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

Development of the Migraine-Related Stigma (MiRS) Questionnaire: Results of the OVERCOME (US) Study

BACKGROUND

Stigma is emerging as an important social contributor to migraine-related disability and other outcomes. Currently, there are no published validated measures of migraine-specific measures of stigma.

OBJECTIVES

This secondary post hoc analysis of a cross-sectional cohort study aimed to develop a questionnaire to evaluate migraine-related stigma.

METHODS

Based on focus group discussions among persons with migraine and literature review, a panel of migraine experts iteratively developed 12 candidate items for the migraine-related stigma (MiRS) questionnaire, which aims to measure if and how people living with migraine perceive they are viewed in a stigmatizing manner by others. The United States ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology tReatment and Care Of MigrainE (OVERCOME) study identified people with active migraine within a demographically representative United States (US) adult sample and administered the novel MiRS questionnaire in addition to questionnaires assessing sociodemographics, monthly headache days, and migraine disability score (Migraine Disability Assessment) among other data. Exploratory factor analysis was then utilized to evaluate the structure of the MiRS items and determine the Cronbach's alpha described internal consistency of the factors.

RESULTS

This exploratory factor analysis was a secondary post hoc analysis of a cross-sectional cohort study derived from the OVERCOME population-based web survey, which was conducted in a United States sample of 61,932 adults with migraine. The mean (standard deviation) age was 41.7 (14.8) years, 74.5% (n = 46,122) were female, and 70.3% (n = 43,564) identified as White. Two factors were identified: MiRS-external perception of Secondary Gain (eigenvalue = 21.5, percentage of total variance = 88.9%) and MiRS-external perception of Minimizing Burden of migraine (eigenvalue = 2.7, percentage of total variance = 11.1%). The two factors were correlated (r = 0.66) and a non-orthogonal varimax rotation showed that eight items loaded onto the MiRS-Secondary Gain factor, and four items loaded onto the MiRS-Minimizing Burden factor.

CONCLUSION

This population-based study of >60,000 people with migraine allowed the development and validation of the first migraine-specific measure of perceived external stigma for people with migraine. This study demonstrated that MiRS consists of two internally consistent subscales: Secondary Gain and Minimizing Burden. This may be a useful tool for quantifying perceived migraine-related stigma to understand determinants of migraine-related stigma and test interventions to reduce perceived migraine-related stigma.

Reasons for declining to participate in a trial of online cognitive behavioural therapy following orthopaedic trauma: A mixed methods study

The timely enrollment of study participants is critical to the success of clinical trials. Understanding factors that contribute to patients' decision to participate in trials involving online cognitive behavioural therapy for pain management should prove helpful to optimize the design of study protocols. Fracture patients from an orthopaedic clinic who declined to participate in the Cognitive behavioural therapy to Optimize Post-operative rEcovery (COPE) trial were asked to complete a Research Participation Questionnaire that asked them about their previous experiences with clinical research and mental health therapy and their reasons for declining to participate in the COPE trial. At the end of the questionnaire, a subset of participants was offered the opportunity to participate in a telephone interview to further discuss why they declined to participate in the COPE trial. Sixty-four patients who declined to participate in the COPE trial completed the questionnaire and twenty of these participants agreed to take part in a telephone interview (31%). Twenty-two participants (34%) had previous experience with clinical research and six participants (9%) had received cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in the past. Excessive time commitment (41%) was the most commonly selected reason for not participating in the COPE trial, followed by a disinclination to participate in clinical research (19%). Four themes emerged from the interviews with participants: 1) belief that they could overcome mental health challenges after their fracture without external help; 2) belief that CBT might be helpful for some fracture patients, but not for themselves; 3) preference for online or in-person CBT; and 4) concerns regarding time commitment. To maximize enrollment, trials exploring the role of psychotherapy in recovery from orthopedic trauma should optimize time commitment of psychotherapy. Providing information in the patient consent process regarding evidence for psychotherapy and recovery from orthopedic trauma may also prove helpful in promoting patient enrollment.

Headache diagnosis and treatment: A pilot knowledge and needs assessment among physical therapists

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this pilot study was to assess physical therapists' (PTs) knowledge and needs regarding headache diagnosis and management.

BACKGROUND

While there is significant research on physical therapy and cervicogenic headache, studies suggest that migraine is often under-recognized, misdiagnosed, and inadequately treated across society despite its high prevalence and burden. Because migraine commonly includes concurrent neck pain and/or vestibular symptoms, patients with migraine may present to PTs for treatment. Very little is known about PTs' headache and migraine education, knowledge, and clinical practices.

METHODS

A team of headache specialists and PTs adapted a previously used headache knowledge and needs assessment survey to help ascertain PTs' knowledge and needs regarding headache treatment. The cross-sectional survey was distributed online via Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) to PTs within a large healthcare system in Connecticut.

RESULTS

An estimated 50.5% (101/200) of PTs invited to complete the survey did so. Only 37.6% (38/101) of respondents reported receiving any formal headache or migraine education in their professional training, leading to knowledge gaps in differentiating and responding to headache subtypes. Only 45.5% (46/101) were able to identify that migraine is characterized by greater pain intensity than tension-type headache, and 22.8% (23/101) reported not knowing the duration of untreated migraine. When asked about the aspects of care they believe their patients with headache would like to see improved, PTs reported education around prevention and appropriate medication use (61/100 [61.0%]), provider awareness of the degree of disability associated with migraine (51/100 [51.0%]), and diagnostics (47/100 [47.0%]).

CONCLUSION

This sample of PTs from one healthcare system demonstrates knowledge gaps and variations in clinical practice for managing their patients with headache. Future research on integrating additional opportunities for headache education for physical therapists, including evidence-based behavioral therapies, is needed to ascertain whether it is likely to improve patient care.

Common barriers and enablers to the use of non-drug interventions for managing common chronic conditions in primary care: an overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

Non-drug interventions are recommended for chronic condition prevention and management yet are underused in clinical practice. Understanding barriers and enablers to using non-drug interventions may help implement non-drug interventions in primary care. We aimed to conduct an overview of reviews to identify and summarise common barriers and enablers for using non-drug interventions for common chronic conditions in primary care.

METHODS

We included qualitative and quantitative reviews that used systematic process or methods to examine barriers and enablers to using non-drug interventions for chronic condition prevention and management in primary care settings. We searched 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL) from inception to September 2022. Two authors independently screened reviews. One author extracted and deductively coded data to Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) (and where relevant, Theoretical Domains Framework [TDF]). A second author validated 10% of extracted data and coding. Data was synthesised thematically using CFIR and TDF. One author assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using a modified AMSTAR 2 tool, with 10% validated by a second author. We assessed overlap between primary studies in included reviews.

RESULTS

From 5324 records, we included 25 reviews, with data predominately from patients. Overall, 130 subthemes (71 barrier and 59 enabler) were identified across 4 CFIR domains (Innovation, Outer Setting, Inner Setting, and Individuals), and all TDF domains. Common barrier and enabler subthemes were identified for CFIR constructs of Innovation Adaptability, Innovation Cost, Innovation Relative Advantage, Local Attitudes, External Pressure, Local Conditions, Relational Connections, Available Resources, and Access to Knowledge and Information. For TDF domains, important barrier and enabler subthemes were identified for Knowledge, Skills, Environmental Context and Resources, Beliefs about Consequences, Reinforcement, and Emotion.

CONCLUSIONS

We synthesised reviews to provide new insight into common barriers and enablers for using non-drug interventions to prevent and manage chronic conditions in primary care. The factors identified can inform the development of generalisable implementation interventions to enhance uptake of multiple non-drug interventions simultaneously.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022357583).

Exploring the link between self-management of migraine and emotional wellbeing: a cross-sectional study of community-dwelling migraine sufferers

BACKGROUND

Globally, an estimated 14% of adults live with migraine disease which impacts their physical, emotional and social wellbeing. To target the disease comprehensively, research recommends a multidisciplinary approach to migraine management. Yet, at present, migraine management primarily centers around pharmaceutical treatments. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which emotional awareness could influence the uptake of self-care behaviours of community-dwelling adults with migraine.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey explored personal experiences with migraine disease and strategies or behaviours to manage migraine attacks. Chi-squared tests were used to investigate differences in ratings of migraine prevention and management strategies between users and non-users of the strategies. Univariable logistic regressions were used to assess the effectiveness of self-care behaviours to manage or prevent migraine attacks.

RESULTS

We surveyed 170 community-dwelling adults with migraine in the United Kingdom, Austria, Germany and the United States. Most (85%) respondents had experienced migraine for over five years, where 42% of attacks usually lasted several days. Whereas we did not differentiate between diagnosis by a neurologist or self-diagnosis, the most common diagnoses in the cohort were migraine without aura (38.9%) and migraine with aura (29%). Staying hydrated was the most popular preventative strategy (87%), 70.2% used prescription medication and 64.9% changed their diet and/or supplements. Almost all ( 92.4%) respondents stated that their mood or emotions could trigger their migraine attacks. Keeping a headache or mood diary was the lowest-rated prevention strategy and was rated as "probably ineffective" or causing "no change" in preventing migraine attacks. Over a third (39.7%) kept track of their physical wellbeing and symptoms. Reasons stated for tracking symptoms included to identify triggers (65.8%), show reports to a healthcare professional (59.6%), understand when they must take medication (48.1%), track improvements (67.3%) or deteriorations (67.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine management is dominated by pharmaceutical management for acute pain attacks and lifestyle changes for managing migraine long-term. Perception of the effectiveness of those techniques is high, whereas perception of interventions that target the emotional or psychological components of chronic pain management (keeping a mood diary, and mental health support) is mixed. There exists a gap between the recommended biopsychosocial approach and the current state of migraine management.

Empowered Relief, cognitive behavioral therapy, and health education for people with chronic pain: a comparison of outcomes at 6-month Follow-up for a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

We previously conducted a 3-arm randomized trial (263 adults with chronic low back pain) which compared group-based (1) single-session pain relief skills intervention (Empowered Relief; ER); (2) 8-session cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for chronic back pain; and (3) single-session health and back pain education class (HE). Results suggested non-inferiority of ER vs. CBT at 3 months post-treatment on an array of outcomes.

Methods

Here, we tested the durability of treatment effects at 6 months post-treatment. We examined group differences in primary and secondary outcomes at 6 months and the degree to which outcomes eroded or improved from 3-month to 6-month within each treatment group.

Results

Empowered Relief remained non-inferior to CBT on most outcomes, whereas both ER and CBT remained superior to HE on most outcomes. Outcome improvements within ER did not decrease significantly from 3-month to 6-month, and indeed ER showed additional 3- to 6-month improvements on pain catastrophizing, pain bothersomeness, and anxiety. Effects of ER at 6 months post-treatment (moderate term outcomes) kept pace with effects reported by participants who underwent 8-session CBT.

Conclusions

The maintenance of these absolute levels implies strong stability of ER effects. Results extend to 6 months post-treatment previous findings documenting that ER and CBT exhibit similarly potent effects on outcomes.

Non-Pharmacological Treatment for Chronic Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic migraine (CM) affects a large proportion of the population and is a significant source of disability and lost productivity. Numerous non-pharmacological approaches have been attempted during the past decades. This review discusses the most recent and evidence-based advances in acute and preventive non-pharmacological therapeutic approaches for CM, offering alternatives to drug treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

A growing number of non-pharmacological treatment options, including non-invasive or invasive neuromodulation, acupuncture, psychotherapy, and physiotherapy, have shown promising efficacy in CM. There is strong evidence for the effectiveness of non-invasive neuromodulation such as transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in CM, but less evidence for approaches such as invasive neuromodulation, physical therapy, or dietary approaches. Acupuncture for migraine remains controversial, with the main point of contention still being the placebo effect. Non-pharmacological approaches can be offered as a reliable alternative for patients with CM, and more research is being done to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive neuromodulation with different parameters and the combination of different treatments in CM.

Digital headache self-management interventions for patients with a primary headache disorder: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This article systematically reviews the empirical literature examining the efficacy of digital headache management interventions for patients with a primary headache disorder.

BACKGROUND

Digital headache management interventions provide opportunities to improve access to behavioral headache interventions to underserved groups.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCO (PsycInfo, Education Research Complete, ERIC, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection) and reference review was conducted. Included studies had to recruit a sample with a primary headache diagnosis, be a randomized controlled trial including a digital component, assess a headache outcome (i.e., frequency, duration, severity, intensity, disability) or quality of life, and be published in English. Two authors independently extracted data for included studies. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with unique interventions met inclusion criteria. More than half of the studies were pilots; however, nearly 70% (9/13) demonstrated significant between-group or within-group improvements on one or more headache-related outcomes. All interventions included some form of relaxation training and the majority were delivered via interactive website. While fewer than half the studies report participant race and/or ethnicity, of those that do, 83% (5/6) reported a predominately White/Caucasian sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Efficacy testing of digital headache interventions is in its infancy with the majority of these studies relying on pilot studies with small samples comprised of homogenous patient populations. Interactive websites were the most common digital medium to deliver digital headache management interventions and have demonstrated promising results. Further testing using large-scale randomized controlled trials and exploration of other digital tools is warranted. Future studies with more diverse samples are needed to inform health equity of digital headache interventions.

Lifestyle factors and migraine

Migraine, a common and disabling neurological disorder, is among the top reasons for outpatient visits to general neurologists. In addition to pharmacotherapy, lifestyle interventions are a mainstay of treatment. High-quality daily diary studies and intervention studies indicate intraindividual variations in the associations between lifestyle factors (such as stress, sleep, diet, and physical activity) and migraine attack occurrence. Behaviour change interventions can directly address overlapping lifestyle factors; combination approaches could capitalise on multiple mechanisms. These findings provide useful directions for integration of lifestyle management into routine clinical care and for future research.

A systematic evaluation of primary headache management apps leveraging behavior change techniques

BACKGROUND

Mobile health apps have the potential to promote adherence to headache management through the use of evidence-based behavior change techniques (e.g., self-monitoring). While many headache management apps exist, the extent to which these apps include behavior change techniques remains unknown. Thus, the present study systematically evaluated the content and quality of commercially available headache management apps.

METHODS

Headache apps were identified using a systematic search in the Apple App and Google Play stores. A total of 55 apps were evaluated using the taxonomy of behavior change techniques and app quality using the Mobile App Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Headache management apps included 0-14 behavior change techniques (Mean [M] = 5.89) and 0-8 headache management behavior change techniques (M = 4.29). App quality ranged from 2.84-4.67 (M = 3.73) out of 5.00. Three apps, Migraine Trainer, Easeday: Headache & Migraine, and PainScale, included the highest number of overall and headache management behavior change techniques along with good quality scores.

CONCLUSIONS

While randomized controlled trials are necessary to determine the efficacy of individual headache apps, most existing apps include evidence-based headache management behavior change techniques. Headache apps often focus on either self-monitoring or stress management via relaxation training, suggesting that patients' needs should be used to inform app selection.

Essential components of care in a multidisciplinary headache center: Perspectives from headache neurology specialists

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Comprehensive headache care involves numerous specialties and components that have not been well documented or standardized. This study aimed to elicit best practices and characterize important elements of care to be provided in multidisciplinary headache centers.

METHODS

Qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of headache neurology specialists from across the US, using open-ended questions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Coded data were further analyzed using immersion/crystallization techniques for final interpretation.

RESULTS

Mean years providing headache care was 17.7 (SD = 10.6). Twelve of the 13 participants held United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties headache certification. Six described their practice site as providing multidisciplinary headache care. Participants explained most of their patients had seen multiple doctors over many years, and had tried numerous unsuccessful treatments. They noted patients with chronic headache frequently present with comorbidities and become stigmatized. All participants asserted successful care depends on taking time to talk with and listen to patients, gain understanding, and earn trust. All participants believed multidisciplinary care is essential within a comprehensive headache center, along with staffing enough headache specialists, implementing detailed headache intake and follow-up protocols, and providing the newest medications, neuromodulation devices, botulinum toxin injections, monoclonal antibodies, nerve blocks and infusions, and treatment from a health psychologist. Other essential services for a headache center are other behavioral health practitioners providing cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness, biofeedback and pain management; and autonomic neurology, neuropsychology, vestibular audiology, sleep medicine, physical therapy, occupational therapy, exercise physiology, speech therapy, nutrition, complementary integrative health modalities, and highly trained support staff.

CONCLUSION

While headache neurology specialists form the backbone of headache care, experts interviewed for this study maintained their specialty is just one of many types of care needed to adequately treat patients with chronic headache, and this is best provided in a comprehensive, multidisciplinary center.

Behavioral Health, Telemedicine, and Opportunities for Improving Access

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to summarize advances in behavioral treatments for pain and headache disorders, as well as recent innovations in telemedicine for behavioral treatments.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research for behavioral treatments continues to support their use as part of a multidisciplinary approach to comprehensive management for pain and headache conditions. Behavioral treatments incorporate both behavioral change and cognitive interventions and have been shown to improve outcomes beyond that of medical management alone. The onset of the COVID-19 public health emergency necessitated the rapid uptake of nontraditional modalities for behavioral treatments, particularly telemedicine. Telemedicine has long been considered the answer to several barriers to accessing behavioral treatments, and as a result of COVID-19 significant progress has been made evaluating a variety of telemedicine modalities including synchronous, asynchronous, and mobile health applications. Researchers are encouraged to continue investigating how best to leverage these modalities to improve access to behavioral treatments and to continue evaluating the efficacy of telemedicine compared to traditional in-person care. Comprehensive pain and headache management should include behavioral treatments to address a variety of behavior change and cognitive targets. Policy changes and advances in telemedicine for behavioral treatments provide the opportunity to address historical barriers limiting access.

Strategies for Behavioral Research in Neurology: Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Applications for the Future

Purpose of Review

Behavioral therapies are proven treatments for many neurologic conditions. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant challenges for conducting behavioral research. This article aims to (1) highlight the challenges of running behavioral clinical trials during the pandemic, (2) suggest approaches to maximize generalizability of pandemic-era studies, and (3) offer strategies for successful behavioral trials beyond the pandemic.

Recent Findings

Thousands of clinical trials have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, from undergoing protocol revisions to suspension altogether. Furthermore, for ongoing trials, recruitment of diverse populations has suffered, thereby exacerbating existing inequities in clinical research. Patient adherence and retention have been affected by a myriad of pandemic-era restraints, and medical, psychiatric, and other complications from the pandemic have the potential to have long-term effects on pandemic-era study results.

Summary

In the development of post-pandemic study protocols, attention should be given to designing studies that incorporate successful aspects of pre-pandemic and pandemic-era strategies to (1) broaden recruitment using new techniques, (2) improve access for diverse populations, (3) expand protocols to include virtual and in-person participation, and (4) increase patient adherence and retention.