Barriers to Behavioral Treatment Adherence for Headache: An Examination of Attitudes, Beliefs, and Psychiatric Factors

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.

What is the Status Quo of Patient-Centred Physiotherapy Management of People with Headache within a Biopsychosocial Model? - A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patient-centred care (PCC) is deemed essential in the rehabilitation of musculoskeletal pain. Integrating such care within a biopsychosocial framework, enables to address all facets of the individual pain experience, and to manage the individual instead of the condition. This narrative review describes the status quo of PCC physiotherapy management of people with headache within a biopsychosocial model. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus were searched (update 07.05.2024). The search-query comprised terminology relating to "headache", "patient-centred", "biopsychosocial", "physiotherapy". Additional eligibility criteria were reviews, trials, cohort, case report, case-control studies in English, Dutch, French.

RECENT FINDINGS

Gaps are exposed in patient-centred physiotherapy management of migraine, tension-type headache, and cervicogenic headache. While a biopsychosocial approach is advised to manage migraine and tension-type headache, its use in clinical practice is not reflected by the literature. A biopsychosocial approach is not advised in cervicogenic headache. Psychosocial-lifestyle interventions are mainly delivered by health-care providers other than physiotherapists. Additionally, psychologically-informed practice is barely introduced in physiotherapy headache management. Though, managing the social context within a biopsychosocial framework is advised, the implementation by physiotherapists is unclear. Comparable conclusions apply to PCC. PCC is recommended for the physiotherapy management of primary and secondary headache. Such recommendation remains however theoretical, not reaching clinical implementation. Yet, a shift from the traditional disease-centred model of care towards PCC is ongoing and should be continued in physiotherapy management. With this implementation, clinical and economical studies are needed to evaluate its effectiveness.

Evaluation and Comparison of Relaxation-Related Workplace Interventions Among Office Workers at an Insurance Institution: An Intervention Study

Relaxation-related workplace interventions can be counterstrategies for stress due to office work and should be evaluated for success after implementation. This study reports on the evaluation and comparison of 3 relaxation techniques introduced as an intervention for health promotion. A Germany-wide multicenter evaluation of a 3-month relaxation intervention (30 min, once a week) including autogenic training, progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) or Tai Chi was conducted at 14 locations as an intervention study. Anonymous questionnaires (n = 244) were used to collect self-reports of perceived stress after the courses. Status before the courses (pre) and after completion (post) were reported at the end of the intervention. All 3 relaxation techniques were able to improve the subjective perception of stress (SPS) score. Autogenic training was reported to improve all singular items with large effects, whereas only 2 items showed change for Tai Chi and none for PMR. Singular items were also influenced by the location of the courses. All 3 methods were able to improve stress-related outcomes in terms of stress perception and individual aspects of stress management. For this specific intervention autogenic training yielded the largest and wide-ranging effects. Tai Chi was also effective, but additional effect due to an associated increase in physical activity were not found. For a workplace intervention PMR could not be recommended based on this study. The literature on workplace interventions is surprisingly scarce, and future studies should focus on the selection of appropriate participants while avoiding potential bias.

Provider Perspectives of Facilitators and Barriers to Reaching and Utilizing Chronic Pain Healthcare for Persons With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Qualitative NIDILRR and VA TBI Model Systems Collaborative Project

OBJECTIVE

To identify facilitators and barriers to reaching and utilizing chronic pain treatments for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) organized around an Access to Care framework, which includes dimensions of access to healthcare as a function of supply (ie, provider/system) and demand (ie, patient) factors for a specified patient population.

SETTING

Community.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinicians (n = 63) with experience treating persons with TBI were interviewed between October 2020 and November 2021.

DESIGN

Descriptive, qualitative study.

MAIN MEASURES

Semistructured open-ended interview of chronic pain management for persons with TBI. Informed by the Access to Care framework, responses were coded by and categorized within the core domains (reaching care, utilizing care) and relevant subdimensions from the supply (affordability of providing care, quality, coordination/continuity, adequacy) and demand (ability to pay, adherence, empowerment, caregiver support) perspective.

RESULTS

Themes from provider interviews focused on healthcare reaching and healthcare utilization resulted in 19 facilitators and 9 barriers reaching saturation. The most themes fell under the utilization core domain, with themes identified that impact the technical and interpersonal quality of care and care coordination/continuity. Accessibility and availability of specialty care and use of interdisciplinary team that permitted matching patients to treatments were leading thematic facilitators. The leading thematic barrier identified primarily by medical providers was cognitive disability, which is likely directly linked with other leading barriers including high rates of noncompliance and poor follow-up in health care. Medical and behavioral health complexity was also a leading barrier to care and potentially interrelated to other themes identified.

CONCLUSION

This is the first evidence-based study to inform policy and planning for this complex population to improve access to high-quality chronic pain treatment. Further research is needed to gain a better understanding of the perspectives of individuals with TBI/caregivers to inform interventions to improve access to chronic pain treatment for persons with TBI.

Provider Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to Identifying, Perceiving, and Seeking Healthcare for Chronic Pain After TBI: A Qualitative NIDILRR and VA TBI Model Systems Collaborative Project

OBJECTIVE

Identify determinants to chronic pain healthcare for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) informed by an Access to Care Framework. Findings related to the Access Framework's core domains of identifying a need, perceptions of the need, and seeking healthcare are reported.

SETTING

Community.

PARTICIPANTS

Healthcare providers (n = 63) with 2 or more years of experience treating persons with TBI interviewed between October 2020 and November 2021.

DESIGN

Descriptive, qualitative study.

MAIN MEASURES

Semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions of chronic pain management for persons with TBI. Informed by the Access Framework, responses were coded by and categorized within the domains of identifying healthcare needs, perceptions of needs, and factors related to healthcare seeking from the supply and demand perspective.

RESULTS

For the overall sample, 14 facilitators and 6 barriers were endorsed by more than 20% of the provider cohort. Top facilitators included on-site availability of needed resources and treatments (94%), adequate time and provider capability to ensure patient comprehension of diagnosis and treatment plans (83%), and establishing patient motivation and buy-in with the treatment plan (75%). Barriers most endorsed included policies impacting access (46%), wait times for services (41%), and patient uncertainty regarding telehealth commonly due to cognitive and physical challenges (37%). Unique determinants are reported across civilian versus Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare systems and different provider types.

CONCLUSION

This is the first evidence-based study to inform policy and planning to improve access to high-quality chronic pain treatments for persons with TBI. Results will inform future interventions at the systems, patient, and policy levels of healthcare that can be tailored to healthcare settings (VA, Civilian) and types of providers (rehabilitation therapists, psychologists, and medical). Evidence-informed interventions may help minimize healthcare disparities experienced by persons with TBI and facilitate access to high-quality, evidence-informed chronic pain care.

Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Implementation Strategies to Overcome Barriers to Delivering Chronic Pain Treatments: A NIDILRR and VA TBI Model Systems Collaborative Project

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to illustrate the process of stakeholder-engaged intervention mapping approach to identify implementation strategies to overcome data-driven prioritized barriers to receiving chronic pain services for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI).

SETTING

Community.

PARTICIPANTS

Healthcare providers (n = 63) with 2 or more years' experience treating persons with TBI, interviewed between October 2020 and November 2021 provided data for identification of barriers. TBI, chronic pain, and qualitative research subject matter experts (SMEs) participated in the mapping approach.

DESIGN

Participatory-based research design, using descriptive and intervention mapping approaches.

RESULTS

Four barriers to accessing chronic pain treatment by persons with TBI which emerged from provider interviews were prioritized for intervention mapping: cognitive deficits of patients (67%); patient comorbidities (63%); mental health and/or substance abuse issues (59%); and patient participation (62%). SMEs used prioritized barriers to develop 4 primary objectives and implementation strategies designed to: (1) engage consumers to validate and identify strategies; (2) tailor pain treatment and delivery to overcome barriers; (3) develop and disseminate guidelines and best practices when delivering care to persons with TBI to support spread; and (4) increase awareness, skills, and readiness of workforce to deliver pain treatment to persons with TBI. SMEs used an evidence-based approach to develop a mapping matrix of the prioritized barriers, implementation objectives, and aligned implementation strategies to impact change.

CONCLUSION

Implementation science is needed to facilitate knowledge translation into practice for this complex population to overcome barriers to care. Implementation strategies to address barriers to accessing chronic pain care for individuals with TBI were chosen through a participatory approach to engaging SMEs to support these rehabilitation implementation efforts. Future work includes gathering input from individuals with TBI and chronic pain and to move the intervention (implementation) mapping matrix forward to inform future implementation research, policy, and practice.

Headache-related clinical features in teleworkers and their association with coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objectives

The objectives were (1) to describe and compare headache-related clinical features between teleworkers with migraine and those with tension-type headache (TTH) and (2) to determine the association between coping strategies and headache frequency, and intensity in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 284 teleworkers (127 with migraine and 157 with TTH). Sociodemographic data, information related to work factors, headache clinical features, coping strategies used during the COVID-19 pandemic, and headache-related clinical features were compared between headache profiles. Bivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine the association between coping strategies and headache frequency, and intensity.

Results

Results showed that teleworkers with migraine had longer and more painful headache episodes than teleworkers with TTH (ps < 0.001). Higher migraine frequency was associated with the use of the denial coping strategy (p = 0.006) while lower migraine intensity was associated with planning (p = 0.046) and the use of positive reframing (p = 0.025). Higher TTH frequency was associated with the use of venting, self-blame, and behavioral disengagement (ps < 0.007) while higher TTH intensity was associated with substance use and behavioral disengagement (ps < 0.030). All associations remained significant after adjusting for BMI as a covariate.

Discussion/conclusion

Teleworkers with migraine had more intense and longer headache episodes than teleworkers with TTH. This could be explained by the fact that a greater proportion of individuals suffering from migraine experienced headaches prior to the beginning of the pandemic compared with teleworkers suffering from TTH. Regarding coping strategies, both primary headache profiles were associated with different types of coping strategies. Most of the coping strategies associated with headache frequency or intensity were maladaptive except for planning and positive reframing that were found to be inversely associated with migraine intensity.

Eptinezumab for the Prevention of Migraine: Clinical Utility, Patient Preferences and Selection - A Narrative Review

The new Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapies have proven high efficacy and tolerability in episodic and chronic migraine. Eptinezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds CGRP with high affinity. Eptinezumab was approved by the Food and Drug Administration on February 21st, 2020, for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. It is administered intravenously over 30 minutes with a standard dose of 100 mg and has a T-max of 30 minutes-1 hour and a half-life of 27 days. These pharmacological properties allow for a very rapid onset of effect and a quarterly administration. It is the first time that a preventive treatment for migraine can be offered as an intravenous administration. As the range of therapeutic possibilities in migraine is expanding, the treatment process must include common decision-making, where physicians should explain in detail to patients the different characteristics of treatment options beyond efficacy and side effects. Patients can now express a preference on a range of opportunities: pharmacological versus non-pharmacological approaches, route of administration, frequency of administration, efficacy, rapidity, side effects, costs, the possibility of titration or dosing, and durability of effectiveness at suspension. Also, patient preferences can be influenced by age, country, migraine severity, and earlier experience with CGRP-targeted therapies. Besides, adherence may be influenced by several factors, including route and the schedule of administration. This narrative review describes a new perspective from the patient's point of view. Clinicians should ally with patients to select treatments that meet each patient's needs and thus apply a tailored approach, addressing not only headaches. In this way, physicians would care for the patients globally and stand out their preferences on different aspects of treatment. Besides, healthcare professionals shall be aware that patients' beliefs about therapies are subject to change with increasing experience with new therapeutic approaches.

Acceptability and Tolerability of Extended Reality Relaxation Training with and without Wearable Neurofeedback in Pediatric Migraine

Objective. To determine the acceptability of using extended reality (XR) relaxation training as a preventive treatment for pediatric migraine. Methods. Youths aged 10-17 years old with migraine were recruited from a specialty headache clinic and completed baseline measures evaluating their vestibular symptoms and attitudes about technology. The patients were then instructed in three XR-based relaxation training conditions (fully immersive virtual reality with and without neurofeedback, and augmented reality with neurofeedback), in counterbalanced order, and completed acceptability and side effect questionnaires after each. The patients also took XR equipment home for one week to use for relaxation practice and again completed the measures about their experience. The acceptability and side effect data were compared against predetermined acceptable thresholds and were evaluated for their association with the participant characteristics. Results. The aggregate acceptability questionnaire scores exceeded our minimum threshold of 3.5/5, with the two fully immersive virtual reality conditions preferred over augmented reality for relaxation training (z = -3.02, p = 0.003, and z = -2.31, p = 0.02). The endorsed side effects were rated by all but one participant as mild, with vertigo being the most common. The acceptability ratings were not reliably associated with age, sex, typical hours per day of technology use, or technology attitudes, but were inversely related to the side effect scores. Conclusions. The preliminary data on acceptability and tolerability of immersive XR technology for relaxation training among youths with migraine supports further intervention development work.

Aligning with Patients and Families: Exploring Youth and Caregiver Openness to Pediatric Headache Interventions

Primary headache disorders are common yet underestimated in youth, resulting in functional disability, decreased quality of life, and caregiver burden. Despite the ubiquity of options, adherence remains challenging for families. One potential factor impacting willingness to engage in recommended treatments is openness. This study explored openness to multidisciplinary headache interventions and the relationships with demographic, pain-related, and psychological variables, among youth and their caregivers. Participants (n = 1087) were youth/caregiver dyads presenting for initial headache evaluation. They completed assessments of openness to headache treatments, medical information, functional disability, and pain-related distress. Overall openness was moderately high for youth and caregivers, and highly correlated between them (r = 0.70). Relationships between youth/caregiver openness to specific interventions were moderate-high (r = 0.42-0.73). These were stronger for interventional techniques but weaker for lifestyle changes. In hierarchical regression models predicting youth and caregiver openness, we found that counterpart openness accounted for the largest portion of variance in their own openness (31-32%), beyond demographic (3%), pain-related (10%), and psychological variables (2-3%). Our findings highlight the importance of involving caregivers in pediatric headache management, given their influence on youth openness and potential involvement in adherence. Awareness of youth/caregiver openness may guide clinicians providing recommendations.

Combining Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia and Chronic Spinal Pain Within Physical Therapy: A Practical Guide for the Implementation of an Integrated Approach

Most people who have nonspecific chronic spinal pain (nCSP) report comorbid insomnia. However, in current treatment strategies for nCSP, insomnia is usually not addressed. Considering the bidirectional interaction between pain and sleep and its underlying psychophysiological mechanisms, insomnia may increase the risk of developing adverse physical and psychological health outcomes and should thus no longer be left untreated. As suggested by previous pilot studies, adding cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia to the contemporary evidence-based biopsychosocial physical therapy approach may also improve pain outcomes in nCSP. This manuscript aims to provide practical guidelines on hybrid physical therapy, including the combination of the following components: (1) pain neuroscience education (eg, to reconceptualize pain) and cognition-targeted exercise therapy (eg, graded exposure to functional daily life movements), and (2) cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (sleep psychoeducation, behavioral and cognitive therapy, correction of sleep hygiene, and relaxation therapy) can be deployed for the management of patients who have chronic spinal pain. Impact. Due to the major impact sleep disturbances have on pain and disability, insomnia as a comorbidity should no longer be ignored when treating patients with chronic spinal pain.

Clinical characteristics of patients with chronic migraine, depending on their personality profile

Background: Chronic migraine is a highly disabling neurological disease that is difficult to treat. The success of the therapeutic management depends, in part, on the psychosocial and personal factors. Aims: To evaluate the clinical characteristics of patients suffering from chronic migraine, depending on the prevailing coping strategy of the individual. Methods: 104 patients with an established diagnosis of chronic migraine were examined, all of them underwent а clinical and neurological examination and questionnaire testing. Results: In the studied group of patients, active behavioral coping strategies (a strategy for solving the problem and seeking a social support) prevailed, while passive coping was much less common. The patients with active coping strategies had the lowest level of comorbid psychoemotional disorders. Conclusion: The patients with passive coping strategies had a shorter medical history and the least severe effect of migraine, but the frequency of headaches and time lost due to headaches for these patients were comparable to those for the patients with active coping strategies.

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.

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

Migraine affects over 40 million Americans and is the world's second most disabling condition. As the majority of medical care for migraine occurs in primary care settings, not in neurology nor headache subspecialty practices, healthcare system interventions should focus on primary care. Though there is grade A evidence for behavioral treatment (e.g., biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and relaxation techniques) for migraine, these treatments are underutilized. Behavioral treatments may be a valuable alternative to opioids, which remain widely used for migraine, despite the US opioid epidemic and guidelines that recommend against them. Identifying and removing barriers to the use of headache behavioral therapy could help reduce the disability as well as the personal and social costs of migraine. These techniques will have their greatest impact if offered in primary care settings to the lower socioeconomic status groups at greatest risk for migraine. We review the societal and cultural challenges that impose barriers to optimal use of non-pharmacological treatment services. These barriers include insufficient knowledge of migraine/headache behavioral treatments and insufficient availability of clinicians trained in non-pharmacological treatment delivery; limited access in underserved communities; financial burden; and stigma associated with both headache and mental health diagnoses and treatment. For each barrier, we discuss potential approaches to minimizing its effect and thus enhancing non-pharmacological treatment utilization.Case ExampleA 25-year-old graduate student with a prior history of headaches in college is attending school in the evenings while working a full-time job. Now, his headaches have significant nausea and photophobia. They are twice weekly and are disabling enough that he is unable to complete homework assignments. He does not understand why the headaches occur on Saturdays when he pushes through all week to get through his examinations that take place on Friday evenings. He tried two different migraine preventive medications, but neither led to the 50% reduction in headache days his doctor had hoped for. His doctor had suggested cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) before initiating the medications, but he had been too busy to attend the appointments, and the challenges in finding an in-network provider proved difficult. Now with the worsening headaches, he opted for the CBT and by the fifth week had already noted improvements in his headache frequency and intensity.

Coping and Motivation for Change-An Interview Study of the Experience From Participation in an Educational Program for Patients With Medication-Overuse Headache

Patient educational programs (PEP) are recommended as part of the treatment for medication-overuse headache (MOH), however, knowledge of patients' experiences when participating is sparse. This study explored how patients experienced participating in a PEP focusing on empowering coping strategies and motivation for behavioral changes. Eight individual semistructured interviews were conducted among patients suffering from MOH who had attended a PEP intervention in a randomized controlled trial. The PEP involved techniques from Motivational Interviewing as its communicative approach. Data collection, analysis, and interpretation were performed within a phenomenological-hermeneutic framework. Results showed that patients found the educational program relevant regarding coping with headache. Participants shifted from focusing on medication to include other ways to manage headache. Experiences regarding ambivalent feelings for behavioral change and feelings of stigmatization were key issues. Participation in this PEP helped the participants cope with headache in new ways relevant to their everyday lives and challenges. The individualized approach enabled by Motivational Interviewing was experienced as useful by the participants, as it actively involved them in the treatment.

The American Headache Society Consensus Statement: Update on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

To incorporate recent research findings, expert consensus, and patient perspectives into updated guidance on the use of new acute and preventive treatments for migraine in adults.

BACKGROUND

The American Headache Society previously published a Consensus Statement on the use of newly introduced treatments for adults with migraine. This update, which is based on the expanded evidence base and emerging expert consensus concerning postapproval usage, provides practical recommendations in the absence of a formal guideline.

METHODS

This update involved four steps: (1) review of data about the efficacy, safety, and clinical use of migraine treatments introduced since the previous Statement was published; (2) incorporation of these data into a proposed update; (3) review and commentary by the Board of Directors of the American Headache Society and patients and advocates associated with the American Migraine Foundation; (4) consideration of these collective insights and integration into an updated Consensus Statement.

RESULTS

Since the last Consensus Statement, no evidence has emerged to alter the established principles of either acute or preventive treatment. Newly introduced acute treatments include two small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (ubrogepant, rimegepant); a serotonin (5-HT1F ) agonist (lasmiditan); a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (celecoxib oral solution); and a neuromodulatory device (remote electrical neuromodulation). New preventive treatments include an intravenous anti-CGRP ligand monoclonal antibody (eptinezumab). Several modalities, including neuromodulation (electrical trigeminal nerve stimulation, noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation) and biobehavioral therapy (cognitive behavioral therapy, biofeedback, relaxation therapies, mindfulness-based therapies, acceptance and commitment therapy) may be appropriate for either acute and/or preventive treatment; a neuromodulation device may be appropriate for acute migraine treatment only (remote electrical neuromodulation).

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of new treatments into clinical practice should be informed by the potential for benefit relative to established therapies, as well as by the characteristics and preferences of individual patients.

Telerehabilitation for Headache Management

Headache is one of the most disabling conditions in the world. Despite plentiful evidence supporting rehabilitation strategies, headache is significantly underassessed and undertreated. Obstacles to headache care include lack of available expertise in headache management, few available resources for effective assessment and treatment, and cost and disability that preclude treatment seeking in patients with headache. Telerehabilitation can allow providers to access expert consultation and gives patients easier access to assessment and treatment. This article covers existing telerehabilitation options for headache management and explores the strength of evidence supporting these approaches. Risks of telerehabilitation and recommendations for future development are discussed.

Heartrate variability biofeedback for migraine using a smartphone application and sensor: A randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Although hand temperature and electromyograph biofeedback have evidence for migraine prevention, to date, no study has evaluated heartrate variability (HRV) biofeedback for migraine.

METHODS

2-arm randomized trial comparing an 8-week app-based HRV biofeedback (HeartMath) to waitlist control. Feasibility/acceptability outcomes included number and duration of sessions, satisfaction, barriers and adverse events. Primary clinical outcome was Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQv2).

RESULTS

There were 52 participants (26/arm). On average, participants randomized to the Hearthmath group completed 29 sessions (SD = 29, range: 2-86) with an average length of 6:43 min over 36 days (SD = 27, range: 0, 88) before discontinuing. 9/29 reported technology barriers. 43% said that they were likely to recommend Heartmath to others. Average MSQv2 decreases were not significant between the Heartmath and waitlist control (estimate = 0.3, 95% CI = -3.1 - 3.6). High users of Heartmath reported a reduction in MSQv2 at day 30 (-12.3 points, p = 0.010) while low users did not (p = 0.765).

DISCUSSION

App-based HRV biofeedback was feasible and acceptable on a time-limited basis for people with migraine. Changes in the primary clinical outcome did not differ between biofeedback and control; however, high users of the app reported more benefit than low users.

The migraine signature study: Methods and baseline results

Objective

To characterize patients who utilize services for migraine in a large integrated health care network, and describe patterns of care and utilization.

Background

Within health care systems, migraine is a common reason for seeking primary and neurology care, but relatively little is documented about who seeks care and the factors that explain variation in utilization.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic health record (EHR) data from Sutter Health primary care (PC) patients who had at least one office visit to a PC clinic between 2013 and 2017. Migraine status was ascertained from diagnosis codes and medication orders. Control status was assigned to those with no evidence of care for any type of headache. We divided the primary care migraine cohort into two groups: those who received all their care for migraine from PC (denoted PC‐M) and those who had ≥1 encounter with a neurologist for migraine (denoted N‐M). Migraine cases were also designated as having preexisting migraine if they had an encounter with a migraine diagnosis within (±) 6 months of their first study period PC visit and, otherwise, designated as first migraine consult. Two levels of contrasts included: patients with migraine and controls; and within the group of patients with migraine, PC‐M and N‐M groups. Comorbid conditions were determined from EHR encounter diagnosis codes.

Results

We identified 94,149 patients with migraine (including 21,525 N‐M and 72,624 PC‐M) and 1,248,763 controls. Comorbidities: Proportions of psychiatric [29.8% (n = 28,054) vs. 11.8% (n = 147,043)], autoimmune [(4.4% (n = 4162) vs. 2.6% (n = 31,981)], pain [13.2% (n = 12,439) vs. 5.8% (n = 72,049)], respiratory [24.6% (n = 23,186) vs. 12.3% (n = 153,692)], neurologic [2.9% (n = 2688) vs. 0.9% (n = 11,321)], and cerebrovascular [1.0% (n = 945) vs. 0.6% (n = 7500)] conditions were higher in the migraine group compared to controls, all p < 0.001. Among patients with migraine, the N‐M group was similar to the PC‐M group in sex, age, ethnicity, and marital status, but were more likely to have preexisting migraine (49.9% (n = 10,734) vs. 36.2% (n = 26,317), p < 0.001). Proportions of comorbid conditions were higher among the N‐M group than the PC‐M group {psychiatric [38.5% (n = 8291) vs. 27.2% (n = 19,763)], autoimmune [6.3% (n = 1365) vs. 3.9% (n = 2797)], pain [19.6% (n = 4218) vs. 11.3% (n = 8211)], respiratory [30.3% (n = 6516) vs. 23.0% (n = 16,670)], neurologic [6.0% (n = 1288) vs. 1.9% (n = 1400)], cardiovascular [9.7% (n = 2091) vs. 7.0% (n = 5076)], and cerebrovascular [2.3% (n = 500) vs. 0.6% (n = 445)], all p < 0.001}. Medications: During the study period, 82.6% (n = 77,762) of patients with migraine received ≥1 prescription order for an acute migraine medication [89.4% (n = 19,250) of N‐M vs. 80.6% (n = 58,512) of PC]. Opioids were prescribed to 52.9% (n = 49,837) of patients with migraine [63.5% (n = 13,669) for N‐M and 49.8% (n = 36,168) for PC‐M patients). During the study period, 61.4% (n = 57,810) of patients received ≥1 prescription for a migraine preventive medication [81.4% (n = 17,521) of N‐M and 55.5% (n = 40,289) of PC‐M patients]. The most commonly prescribed classes of preventive medications were antidepressants.

Conclusions

Among patients with migraine in a large health system, those who were also cared for in neurology were more likely to receive both acute and preventive medication migraine orders than those patients who did not see a neurologist, with triptans and antidepressants the most commonly prescribed classes of acute and preventive pharmacotherapies, respectively. Opioids were prescribed to approximately half of the total sample and more common in the N‐M group. Adjusting for demographics, patients with migraine had higher rates of nearly every comorbidity we assessed and were more likely to utilize services compared to those without migraine. Overall, patients with migraine also cared for in neurology practices used more of all health care resource types under consideration and had more medical issues, which may be due in some part to a more severe, frequent and disabling disease state compared to those who sought care exclusively from PC practices.

Nummular Headache - a Case Report of a Rare Entity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this manuscript is to shed light on systematic work-up of a diagnostic challenge such as nummular headache (NH), and to summarize the relevant literature on NH.

RECENT FINDINGS

The specific nature of the shape of the pain site is usually characteristic of NH. Multiple modalities of investigation including succinct imaging are necessary to successfully rule out other similar conditions. A 26-year-old female patient of Asian-Indian origin presented to the clinic with the chief complaint of chronic persistent left parietal headache for more than 10 years, which has been worsening over the past few days with no specific identifiable trigger. The diagnosis of nummular headache is challenging and confusing due to the rare occurrence and inadequate references in the literature. Appropriate imaging was done, which revealed no pathology that could explain the headache presentation. These findings are consistent with our diagnosis of nummular headache, and helped in the successful management of the case.

The effect of pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide-38 and vasoactive intestinal peptide in cluster headache

BACKGROUND

Previously reported increases in serum levels of vasodilating neuropeptides pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide-38 (PACAP38) and vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) during attacks of cluster headache could indicate their involvement in cluster headache attack initiation. We investigated the attack-inducing effects of PACAP38 and vasoactive intestinal peptide in cluster headache, hypothesising that PACAP38, but not vasoactive intestinal peptide, would induce cluster-like attacks in episodic active phase and chronic cluster headache patients.

METHODS

In a double-blind crossover study, 14 episodic cluster headache patients in active phase, 15 episodic cluster headache patients in remission phase and 15 chronic cluster headache patients were randomly allocated to receive intravenous infusion of PACAP38 (10 pmol/kg/min) or vasoactive intestinal peptide (8 pmol/kg/min) over 20 min on two study days separated by at least 7 days. We recorded headache intensity, incidence of cluster-like attacks, cranial autonomic symptoms and vital signs using a questionnaire (0-90 min).

RESULTS

In episodic cluster headache active phase, PACAP38 induced cluster-like attacks in 6/14 patients and vasoactive intestinal peptide induced cluster-like attacks in 5/14 patients (p = 1.000). In chronic cluster headache, PACAP38 and vasoactive intestinal peptide both induced cluster-like attacks in 7/15 patients (p = 0.765). In episodic cluster headache remission phase, neither PACAP38 nor vasoactive intestinal peptide induced cluster-like attacks.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to our hypothesis, attack induction was lower than expected and roughly equal by PACAP38 and vasoactive intestinal peptide in episodic active phase and chronic cluster headache patients, which contradicts the PAC₁-receptor as being solely responsible for attack induction.Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT03814226).

Smartphone based behavioral therapy for pain in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients: A feasibility acceptability randomized controlled study for the treatment of comorbid migraine and ms pain

BACKGROUND

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and Migraine are comorbid neurologic conditions. Migraine prevalence is three times higher in the MS clinic population compared to the general population, and patients with MS and migraine are more symptomatic than patients with MS without migraine.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to conduct a pilot feasibility and acceptability study of the RELAXaHEAD app in MS-Migraine patients and to assess whether there was any change in migraine disability and MS pain-related disability.

METHODS

Randomized controlled study of patients with MS-migraine ages 18-80 years with 4+ headache days/ month who were willing to engage in smartphone based behavioral therapy. Half received the RELAXaHEAD app with progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) and the other half received the app without the PMR. Data was collected for 90 days on measures of recruitment, retention, engagement, and adherence to RELAXaHEAD. Preliminary data was also collected on migraine disability (MIDAS) and MS pain (PES).

RESULTS

Sixty-two subjects with MS-migraine were enrolled in the study (34 in PMR arm, 28 in monitored usual care arm). On average, during the 90 days, participants played the PMR on average 1.8 times per week, and for 12.9 min on days it was played. Forty-one percent (14/34) of the participants played the PMR two or more times weekly on average. Data was entered into the daily diaries, on average, 49% (44/90) of the days. There were major challenges in reaching subjects in follow-up for the efficacy data, and there was no significant change in migraine disability (MIDAS) scores or MS Pain (PES) scores from baseline to the endpoints. During the six-month follow-up, most patients felt either positively or neutral about the relaxation therapy.

CONCLUSION

There was interest in scalable accessible forms of behavioral therapy to treat migraine and MS-related pain in patients with MS and comorbid migraine. Similar to prior studies, a significant minority were willing to practice the PMR at least twice weekly. In the societal shift from telephone to more text and internet-based interactions, follow up was challenging, but those reached indicated that they appreciated the PMR and would recommend it to others. Future work should focus on engagement and efficacy.

Exploring Emotional Distress, Psychological Traits and Attitudes in Patients with Chronic Migraine Undergoing OnabotulinumtoxinA Prophylaxis versus Withdrawal Treatment

This explorative cross-sectional study aims at exploring emotional distress, psychological profiles, and the attitude towards receiving psychological support in eighty-seven patients with chronic migraine (CM) undergoing OnabotulinumtoxinA prophylactic treatment (OBT-A, n = 40) or withdrawal treatment (WT, n = 47). The outcomes were explored through a specific battery of questionnaires. 25% of patients undergoing OBT-A and almost half of the patients undergoing WT reported psychological distress of at least moderate-severe level, respectively. Coping strategies, self-efficacy, and perceived social support were similar in the two groups. Patients undergoing OBT-A presented lower psychological inflexibility than patients undergoing WT. Predictors of higher psychological distress were low perceived social support by friends, low self-efficacy, and higher avoidance strategies. In both groups, most of the patients evaluated receiving psychological support to be useful (79%). The potential beneficial effects of OBT-A on the severity of symptoms and psychological distress might further support its role in the multidisciplinary management of patients with CM. Identifying patients with psychological vulnerabilities who may benefit from psychological support is relevant in patients with CM.

Feasibility of Smartphone-Delivered Progressive Muscle Relaxation in Persistent Post-Traumatic Headache Patients

Persistent post-traumatic headache (PPTH) is often the most common injury after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), reported by 47-95% of patients. Progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) has level A evidence in preventing migraine and tension headaches. However, research on this behavioral therapy for PPTH, let alone smartphone delivered, is limited. We performed a single-arm study of prospective patients calling our Concussion Center between June 2017 and July 2018. Inclusion criteria were that subjects had to meet International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd Edition criteria for PPTH secondary to mTBI, have four or more headache days a month, be age 18-85 years and 3-12 months post-injury, own a smartphone, and not tried headache behavioral therapy within the year. We recorded baseline headache and neuropsychiatric data. Using the RELAXaHEAD smartphone application, which has a headache diary and PMR audio files, participants were instructed to record headache symptoms and practice 20 min of PMR daily. There were three monthly follow-up assessments. There were 49 subjects enrolled. Basic demographics were: 33 (67%) female with mean age 40.1 ± 14.6 [20, 75] years. Of the 49 subjects, 15 (31%) had pre-existing headaches. In 11 (22%) subjects, mTBI was sports related. Subjects reported 17.7 ± 9.3 [4, 31] headache days in the month before enrollment, and 49 (100%) experienced over three concussion symptoms. Participants inputted data in the RELAXaHEAD app on average 18.3 ± 12.0 days [0, 31] the first month. Number of participants who did PMR over four times per week was 12 (24.5%) the first month, 9 (22.5%) the second month, and 6 (15%) the third month. After 3 months, 17 (42.5 %) participants continued doing PMR. Participants cited time constraints, forgetfulness, application glitches, and repetitiveness as obstacles to practicing PMR. It is feasible to get PPTH subjects to practice behavioral therapy through low-cost smartphone-based PMR two times weekly. Future work will assess efficacy and examine how to optimize barriers to PMR.

Outpatient and self-referred participants: Adherence to treatment components and outcome in an internet intervention targeting anxiety disorders

OBJECTIVE

While adherence is an important factor influencing the effectiveness of internet interventions, many studies operationalize adherence only by the number of sessions and do not report adherence to specific treatment components. The goal of this study was to investigate adherence to treatment components as well as outcome in outpatients and self-referred participants who participated in an internet intervention targeting anxiety.

METHOD

Outpatients (N = 50) were compared to self-referred (N = 37) participants and a matched outpatient waitlist sample (based on nearest neighbor matching): Using t-test and χ2 tests adherence to treatment components based on the number of completed exercises was compared between participant groups. A 2 × 2 repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare pre-to post symptom change between participant groups. Primary measures included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 (GAD-7) and the Mini Social Phobia Inventory (Mini-SPIN). Using nonparametric bootstrap analyses number of sessions and adherence to treatment components were investigated as potential mediators of the relationship between participant group and outcome. Finally, predictors of adherence to treatment components in outpatient participants were investigated using LASSO and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Self-referred participants were more adherent than outpatient participants, however the groups did not differ significantly in outcome. Outpatient participants who adhered to relaxation showed greater improvement during the waiting period than the matched outpatient waitlist sample. The effect of participant group on outcome was mediated via adherence to exposure and number of sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

In internet interventions adherence to treatment components differs between participant groups and has a mediating effect on treatment outcome. Therefore, it should be fostered, especially when participants are not self-referred. In line with these findings more studies should investigate relevant participant characteristics in more depth.

Incorporating Remote Electrical Neuromodulation (REN) Into Usual Care Reduces Acute Migraine Medication Use: An Open-Label Extension Study

Background: A recent randomized controlled study showed that 66.7% (66/99) and 37.4% (37/99) of people undergoing remote electrical neuromodulation (REN), a novel non-pharmacological migraine treatment, achieve pain relief and pain freedom, respectively, at 2 h post-treatment. The participants who completed the 6-weeks double-blind phase of this study were offered to participate in an open-label extension (OLE) with an active REN device. Objective: This study investigated the clinical use of REN, focusing on its potential in reducing the use of acute migraine medications. Methods: The parent study for this open-label extension (OLE) was a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study of acute treatment conducted on 296 participants enrolled at 12 sites in the USA and Israel. This study included a run-in phase, in which migraine attacks were treated with usual care, and an 8-weeks double-blind treatment phase. One hundred sixty participants continued in an 8-weeks OLE phase in which they could incorporate a REN device into their usual care. Medication use rate (percentage of participants who treated their attacks only with REN and avoided medications in all their attacks) and pain outcomes at 2 h post-treatment were compared between the OLE and the run-in phase in a within-subject design. Results: The analyses were performed on 117 participants with episodic migraine. During the OLE, 89.7% of the participants treated their attacks only with REN and avoided medications in all their attacks compared with 15.4% in the run-in phase (p < 0.0001). The rates of pain relief and pain-free in at least 50% of the treatments at 2 h post-treatment were comparable (pain relief: 58.1% in the run-in phase and 57.3% in the OLE, p = 0.999; pain-free: 23.1% in the run-in vs. 30.8% in the OLE, p = 0.175). Conclusions: REN may reduce the use of acute migraine medications. Thus, incorporating REN into usual care may reduce the risk for medication overuse headache (MOH). Future studies should evaluate whether REN reduces the use of acute migraine medications in a population at risk for MOH.

Behavioral Therapy Preferences in People With Migraine

BACKGROUND

There are safe and well-tolerated level A evidence-based behavioral therapies for the prevention of migraine. They are biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, and relaxation. However, the behavioral therapies for the prevention of migraine are underutilized.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to examine whether people with migraine with 4 or more headache days a month had preferences regarding the type of delivery of the behavioral therapy (in-person, smartphone based, telephone) and whether they would be willing to pay for in-person behavioral therapy. We also sought to determine the predictors of likelihood to pursue the behavioral therapy.

METHODS

Using a cross-sectional study design, we developed an online survey using TurkPrime, an online survey platform, to assess how likely TurkPrime participants who screened positive for migraine using the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention screen were to pursue different delivery methods of the behavioral therapy. We report descriptive statistics and quantitative analyses.

RESULTS

There were 401 participants. Median age was 34 [IQR: 29, 41] years. More than two thirds of participants (70.3%, 282/401) were women. Median number of headache days/ month was 5 [IQR: 2.83, 8.5]. Some (12.5%, 50/401) used evidence-based behavioral therapy for migraine. The participants reported that they were "somewhat likely" to pursue in-person or smartphone behavioral therapy and behavioral therapy covered by insurance but were neutral about pursuing the telephone-based behavioral therapy. Participants were "not very likely" to pay out of pocket for the behavioral therapy. Migraine-related disability as measured by the MIDAS grading score was associated with likelihood to pursue the behavioral therapy in-person (P = .004), via telephone (P = .015), and via smart phone (P < .001), and covered by insurance (P = .001). However, migraine-related disability was not associated with likelihood to pursue out of pocket (P = .769) behavioral therapy. Pain intensity was predictive of likelihood of pursuing the behavioral therapy for migraine when covered by insurance. Other factors including education, employment, and headache days were not predictors.

CONCLUSION

People with migraine prefer in-person and smartphone-based behavioral therapy to telephone-based behavioral therapy. Migraine-related disability is associated with likelihood to pursue the behavioral therapy (independent of type of delivery of the behavioral therapy-in-person, telephone based or smartphone based). However, participants were not very likely to pay for the behavioral therapy.

Phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled study of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache: Results from 3-month double-blind treatment

Objective

To report efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in adults with chronic cluster headache.

Background

Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide and inhibits its biological activity.

Methods

This study comprised a prospective baseline period, a 12-week double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period, and a 52-week open-label period. Up to six protocol-specified concomitant preventive medications were allowed if patients were on a stable dose for 2 months prior to the prospective baseline period. Patients were randomized 1:1 to monthly subcutaneous galcanezumab (300 mg) or placebo. The primary endpoint was overall mean change from baseline in weekly attack frequency with galcanezumab compared to placebo. Key secondary endpoints were ≥50% response rate and percentage of patients meeting sustained response. Results from the double-blind treatment period are reported.

Results

A total of 237 patients were randomized and treated (120 placebo; 117 galcanezumab). At baseline, the mean age was 45 years and 63% were using ≥1 preventive drug. The primary endpoint was not met; mean change in weekly attack frequency was −4.6 placebo versus −5.4 galcanezumab (p = 0.334). Key secondary endpoints also were not met. Injection site-related treatment-emergent adverse events were more common in the galcanezumab than the placebo group, with significantly more injection site erythema.

Conclusion

Treatment with galcanezumab 300 mg did not achieve its primary and key secondary endpoints. This study underscores the potential distinct biology of cCH as well as the significant unmet need for safe, effective, and well-tolerated preventive treatment. The safety profile of galcanezumab in cCH is consistent with that observed in trials of episodic CH and migraine.

Trial registration

NCT02438826; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02438826.

Mindfulness in migraine: A narrative review

Introduction: Migraine is the second leading cause of disability worldwide, yet many patients are unable to tolerate, benefit from, or afford pharmacological treatment options. Non-pharmacological migraine therapies exist, especially to reduce opioid use, which represents a significant unmet need. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) have potential as a non-pharmacological treatment for migraine, primarily through the development of flexible attentional capacity across sensory, cognitive, and emotional experiences.Areas covered: The authors review efficacy and potential mechanisms of MBIs for migraine, including mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT).Expert opinion: While most mindfulness research studies for migraine to date have been pilot trials, which are small and/or lacked rigor, initial evidence suggests there may be improvements in overall headache-related disability and psychological well-being. Many research questions remain to help target the treatment to patients most likely to benefit, including the ideal dosage, duration, delivery method, responder characteristics, and potential mechanisms and biomarkers. A realistic understanding of these factors is important for patients, providers, and the media. Mindfulness will not 'cure' migraine; however, mindfulness may be an important tool as part of a comprehensive treatment approach to help patients 'mindfully' engage in valued life activities.

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess the Impact of Motivational Interviewing on Initiating Behavioral Therapy for Migraine

BACKGROUND

Relaxation, biofeedback, and cognitive behavioral therapy are evidence-based behavioral therapies for migraine. Despite such efficacy, research shows that only about half of patients initiate behavioral therapy recommended by their headache specialists.

OBJECTIVE

Motivational interviewing (MI) is a widely used method to help patients explore and overcome ambivalence to enact positive life changes. We tested the hypothesis that telephone-based MI would improve initiation, scheduling, and attending behavioral therapy for migraine.

METHODS

Single-blind randomized controlled trial comparing telephone-based MI to treatment as usual (TAU). Participants were recruited during their appointments with headache specialists at two sites of a New York City medical center.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

ages from 16 to 80, migraine diagnosis by United Council of Neurologic Subspecialty fellowship trained and/or certified headache specialist, and referral for behavioral therapy for prevention in the appointment of recruitment.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

having done behavioral therapy for migraine in the past year. Participants in the MI group received up to 5 MI calls. TAU participants were called after 3 months for general follow-up data. The prespecified primary outcome was scheduling a behavioral therapy appointment, and secondary outcomes were initiating and attending a behavioral therapy appointment.

RESULTS

76 patients were enrolled and randomized (MI = 36, TAU = 40). At baseline, the mean number of headache days was 12.0 ± 9.0. Self-reported anxiety was present for 36/52 (69.2%) and depression for 30/52 (57.7%). Follow-up assessments were completed for 77.6% (59/76, MI = 32, TAU = 27). The mean number of MI calls per participant was 2.69 ± 1.56 [0 to 5]. There was a greater likelihood of those in the MI group to initiating an appointment (22/32, 68.8% vs 11/27, 40.7%, P = .0309). There were no differences in appointment scheduling or attendance. Reasons stated for not initiating behavioral therapy were lack of time, lack of insurance/funding, prioritizing other treatments, and travel plans.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief telephone-based MI may improve rates of initiation of behavioral therapy for migraine, but other barriers appear to lessen the impact on scheduling and attending behavioral therapy appointments.

Message Framing and the Willingness to Pursue Behavioral Therapy: A Study of People With Migraine

OBJECTIVE

Behavioral treatments for migraine prevention are safe and effective but underutilized in migraine management. Health message framing may be helpful in guiding patients with treatment decision making. The authors assessed associations between message framing and the willingness to seek migraine behavioral treatment among persons with a diagnosis of migraine headache.

METHODS

A total of 401 individuals (median age=34 years [interquartile range, 12 years]) who screened positive for migraine, as determined by the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention questionnaire, were assessed. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one of four message frames using TurkPrime: specific loss framing (N=101), specific gain framing (N=98), nonspecific loss framing (N=102), and nonspecific gain framing (N=100). The message frames were initially piloted for 56 participants and then revised by a headache specialist, with input from a communications specialist, and randomly distributed to the larger sample.

RESULTS

More than two-thirds of participants (70.3%) were women. The median number of headache days per month was 5 (interquartile range, 5.3). Some of the participants (12.5%) had previously used evidence-based behavioral therapy for migraine. No significant differences in the willingness to pursue behavioral treatment for migraine between the four message framing groups were found. The median for all four types of message frames was 4 (interquartile range, 1; Kruskal-Wallis H, p=0.41).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings revealed that message framing was not associated with willingness to seek behavioral therapy for migraine.

Adherence and barriers in e-health self-control training for enhancing childhood multidisciplinary obesity treatment

Training self-control as the assumed underlying mechanism for weight loss is a promising pathway for improving long-term outcomes of childhood multidisciplinary obesity treatment (MOT). The present study is the first to analyse adherence to e-health self-control training in paediatric obesity. We hypothesized that low adherence would relate to child characteristics and to contextual treatment barriers. Participants were recruited as a part of a larger randomized controlled trial, evaluating an e-health self-control training during inpatient MOT (intensive phase) and its outpatient aftercare (booster phase). A number of 68 youngsters with severe obesity between 11 to 19 years old were included in the present study. Excellent adherence was observed in the intensive phase during inpatient MOT, but rates decreased in the booster phase. As predicted, the low adherence group had a significantly higher weight status throughout the entire study period. Differences in contextual treatment barriers did not appear. Further in-depth analysis showed that the low adherence group frequently experienced practical obstacles. The end of inpatient MOT and high weight status can be considered important risk factors for low adherence in an additional self-control training aimed at facilitating weight loss.

Complementary and Integrative Health Treatments for Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a chronic disabling neurologic condition that can be treated with a combination of both pharmacologic and complementary and integrative health options.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

With the growing interest in the US population in the use of nonpharmacologic treatments, we reviewed the evidence for supplements and behavioral interventions used for migraine prevention.

RESULTS

Supplements reviewed included vitamins, minerals, and certain herbal preparations. Behavioral interventions reviewed included cognitive behavioral therapy, biofeedback, relaxation, the third-wave therapies, acupuncture, hypnosis, and aerobic exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

This article should provide an appreciation for the wide range of nonpharmacologic therapies that might be offered to patients in place of or in addition to migraine-preventive medications.

Management of supragastric belching with cognitive behavioural therapy: factors determining success and follow-up outcomes at 6-12 months post-therapy

BACKGROUND

Supragastric belching (SGB) has a significant behavioural component. We recently used cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) to treat SGB. We demonstrated that CBT significantly reduces symptoms and improves quality of life in 50% of patients who had completed treatment.

AIMS

To investigate factors associated with successful CBT for SGB and to assess symptoms 6-12 months after completion of CBT METHODS: Records of 39 patients who had completed the CBT protocol were analysed. Per cent pre- to post-treatment change in symptoms was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) score. We evaluated the association between 'pre-treatment' factors and 'during-treatment' factors, and symptomatic outcomes. Symptoms were also assessed 6-12 months after treatment.

RESULTS

From 'pre-treatment factors', a lower number of SGBs (P < .01) and lower hypervigilance score (P < .04) were significantly associated with a better outcome. From 'during-treatment factors' a higher CBT 'proficiency score' ([a] acceptance of the explanation that SGB is a behavioural phenomenon [b] detection of a warning signal before belching [c] adherence to the exercises treatment) was associated with a better outcome (P = .001). Multiple regression analysis found that number of SGBs, hypervigilance score and CBT proficiency score were independently associated with outcome (P < .01, P = .01, P < .01). VAS score before CBT (267 ± 79) decreased to 151 ± 88 soon after CBT (P < .001), and the effect persisted at 6-12 months follow-up (153 ± 82).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower number of SGBs, lower hypervigilance score and higher proficiency during CBT were associated with better CBT outcome. CBT positive effect lasted for at least 6-12 months post-treatment.

A Prospective Observational Cohort Study on Pharmacological Habitus, Headache-Related Disability and Psychological Profile in Patients with Chronic Migraine Undergoing OnabotulinumtoxinA Prophylactic Treatment

Chronic Migraine (CM) is a disabling neurologic condition with a severe impact on functioning and quality of life. Successful therapeutic management of patients with CM is complex, and differences in therapeutic response could be attributable to genetically determined factors, sensitivity to pharmacological treatment, psychosocial and relational factors affecting the patient’s compliance and approach on the therapeutic treatment. The aim of this prospective observational study was to explore self-efficacy, coping strategies, psychological distress and headache-related disability in a cohort of 40 patients with CM (mean age: 46.73; standard deviation 13.75) treated with OnabotulinumtoxinA and the relationship between these clinical and psychological aspects and acute medication consumption during OnabotulinumtoxinA prophylactic treatment. Patients presented an overall significant reduction in the Headache Index (HI) (p < 0.001), HI with severe intensity (p = 0.009), and total analgesic consumption (p = 0.003) after the prophylactic treatment. These results are in line with the literature. Despite this, higher nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs consumption was associated with higher psychological distress, higher HI with severe and moderate intensity, and worse quality of life. Conversely, triptans consumption was correlated with HI of mild intensity, and problem-focused coping strategies. To conclude, the psychological profile, and in particular, the psychological distress and specific coping strategies might influence the self-management of acute medication.

Enhancing Motivation for Change in the Management of Chronic Painful Conditions: a Review of Recent Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to evaluate and summarize recent empirical research investigating motivational factors for management of chronic pain and headache disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research on motivation for non-pharmacological treatment of chronic pain and headache disorders has identified factors that influence initiation of and adherence to treatment. To address common factors that inhibit initiation of treatment (i.e., cost, time commitment), several electronic treatments have been developed. Self-efficacy is the most commonly studied psychosocial influence on treatment adherence, with evidence that it is positively correlated with adherence. Other studies have sought to improve adherence to treatment using motivational interviewing interventions. There is currently limited research on how to enhance motivation for initial adherence to non-pharmacological treatment for chronic pain and headache disorders. Instead of enhancing motivation, researchers have looked to reduce barriers to treatment with electronic health treatments; however, many of these studies have focused on intervention feasibility, rather than efficacy or effectiveness. Numerous studies have identified a relationship between self-efficacy and treatment adherence. Although motivational interviewing interventions have been shown to improve adherence to treatment, there is little evidence that they improve treatment outcomes. Recommendations for further investigation include improving interventions to enhance accessibility and adherence to treatment with the goal of improving outcomes, as well as identifying ways to improve treatment initiation and adherence in patients who are currently engaged in long-term opioid therapy.

Smartphone-based migraine behavioral therapy: a single-arm study with assessment of mental health predictors

Progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) is an under-utilized Level A evidence-based treatment for migraine prevention. We studied the feasibility and acceptability of smartphone application (app)-based PMR for migraine in a neurology setting, explored whether app-based PMR might reduce headache (HA) days, and examined potential predictors of app and/or PMR use. In this single-arm pilot study, adults with ICHD3 migraine, 4+ HA days/month, a smartphone, and no prior behavioral migraine therapy in the past year were asked to complete a daily HA diary and do PMR for 20 min/day for 90 days. Outcomes were: adherence to PMR (no. and duration of audio plays) and frequency of diary use. Predictors in the models were baseline demographics, HA-specific variables, baseline PROMIS (patient-reported outcomes measurement information system) depression and anxiety scores, presence of overlapping pain conditions studied and app satisfaction scores at time of enrollment. Fifty-one patients enrolled (94% female). Mean age was 39 ± 13 years. The majority (63%) had severe migraine disability at baseline (MIDAS). PMR was played 22 ± 21 days on average. Mean/session duration was 11 ± 7 min. About half (47%) of uses were 1+ time/week and 35% of uses were 2+ times/week. There was a decline in use/week. On average, high users (PMR 2+ days/week in the first month) had 4 fewer days of reported HAs in month 2 vs. month 1, whereas low PMR users (PMR < 2 days/week in the first month) had only 2 fewer HA days in month 2. PROMIS depression score was negatively associated with the log odds of using the diary at least once (vs. no activity) in a week (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = [0.55, 0.85]) and of doing the PMR at least once in a week (OR = 0.77, 95% CI = [0.68, 0.91]). PROMIS anxiety was positively associated with using the diary at least once every week (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = [1.09, 1.73]) and with doing the PMR at least once every week (OR = 1.14 [95% CI = [1.02, 1.31]). In conclusion, about half of participants used smartphone-based PMR intervention based upon a brief, initial introduction to the app. App use was associated with reduction in HA days. Higher depression scores were negatively associated with diary and PMR use, whereas higher anxiety scores were positively associated.