Management of Migraine and the Accessibility of Specialist Care: Findings from an Extended Multinational Survey (My Migraine Center Survey)

Consensus recommendations on the role of nurses in headache care: A European e-Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Nurses work at headache centres throughout Europe, and their care for migraine patients is acknowledged. However, the specific roles and tasks of nursing vary, and a unified understanding is lacking, posing challenges to knowledge sharing and research.

OBJECTIVES

Using an e-Delphi study method, the objective is to obtain healthcare professional headache experts' opinions on nursing-specific roles and tasks and combine this into consensus statements for nurse recommendations for migraine treatment.

METHODS

A three-round questionnaire study was conducted with nurses and neurologists from 18 specialised headache centres in 10 countries. In round 1, statements were compiled from a systematic examination of existing literature and expert opinions. In rounds 2 and 3, the experts rated the importance of statements (from round 1) on a 5-point Likert scale. Statements were analysed using a content analysis method, and the consensus of pre-defined statements was evaluated with gradually increased predetermined criteria using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Twenty-one experts, representing all 10 countries, participated. The predetermined consensus of ≥70% agreement was reached for 42 out of the initial 63 statements. These statements formed the final recommendations within two themes: "The nurses' roles and tasks in the clinical setting" and "The nurses' roles and tasks in educating patients and colleagues." The consensus level of statements was strong, with 40% receiving unanimous agreement (100%) and 97% achieving relatively high agreement (>80%).

CONCLUSION

Nursing plays a vital role with diverse tasks in migraine care. This study offers practical recommendations and a framework for nurses, equipping them with a clinical tool to enhance care and promote a coordinated approach to migraine treatment.

Patient satisfaction and patient accessibility in a small fiber neuropathy diagnostic service in the Netherlands: A single-center, prospective, survey-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is a common cause of neuropathic pain in peripheral neuropathies. Good accessibility of diagnostics and treatment is necessary for an accurate diagnosis and treatment of SFN. Evidence is lacking on the quality performance of the diagnostic SFN service in the Netherlands. Our aim was to determine the patient satisfaction and -accessibility of the diagnostic SFN service, and to identify areas for improvement.

METHODS

In a single-center, prospective, survey-based cohort study, 100 visiting patients were asked to fill in the SFN patient satisfaction questionnaire (SFN-PSQ), with 10 domains and 51 items. Cut-off point for improvement was defined as ≥ 25% dissatisfaction on an item. A chi-square test and linear regression analyses was used for significant differences and associations of patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

From November 2020 to May 2021, 98 patients with SFN-related complaints filled in the online SFN-PSQ within 20 minutes. In 84% of the patients SFN was confirmed, average age was 55.1 (52.5-57.8) years and 67% was female. High satisfaction was seen in the domains 'Waiting List Period', Chest X-ray', 'Consultation with the Doctor or Nurse Practitioner (NP)', 'Separate Consultation with the Doctor or NP about Psychological Symptoms', and 'General' of the SFN service. Overall average patient satisfaction score was 8.7 (IQR 8-10) on a 1-to-10 rating scale. Main area for improvement was shortening the 8-week period for receiving the results of the diagnostic testing (p < 0.05). General health status was statistically significant associated with patient satisfaction (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

A good reflection of the high patient satisfaction and -accessibility of the SFN-service is shown, with important points for improvement. These results could help hospitals widely to optimize the logistic and diagnostic pathway of SFN analysis, benchmarking patient satisfaction results among the hospitals, and to improve the quality of care of comparable SFN services.

Migraine Patient Care Model Preferences in a Community Practice

Background and Objectives

Developing high-value care models with limited resources for large populations of individuals with migraine requires advanced understanding of patient preferences for care delivery methods. In this study, we aimed to inform the development of migraine care models by assessing patient preferences for types of care delivery and determining differences based on migraine frequency and disability.

Methods

We analyzed unpublished data from a cross-sectional survey of 516 randomly selected individuals with migraine within a community practice associated with Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Results

Individuals with chronic migraine, compared with those with episodic migraine, were more likely to prefer a visit with a neurologist (p = 0.0005), synchronous telephone conference with primary care provider (PCP) and neurologist (p = 0.0102), and a written migraine action plan in the medical record (p = 0.0343). Compared with those with mild/no disability, individuals with moderate-to-severe disability were more likely to prefer a visit with a neurologist (p < 0.0001), synchronous video or telephone conference with PCP and neurologist (p < 0.0001), PCP communication with neurologist (p = 0.0099), electronic message to primary care team with access to neurologist (p = 0.0216), and written action plan in the medical record (p = 0.0011). Collectively, individuals most preferred telephone follow-up and least preferred communications with a nurse or pharmacist or generalized education (all p < 0.001).

Discussion

We observed differences in migraine care delivery preferences between migraine frequency and level of migraine disability. Observations support development of care pathways that include a written migraine action plan, primary care-neurology collaboration including nontraditional interactions, and prioritization of traditional neurology consultation for the most disabled patients.

Telephone follow-up on treatment and patient satisfaction at a Danish tertiary headache center: A prospective study

OBJECTIVE

We investigated whether telephone follow-up consultations could lead to appropriate adjustment of treatments and a higher degree of patient satisfaction among patients with migraine and tension-type headache (TTH).

BACKGROUND

Migraine and TTH are disabling headache forms requiring optimized treatment.

METHODS

In a prospective, non-randomized, quality control study with controls comparing telephone-interview intervention (TeII) with business-as-usual (BAU) treatment, we included newly referred patients with migraine and/or TTH. The TeII group was contacted by telephone by healthcare professionals at 8 and 16 weeks after the first visit addressing headache treatment. Electronic questionnaires were sent to all participants before the first visit and after 6 months. Predefined outcomes were number of patients with change in preventive and acute medication; change in headache frequency; migraine frequency; scores from the eight-item Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT-8) questionnaire, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS); and patient satisfaction after 6 months.

RESULTS

From May 2020 to April 2021, there were 230 patients enrolled in the TeII program, whereof 96 patients were included in the analysis. For the BAU group, 91 patients with similar sex and age distribution were identified via medical-record reviews in the same period. More patients in the TeII group than in the BAU group had a change in acute medication (27/96 [28%] vs. five of 91 [6%], p < 0.001) and preventive medication (28/96 [29%] vs. 12/91 [13%], p = 0.006). Headache days per month decreased in the TeII group (-4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.5 to -2.7; p = 0.001) and the BAU group (-2.5, 95% CI -4.6 to -0.4; p = 0.018), without significant difference between the groups (p = 0.080). There was no difference in migraine frequency between the groups (TeII: 1.0 day, 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.0; BAU: 1.0 day, 95% CI, -2.5 to 0.5; p = 0.718) or HURT-8 score (TeII: 10.5, 95% CI 9.5-11.5; BAU: 13.0, 95% CI 11.7-14.2; p = 0.053). There were no changes in the ISI score (TeII: 1.0, interquartile range [IQR] 6; p = 0.152; BAU: 0.5, IQR 4.5; p = 0.824), HADS-Anxiety score (TeII: -5, IQR 5.3; p = 0.186; BAU: 1.0, IQR 4.0; p = 0.445), or HADS-Depression score (TeII: 0.0, IQR 3.0; p = 0.163; BAU: 0.0, IQR 2.0; p = 0.303) in any of the groups. There was a higher degree of patient satisfaction in the TeII group compared with the BAU group in treatment (median [IQR] score 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p < 0.001), headache improvement (median [IQR] 3 [2-4] vs. 2 [1-3], p = 0.002), the headache program (median [IQR] 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p < 0.001), and information (median [IQR] 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Patients with migraine and/or TTH benefit from a telephone follow-up approach within the first 6 months of their treatment course in terms of more efficient treatment and higher patient satisfaction.

Migraine, Migraine Disability, Trauma, and Discrimination in Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study sought to describe migrainous headache frequency and severity and to examine the relationship between trauma, discrimination, and migraine-associated disability in a sample of sexual and/or gender minority (SGM) adults.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of SGM people in The Population Research in Identity and Disparities for Equality Study from August to October 2018. The primary exposure was any trauma or discrimination, regardless of attribution. The primary outcome was moderate-severe migraine disability, as defined by a Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire score of ≥11. We performed descriptive analysis comparing respondents with any migrainous headache with those without. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association between trauma/discrimination and migraine disability, controlling first for sociodemographic and clinical factors and then for psychiatric comorbidities.

RESULTS

Of the 3,325 total respondents, 1,126 (33.9%) screened positive for migrainous headache by ID-Migraine criteria. Most people with migraine self-reported moderate (n = 768, 68.2%) or severe (n = 253, 22.5%) intensity. The median MIDAS score was 11 (interquartile range 5-25). Most respondents with migraine (n = 1,055, 93.7%) reported a history of trauma or discrimination. In unadjusted analysis, exposure to both trauma and discrimination was associated with higher odds of moderate-severe disability (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34-2.32). After adjustment for self-reported psychiatric comorbidities of anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder, this association lost statistical significance.

DISCUSSION

Migrainous headache is common among our sample of SGM adults, and prior experiences with trauma and discrimination are associated with increased migraine disability. Our findings suggest that psychiatric comorbidities play a significant role in this relationship, identifying a potentially modifiable risk factor for disability in SGM people with migraine.