interquartile range (IQR) 42–51] years; 81 (90.0%) treated with erenumab and 9 (10.0%) with fremanezumab. Median MMDs decreased from 11 (IQR 8–14) at baseline to 4 (IQR 2–5) at Month 3 (p < 0.001 vs. baseline) and 3 (IQR 2–6) at Month 6 (p < 0.001 vs. baseline). Median MDI decreased from 15 drug intakes (IQR 11–20) at baseline to four drug intakes (IQR 2–7) at Month 3 (p < 0.001) and four drug intakes (IQR 2–7) at Month 6 (p < 0.001).The corresponding MDIs for MS medications were 10 (IQR 6–14) at baseline, 3 (IQR 1–5, p < 0.001) at Month 3, and 2 (IQR 0–4, p < 0.001) at Month 6. Monthly drug intakes for non-MS medications were 4 (IQR 0–9) at baseline, 1 (IQR 0–3, p < 0.001) at Month 3 and at Month 6.Median MMI decreased from 1.32 (IQR 1.11–1.68) at baseline to 1.00 (IQR 1.00–1.50, p < 0.001) at Month 3 and 1.00 (IQR 1.00–1.34, p < 0.001) at Month 6.ConclusionsWe confirmed that MoAbs acting on CGRP pathway decrease acute migraine medication consumption. We proposed a new index that can be easily applied in clinical practice to quantify migraine burden and its response to acute medication. Our index could help optimizing migraine acute treatment in clinical practice.

Aim: To assess the efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) in patients with ischemic stroke within 9 h of onset, that are not candidates for recanalization therapies.Sample Size Estimates: A sample size of 80 patients (40 in each arm) should yield 80% power to detect a 20% difference in early neurological improvement at 72 h at p = 0.05, two sided.Methods and Design: TRICS-9 is a phase II, multicenter, controlled, block randomized, open-label, interventional clinical trial. Patients recruited in Italian academic hospitals will be randomized 1:1 to either RIC plus standard medical therapy or standard medical therapy alone. After randomization, RIC will be applied manually by four alternating cycles of inflation/deflation 5 min each, using a blood pressure cuff around the non-paretic arm.Study Outcomes: The primary efficacy outcome is early neurological improvement, defined as the percent change in the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at 72 h in each arm. Secondary outcomes include early neurologic improvement at 24 and 48 h, disability at 3 months, rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, feasibility (proportion of patients completing RIC), tolerability after RIC and at 72 h, blood levels of HIF-1α, and HSP27 at 24 h and 72 h.Discussion/Conclusion: RIC in combination with recanalization therapies appears to add no clinical benefit to patients, but whether it is beneficial to those that are not candidates for recanalization therapies is still to be demonstrated. TRICS-9 has been developed to elucidate this issue.Clinical Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04400981.

Data were extracted from observational studies describing undergraduate nursing students’ academic outcomes that were included in a systematic review and meta-analysis conducted in 2019 and updated in 2020 [1]. Data were extracted by two researchers independently through a previously tested electronic spreadsheet; any disagreement about data extraction was discussed with a third author. Extracted data were studies’ general information, characteristics (i.e., country, study design, involved centers, number of cohort of students involved, duration (years) and denomination of the program attended, sample (N), sociodemographic characteristics of the sample, and methods utilized for data collection), and data related to the research question(s) of the review, i.e., nursing students’ academic outcomes occurrence and associated factors. Raw data for each included study are reported, along with meta-analyses that were performed using ProMeta free software utilizing Odds Ratio (OR) and Cohen's d as principal effect sizes. The random-effect model was used for all studies, while the level of heterogeneity was explored and quantified through the Cochran's Q-test and I2, respectively. Substantial or considerable heterogeneity (i.e., I2 ≥ 50%) was explored through a subgroup analysis based on the study design, when feasible [2]. A sensitivity analysis was also performed to detect the possible influence of single studies on meta-analyses results [2]. Publication bias was assessed through funnel plots and the testsf for their asymmetry, i.e., Begg and Mazumdar's rank correlation and Egger's linear regression method [2]. These data provide for an updated state of the art about nursing students’ outcomes and associated factors. Therefore, they could ease future literature summaries about the topic, other than allow a comparison of the literature with future research results.

The study aims were to define the psychometric properties of the Albanian Jefferson Scale of Empathy–Health Professional Students’ version, compare empathy levels among Albanian Health Professional students, and explore any relationship among students’ characteristics and their empathy levels. To achieve these aims, a comparative cross-sectional study was conducted. A preliminary exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine the factor structure of the scale, while group comparisons of empathy scores were examined using t -test and ANOVA F -test. A total of 1,240 students were enrolled in the study. Psychometric properties of the scale were confirmed. Midwifery, physiotherapy, and female students showed higher levels of empathy than other groups. Similarly, third-year students showed higher empathy than first- and second-year students. Monitoring empathy levels is fundamental to the adoption of useful educational strategies by faculties to improve empathy skills in Health Professional students and guarantee better care of patients, especially those in need of psychological support.

Introduction: OnabotulinumtoxinA (BT-A) is a preventive treatment for chronic migraine (CM), which needs to be administered regularly by a trained clinician every 3 months. The spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 pandemic has forced many patients to momentarily stop the scheduled BT-A injections. The goal of this study was to explore whether those patients experienced a worsening of their CM and, if any, the clinical predictors of migraine worsening after BT-A withdrawal.Methods: This was a retrospective, multicenter study. Patients' clinical data were obtained from their clinical documentation stored at each center. In particular, the following variables were collected: the mean number of headache days in the last month (NHD), the average number of painkillers taken in the last month (AC), the average number of days in which patients took, at least, one painkiller in the last month (NDM), the average intensity of migraine using the numeric rating scale (NRS) score in the last month, and the average score obtained at the six-item Headache Impact Test. The variables mentioned earlier were compared before and after BT-A withdrawal.Results: After BT-A suspension, there was a significant increase in the NHD (P = 0.0313, Kruskal–Wallis rank test), AC (P = 0.0421, Kruskal–Wallis rank test), NDM (P = 0.0394, paired t-test), NRS score (P = 0.0069, Kruskal–Wallis rank test), and six-item Headache Impact Test score (P = 0.0372, Kruskal–Wallis rank test). Patients who were not assuming other preventive treatments other than BT-A displayed similar results. Patients who experienced a >30% worsening in NHD after BT-A was withdrawn displayed a longer CM history (P = 0.001, Kruskal–Wallis rank test), a longer MOH duration (P = 0.0017, Kruskal–Wallis rank test), a higher AC value at the baseline (P = 0.0149, Kruskal–Wallis rank test), a higher NDM (P = 0.0024, t-test), and a higher average value of the NRS score (P = 0.0073, Kruskal–Wallis rank test).Conclusion: BT-A withdrawn during severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 pandemic was associated with a general worsening in patients suffering from CM, hence the need to continue BT-A injection to avoid patients' worsening.

Background: Previous studies during SARS and Ebola pandemics have shown that quarantine is associated with several negative psychological effects, such as post-traumatic stress symptoms, confusion, and anger. These conditions may affect the course of many diseases, including migraine. Although it is possible that the quarantine measures for the current COVID-19 pandemic affect migraine burden, no information is currently available on this issue.Aim: In this study, we aimed to: (1) explore the possible changes in migraine frequency, severity, and days with acute medication intake during quarantine period; (2) evaluate possible differences in migraine outcomes in consideration of lifestyle changes, emotions, pandemic diffusion, and COVID-19 infection.Methods: We interviewed patients who were included in the observational Italian Headache Registry (Registro Italiano Cefalee, RICE), retrospectively collecting information on main headache features, lifestyle factors, emotions, individual infection status, and perception of COVID-19 for 2 months before (pre-quarantine) and after the beginning of the quarantine (quarantine). Inclusion criteria were: age > 18, diagnosis of migraine without aura, migraine with aura and chronic migraine, last in-person visit more than 3 months preceding the beginning of quarantine.Results: A total of 433 migraine subjects agreed to be interviewed. We found an overall reduction in headache frequency (9.42 ± 0.43 days with headache vs. 8.28 ± 0.41) and intensity (6.57 ± 0.19 vs. 6.59 ± 0.21) during the quarantine, compared to pre-quarantine. There was a correlation between improvement and number of days of stay-at-home. When results were stratified for geographic area, we found a tendency toward worsening of headache frequency in northern Italy. Disgust regarding viral infection corresponded to a minor improvement in migraine.Conclusions: Migraine patients showed a mild improvement of migraine features, probably attributable to resilient behavior toward pandemic distress. Disgust regarding the contagion whereas potentially favoring defensive behavior, could potentially worsen migraine. The spontaneous limitation of migraine burden during quarantine could favor patient follow-up via the use of telemedicine visits, reliable diaries, and frequent remote contacts.

Objectives: The study aims to assess the impact of the second COVID-19 pandemic wave on migraine characteristics. Methods: This is an observational cross-sectional study conducted on migraine patients previously interviewed during the first Italian pandemic outbreak. A second structured telephone interview was conducted between 20 November 2020 and 18 January 2021. We compared migraine characteristics among T0 (before pandemic), T1 (during the first pandemic phase), and T2 (during the second pandemic phase). Results: Among the 433 patients interviewed during the first pandemic phase, 304 cases were finally considered. One hundred forty-eight patients had a control visit between March 2020 and December 2020, 120 had an in-person visit, 14 by phone, the remainder used telemedicine software provided by the hospital. Frequency of headache, number of symptomatic drugs and headache intensity worsened during T2, compared to T0 and T1, especially in episodic migraine. Headache intensity increased relating to the negative emotional impact of the pandemic. Migraine management during the pandemic did not influence the clinical outcome. Conclusion: The prolongation of the pandemic seems to have a negative impact on migraine evolution. The arousal and negative psychological behavior toward the COVID-19 outbreak seem to worsen migraine.

Background: We aimed to assess the differences between menstrual and non-menstrual headache in women with chronic migraine treated with erenumab. Methods: We included fertile women from a single center. Patients were defined as responders to erenumab if reporting a ≥50% decrease in monthly headache days, as compared to pre-treatment for more than half of the treatment period. Premenstrual days were defined as the two days preceding menstruation, while menstrual days were defined as the first three days of menstruation. Results: We included 18 women (11 erenumab responders and 7 erenumab non-responders) contributing to a total of 103 menstrual cycles and 2926 days. The proportion of headache days was higher in menstrual than in premenstrual and non-menstrual days in erenumab responders (34.4% vs. 14.8% vs. 16.3%, respectively; p < 0.001) and in erenumab non-responders (71.4% vs. 53.6% vs. 48.3%, respectively; p < 0.001). Headache days with ≥2 acute medications were higher in menstrual than in premenstrual or non-menstrual headache days in erenumab non-responders (p = 0.002) but not in erenumab responders (p = 0.620). Conclusions: Our data suggest that migraine is more frequent during than outside menstrual days even in women treated with erenumab.