Inpatient Treatment of Headache: An Evidence-Based Assessment

Management of medication overuse (MO) and medication overuse headache (MOH) S1 guideline

Introduction

Chronic headache due to the overuse of medication for the treatment of migraine attacks has a prevalence of 0.5–2.0%. This guideline provides guidance for the management of medication overuse (MO) and medication overuse headache (MOH).

Recommendations

Treatment of headache due to overuse of analgesics or specific migraine medications involves several stages. Patients with medication overuse (MO) or medication overuse headache (MOH) should be educated about the relationship between frequent use of symptomatic headache medication and the transition from episodic to chronic migraine (chronification), with the aim of reducing and limiting the use of acute medication. In a second step, migraine prophylaxis should be initiated in patients with migraine and overuse of analgesics or specific migraine drugs. Topiramate, onabotulinumtoxinA and the monoclonal antibodies against CGRP or the CGRP-receptor are effective in patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse. In patients with tension-type headache, prophylaxis is performed with amitriptyline. Drug prophylaxis should be supplemented by non-drug interventions. For patients in whom education and prophylactic medication are not effective, pausing acute medication is recommended. This treatment can be performed in an outpatient, day hospital or inpatient setting. Patients with headache due to overuse of opioids should undergo inpatient withdrawal. The success rate of the stepped treatment approach is 50–70% after 6 to 12 months. A high relapse rate is observed in patients with opioid overuse. Tricyclic antidepressants, neuroleptics (antiemetics) and the administration of steroids are recommended for the treatment of withdrawal symptoms or headaches during the medication pause. Consistent patient education and further close monitoring reduce the risk of relapse.

Headache infusion centers: A survey on treatments provided, infusion center operations, and barriers to developing new infusion centers

BACKGROUND

Infusion therapy refers to the intravenous administration of medicines and fluids for the treatment of status migrainosus, severe persistent headaches, or chronic headache. Headache practices and centers offer this treatment for patients as an alternative to the emergency department (ED) setting. However, little information is available in the literature on understanding the operations of an infusion center.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to survey the Inpatient Headache & Emergency Medicine specialty section and the Academic Program Directors listserv of the American Headache Society (AHS) to better understand current practices.

METHODS

A survey was advertised and distributed to the listservs of both the Inpatient Headache & Emergency Medicine specialty section and the Academic Program Directors, which combined included both academic and private practices. In addition, the survey was available on laptops at related events at an annual AHS meeting in Scottsdale.

RESULTS

Of the 127 members of the combined group of both listservs, 50 responded with an overall survey response rate of 39%. Ten out of fifty were from programs with more than one responder completing the survey, leaving 40 unique headache programs. Academic programs made up the majority of programs (85%, 34/40). The total of 40 participating programs is comparable with the 47 academic headache programs listed on the American Migraine Foundation website at the time of the survey. Of the academic programs surveyed, most were hospital based (n = 23) compared with a satellite location (n = 11). Of all programs surveyed, 68% (27/40) offered infusion therapy. Of those that did not have an infusion practice (n = 13), the most common reason cited was insufficient staffing (n = 8). Key highlights of the survey included the following: The majority of programs offering infusions obtain prior authorization before scheduling (70%, 19/27) and offer patient availability 5 days/week (78%, 21/27) typically only during business hours (81%, 22/27). Programs reported that they typically give three to four medications during each infusion session (72%, 18/25). Treatment paradigms varied between programs. Programs surveyed were concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest regions of the United States.

CONCLUSION

The limited number of headache infusion centers overall may contribute to the limited ability of headache infusion centers to prevent ED migraine visits. Headache patients can have unpredictable headache onset, and most of the infusion practices surveyed appeared to adapt to this by offering infusions most days during a work week. However, this need for multiple days per week may also explain the most common reason for not having an infusion practice, which is insufficient staffing. Various treatment paradigms are implemented by different practitioners, and future studies will have to focus on investigation of best practice.

Dihydroergotamine infusion for pediatric refractory headache: A retrospective chart review

BACKGROUND

Headaches are a common symptom in children. Children with refractory headaches may be admitted for inpatient treatment with intravenous dihydroergotamine mesylate (DHE). However, very few studies have characterized these patients and their treatment outcomes using validated, self-reported, pain scales.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe demographic and clinical characteristics of children admitted for DHE infusion, determine DHE treatment outcomes by means of numeric pain scale ratings, and explore associations between treatment outcomes and clinical characteristics.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was completed in patients ages 5-21 admitted for DHE infusion from January 2013 to July 2018 at a large, pediatric academic medical center and community-based satellite center. All primary headache types were included.

RESULTS

A total of 200 unique admissions for DHE were available for analysis. Overall, patients were predominantly White (87.5%, 175/200) and female (80.0%, 160/200) with an average age of 15.4 years (SD 2.3). Common comorbidities included obesity (42.0%, 81/193), anxiety (41.0%, 82/200), and depression (20.0%, 40/200). The mean length of stay was 2.4 days (SD 1.10; range 1-8 days). Most headaches (65.0%, 130/200) met the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition criteria for migraine, followed by new daily persistent headache (25.5%, 51/200). Mean DHE maximum dose was 5.3 (SD 2.17; range 0.5-14.5 mg) with most patients requiring 3.5-6.5 mg. DHE was typically terminated at six doses (range 1-15). The most frequently reported adverse event was nausea (5.5%, 11/200). There was no difference in pain severity at admission across headache types, with an average baseline pain score of 8.1 (SD 1.6). Posttreatment reduction in pain score was statistically significant (range: -3.2 to -4.9; each p < 0.001) across all headache types. Overall, 84.0% (168/200) of the patients had some improvement in pain. More than half of the patients (53.5%, 107/200) showed at least moderate improvement (≥50.0% reduction in pain score), and 18.0% (36/200) had full headache resolution. Limited patients (16.0%, 32/200) experienced no improvement in pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with DHE resulted in at least some improvement for most patients regardless of headache type or number of doses. Clinical trials stratified by headache type and comorbid factors could help clarify treatment algorithms to optimize patient outcomes.

Hospital Burden of Migraine in United States Adults: A 15-year National Inpatient Sample Analysis

Background

Migraine headache is associated with high costs, but changes over time of inpatient burden in the United States are unknown. Understanding longitudinal trends is necessary to determine the costs of evolving inpatient treatments that target biological factors in the generation of pain such as vasodilation and aberrant activity of trigeminal neurotransmitters. We report the migraine hospital burden trend in the United States over 15 years.

Methods

Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample of the Hospitalization Cost and Utilization Project databases were analyzed from 1997 to 2012. Inpatient costs were reported in dollars for the cost to the institution, whereas charges reflect the amount billed. These parameters were trended and the average annual percent change was calculated to illustrate year-to-year changes.

Results

Overall discharges for migraine headache reached a low of 30,761 discharges in 1999, and peaked in 2012 with 54,510 discharges. Average length of stay decreased from 3.5 days in 1997 to 2.8 days in 2012. Total inpatient charges increased from $176 million in 1999 to $1.2 billion in 2012. Inpatient costs totaled $322 million in 2012, with an average daily cost of $2,111.

Conclusions

Inpatient burden rapidly increased over the analyzed period, with hospital charges increasing from $5,939 per admission and $176 million nationwide in 1997, to $21,576 per admission and $1.2 billion nationwide in 2012. This trend provides context for research examining cost-effectiveness and quality of life benefits for current treatments. The study of these parameters together with better prevention and improved outpatient treatment may help alleviate the inpatient burden of migraine.

Inpatient Management of Migraine

Migraine is a frequently disabling neurologic condition which can be complicated by medication overuse headache and comorbid medical disorders, including obesity, anxiety and depression. Although most migraine management takes place in outpatient clinics, inpatient treatment is indicated for migraine refractory to multiple outpatient treatments, with intractable nausea or vomiting, need for detoxification from medication overuse (such as opioids and barbiturates), and significant medical and psychiatric disease. The goals of inpatient treatment include breaking the current cycle of headache pain, reducing the frequency and/or severity of future attacks, monitored detoxification of overused medications, and reducing disability and improving quality of life.

The Many Faces of Medication-Overuse Headache in Clinical Practice

The management of medication-overuse headache (MOH) is multifaceted and headache experts have different views on the optimal strategy to tackle this type of secondary headache. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the literature on the management of MOH, and to highlight important considerations in the clinical evaluation of the MOH patient. Managing MOH in clinical practice starts by evaluating the headache patient with medication overuse, determining the overused drug(s), assessing the impact of headaches on the patient and assessing comorbid conditions and disorders. Withdrawal of the overused medication is the cornerstone of treatment. An inpatient or outpatient setting is chosen based on the clinical profile of the patient. There is evidence for abrupt withdrawal combined with headache preventive treatment. Bridging therapy to bring relief to withdrawal headaches and/or symptoms should be offered. Education and motivational work through multidisciplinary assessment show benefits in sustaining withdrawal and preventing relapse. Although the reversal of chronic headache after cessation of overused acute medication has been noticed worldwide, different aspects of the management of MOH, such as complete or gradual withdrawal, or preventive treatment with or without withdrawal are still debated.

Pathophysiology, prevention, and treatment of medication overuse headache

Regular or frequent use of analgesics and acute antimigraine drugs can increase the frequency of headache, and induce the transition from episodic to chronic headache or medication overuse headache. The 1-year prevalence of this condition in the general population is between 1% and 2%. Medication overuse headache is more common in women and in people with comorbid depression, anxiety, and other chronic pain conditions. Treatment of medication overuse headache has three components. First, patients need education and counselling to reduce the intake of medication for acute headache attacks. Second, some patients benefit from drug withdrawal (discontinuation of the overused medication). Finally, preventive drug therapy and non-medical prevention might be necessary in patients at onset of treatment or in patients who do not respond to the first two steps. The optimal therapeutic approach requires validation in controlled trials.

How and when to refer patients diagnosed with secondary headache and other craniofacial pain in the Emergency Department and Primary Care: Recommendations of the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group

INTRODUCTION

When secondary headache is suspected and the patient is referred to the emergency department or to the outpatient neurology clinic, it is important to know which are the appropriate complementary examinations to perform and the suitable referral pathway for patients to follow. In order to establish recommendations on this matter, the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group (GECSEN) has decided to issue a series of agreed recommendations constituting a referral protocol for patients with headache and/or craniofacial neuralgias.

DEVELOPMENT

Young neurologists with an interest and experience in headache were invited to draft a series of practical guidelines in collaboration with GECSEN's Executive Committee. For practical reasons, the document was divided into 2 articles: the first focuses on primary headaches and craniofacial neuralgias and this second article on secondary headaches and other craniofacial pain. In order for the recommendations to be helpful for daily practice, they follow a practical approach, with tables summarising referral criteria, examinations to be performed, and referral to other specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

We hope to offer a guide and tools to improve decision-making regarding patients with headache, identifying complementary tests to prioritise and referral pathways to be followed, in order to avoid duplicated consultations and delayed diagnosis and treatment.

Need for Analgesics/drugs of Abuse: A Comparison Between Headache Patients and Addicts by the Leeds Dependence Questionnaire (LDQ)

Our aim was to compare the need for analgesics/drugs of abuse between headache patients—chronic and episodic headache sufferers—and addicts, by the Leeds Dependence Questionnaire (LDQ). This is a self-completion 10-item instrument to measure dependence upon a variety of substances. We administered the LDQ questionnaire to 122 chronic daily headache (CDH) sufferers who had been taking one dose of analgesic drug every day for at least 1 year; 71 subjects suffering from episodic headache (EH) using analgesics only occasionally; 115 consecutive drug addicts (DA) with a diagnosis of substance dependence. The mean LDQ total score was similar in the CDH (11.58 ± 6.35) and DA (10.37 ± 6.51) groups, and for both it was significantly higher than the score in the EH (5.61 ± 3.00) group ( P < 0.001). The CDH group had the highest scores, and higher scores than the DA group (Z = −8.18, P < 0.001) in item 8, assessing the primacy of effect over the kind of analgesic used, and in item 10 (Z = −5.03, P < 0.001), asking if it is difficult to live without the analgesic; the DA group had the highest scores, and higher scores than the CDH group, in item 9 (Z = −5.07, P < 0.001) addressing the need for the continued administration of the drug to maintain well-being, and in item 3 (Z =−2.39, P < 0.05), exploring compulsion to start the use of the drug. The EH group had lower scores in all items ( P < 0.05) except for item 9, where there was no difference from CDH group; the EH group had also lower scores ( P < 0.001) than the DA group, except for item 8, where, instead, the score was higher than in the DA group (Z = −5.33, P < 0.001). A strong link develops between chronic headache patients and the analgesics they use. This sort of ‘dependence’ appears to be a consequence of headache, originating from the necessity for the analgesic to cope with everyday life.

Update of Inpatient Treatment for Refractory Chronic Daily Headache

Chronic daily headache (CDH) is a group of headache disorders, in which headaches occur daily or near-daily (>15 days per month) and last for more than 3 months. Important CDH subtypes include chronic migraine, chronic tension-type headache, hemicrania continua, and new daily persistent headache. Other headaches with shorter durations (<4 h/day) are usually not included in CDH. Common comorbidities of CDH are medication overuse headache and various psychiatric disorders, such as depression and anxiety. Indications of inpatient treatment for CDH patients include poor responses to outpatient management, need for detoxification for overuse of specific medications (particularly opioids and barbiturates), and severe psychiatric comorbidities. Inpatient treatment usually involves stopping acute pain, preventing future attacks, and detoxifying medication overuse if present. Multidisciplinary integrated care that includes medical staff from different disciplines (e.g., psychiatry, clinical psychology, and physical therapy) has been recommended. The outcomes of inpatient treatment are satisfactory in terms of decreasing headache intensity or frequency, withdrawal from medication overuse, reducing disability, and improving life quality, although long-term relapse is not uncommon. In conclusion, inpatient treatment may be useful for select patients with refractory CDH and should be incorporated in a holistic headache care program.

Inpatient management of migraine

Migraine is a frequently disabling disorder which may require inpatient treatment. Admission criteria for migraine include intractable migraine, nausea and/or vomiting, severe disability, and dependence on opioids or barbiturates. The inpatient treatment of migraine is based on observational studies and expert opinion rather than placebo-controlled trials. Well-established inpatient treatments for migraine include dihydroergotamine, neuroleptics/antiemetics, lidocaine, intravenous aspirin, and non-pharmacologic treatment such as cognitive-behavioral therapy. Short-acting treatments possibly associated with medication overuse, such as triptans, opioids, or barbiturate-containing compounds, are generally avoided. While the majority of persons with migraine are admitted on an emergency basis for only a few days, outcome studies and infusion protocols during elective admissions at tertiary headache centers suggest a longer length of stay may be needed for persons with intractable migraine.

Tension-Type Headache in Children: The Cinderella of Headache Disorders!

Tension-type headache (TTH) may be as common a headache disorder as migraine in children and adolescents. TTH has a neurobiological basis with genetic and environmental factors making variable contributions to the different sub-types. The diagnostic criteria for TTH in the second edition of the “International Classification of Headache Disorders” appear to be applicable to children. Anxiety and mood disorders may be co-morbid with frequent episodic and chronic TTH. Psychosocial stressors play an important role in precipitating and maintaining TTH. Hence, a biopsychosocial approach should be adopted for care. Standardized histories and examinations together with prospective headache diaries are the foundations for good management; attention to ‘red flags’ will help identify secondary causes that present with headache similar to TT. There are no randomized controlled drug trials for the treatment of TTH. Relaxation and cognitive behavioral therapies are effective. TTH in children and adolescents warrants greater recognition from the clinician and scientist. Studies focusing on TTH are overdue.

Pediatric headache: where have we been and where do we need to be

In this article, we hope to summarize current understanding of pediatric headache. We discuss epidemiology, genetics, classification, diagnosis, outpatient, emergency and inpatient treatment options, prevention strategies, and behavioral approaches. For each section, we end with a series of questions for future research and consideration.

Migraine disability, healthcare utilization, and expenditures following treatment in a tertiary headache center

Headache is among the most common disabling pain complaints. While many patients are managed in primary care or referral neurology practices, some patients have refractive situations that necessitate referral to a tertiary headache center. Increasing frequency of headache is strongly associated with increasing disability and workplace absenteeism as well as increased healthcare utilization. Previous studies have demonstrated that headache care in a dedicated tertiary center is associated with a decrease in headache frequency and improvement in other characteristics that persist over extended periods of time. Previous studies have not examined the impact of this treatment on subsequent healthcare utilization and associated expenditures. In this study we examined the changes in healthcare utilization and expenditures as well as the impact on disability and workplace productivity with treatment in a tertiary headache care center that used initial treatment settings of inpatient and outpatient care and considered the difference between those with episodic migraine and those with chronic migraine and its complications. Tertiary care was found to produce positive reductions in disability, healthcare utilization, and expenditures. These results suggest that earlier tertiary-level intervention may avoid the complications of migraine that occur in some patients and the increasing costs and utilization of care associated with higher disability.

Chronic headaches and medication overuse

Chronic headaches represent a significant burden for the affected individuals and for the society, and a major challenge for successful care. Among the various types of chronic headaches, those that are associated with medication overuse (medication-overuse headache, MOH) are of particular importance because of the large proportion of patients who complain of this condition and their poor outcome. Most patients with MOH had migraine as primary headache. Practically, almost all drugs used for the symptomatic relief of migraine, including triptans and analgesics can cause MOH. Although the pathophysiology of MOH is unknown, recent studies hypothesize that plastic changes in specific pain areas of the central nervous system are main contributors to establishing MOH. Not infrequently, drug overuse is associated with habituation and failure of previously effective medications. Finally, treatment of MOH is poorly evidence based and mostly relies on clinical experience and belief.

Disability in chronic migraine with medication overuse: treatment effects through 5 years

Chronic migraine accompanied by medication overuse is particularly difficult to treat. The number of treatment investigations is limited, few have included follow-up beyond 6 months and almost none has examined whether treatment leads to concurrent improvements in disability and functional impairment. This open-label study addresses these limitations. We have been prospectively following an initial cohort of 84 chronic migraine patients with medication overuse, who at the time of this evaluation had been reduced to 58, for an extended period to assess longer-term maintenance of effects, using measurement procedures identical to those in the original investigation. Thus, the specific aim was to determine the clinical status, with respect to pain indices and disability level, of chronic migraine patients with medication overuse who were treated and followed prospectively for 5 years. All patients completed a brief inpatient treatment programme, in which they were withdrawn from their offending medications and subsequently placed on more appropriate preventive antimigraine medications. Both end-point, wherein missing data points were estimated, and continuer analyses, wherein data analysis was limited to the 58 individuals with complete datasets, revealed significant improvement on all measures studied-headache days per month, analgesic consumption and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) total score. The percentage reduction from baseline to 5 years for the MIDAS total score was 76.0%, while the percentage of individuals revealing improvements of clinically significant magnitude (≥ 50%) on the MIDAS was 91.9%. MIDAS total scores were lower at 5 years than at some of the intervening follow-up intervals. Comparisons of those who completed the 5-year follow-up (n = 58) with those who did not revealed no differences at baseline. This finding, coupled with the nearly identical results for the end-point and continuers analyses, suggests that attrition did not have a bearing on outcome. None of the patients completing the 5-year follow-up had relapsed since the prior 3-year follow-up assessment. High levels of maintenance were revealed at 5 years, with disability scores showing some continued improvement over time. The implications of these findings and the limitations of the study are discussed.

Chronic Daily Headache with Medication Overuse: A Randomized Follow-Up by Neurologist or PCP

Several studies have shown the benefit of withdrawal therapy when medication overuse headache (MOH) is suspected. Our aim was to compare the effect of withdrawal therapy in patients followed by a neurologist (group A, n = 42) and a primary care physician (PCP) (group B, n = 38). Patients were randomized to A or B, and follow-up was at 3, 6 and 12 months. Calculated mean headache (MH at 6 months + MH at 12 months)/2 (primary end-point) was similar; A 1.04 (0.87, 1.21) and B 1.02 (0.82, 1.21) ( P = 0.87). The number of patients with 50% improvement of headache days was also similar; 14/42 in group A vs. 12/34 in B ( P = 0.86) at 3 months, 15/42 vs. 11/33 ( P = 0.83) at 6 months and 15/42 vs. 14/38 ( P = 0.92) at 12 months. Days without headache during the last 9 months of follow-up were 123 (96, 150) in group A and 137 (112, 161) in B ( P = 0.62). After 3 months one-third were classified as MOH. Patients with MOH improved similarly in group A and B, and so did patients without MOH. Within 1 year 7/42 in A and 9/38 in B had recurrent medication overuse ( P = 0.43). In summary, there were no significant differences in follow-up results between the two groups.

Comprehensive inpatient treatment of refractory chronic daily headache

OBJECTIVE

(1) To assess outcome at discharge for a consecutive series of admissions to a comprehensive, multidisciplinary inpatient headache unit; (2) To identify outcome predictors.

BACKGROUND

An evidence-based assessment (2004) concluded that many refractory headache patients appear to benefit from inpatient treatment, underscoring the need for more research, including outcome predictors.

METHODS

The authors completed a retrospective chart review of 283 consecutive admissions over 6 months. The inpatient program (mean length of stay = 13.0 days) included intravenous and oral medication protocols, drug withdrawal when indicated, cognitive-behavior therapy, and other services when needed, including anesthesiological intervention. Patient-reported pain levels and consensus of medical staff determined outcome status.

RESULTS

The 267 completers (94%) included 212 women and 55 men (mean age = 40.3 years, range = 13-74) from 43 states and Canada. The modal diagnosis was intractable, chronic daily headache (85%), predominantly migraine. Most (59%) had medication overuse headache (MOH), involving opioids (48%), triptans (16%), or butalbital-containing analgesics (10%). Psychiatric diagnoses included stress-related headache (82%), mood disorders (70%), anxiety disorders (49%), and personality disorders (PD, 26%). More patients with a PD (62%) had opioid-related MOH than those with no PD (38%), P < .005. Of the completers, 78% had moderate to significant pain reduction, with comparable improvement in mood, function, and behavior. Clinical factors predicting moderate-significant headache improvement were limited to MOH (84% vs 69%, P < .007) and presence of a PD (68% vs 81%, P < .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients (78%) improved following aggressive, comprehensive inpatient treatment. Maintenance of improvement is likely to depend on multiple post-discharge factors, including continuity of care, compliance, and home or work environment.

When should "chronic migraine" patients be considered "refractory" to pharmacological prophylaxis?

Patients with chronic headache forms evolving from a previous episodic migraine ('chronic migraine') are often difficult to treat. In this paper we focus attention on aspects we believe important for producing a definition of "refractory" in relation to this headache form. We propose a "chronic migraine" patient should be considered "refractory" to pharmacological prophylaxis when adequate trials of preventive therapies at adequate doses have failed to reduce headache frequency and improve headache-related disability and, in patients with medication overuse, reduce the consumption of symptomatic drugs. However before a definition of "refractory" chronic migraine can become established, generally accepted diagnostic criteria and treatment guidelines for this condition need to be developed.

Disability in chronic migraine with medication overuse: treatment effects at 3 years

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical status, with respect to pain indices and disability level, of chronic migraine patients with medication overuse who were treated 3 years previously.

BACKGROUND

Patients who have chronic migraine accompanied by medication overuse are particularly difficult to treat. Investigations are limited in number, few have included follow-up beyond 6 months, and almost none have examined whether treatment leads to concurrent improvements in disability and functional impairment. In a prior report, we described the clinical course of 84 such patients followed for 1 full year after treatment.

METHODS

These same 84 patients were followed for 2 additional years to assess longer term maintenance of effects, using measurement procedures identical to those in the original investigation.

RESULTS

Both endpoint and completer analyses revealed significant improvement on all measures studied-headache days per month, analgesic consumption, and MIDAS scores (Total, Headache Frequency, and Headache Intensity)-with some loss of benefits over time for the pain indices. MIDAS total scores, however, were lower at 36 months than at 6 months. Comparisons of those who completed the 3-year follow-up to those who did not revealed few differences at baseline. All of this suggests attrition did not have a bearing on outcome.

DISCUSSION

High levels of maintenance were revealed at 3 years. Even though reports of pain revealed some lessening of effects, this was not accompanied by reports of deterioration in functioning. This suggests that patients have learned to adapt and adjust to headaches in their daily lives.

Antiepileptic drugs for the treatment of chronic and episodic cluster headache: a review

Cluster headache needs to be rapidly diagnosed and effectively managed, as the individual headache attacks that are characteristic of this disorder are excruciatingly painful and debilitating. Preventive therapies are necessary to reduce the frequency of attacks during the cluster period. However, preventive therapy for this disorder is limited by a lack of controlled evidence of efficacy and the potential for systemic toxicity. Recent progress has been made in understanding both the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying cluster headache and the mechanisms of action of the antiepileptic drug class for the treatment of primary headache syndromes. Newly available preliminary clinical trial data evaluating antiepileptic drugs for the prevention of cluster headache suggest that these agents may be effective and that further evaluation in randomized, placebo-controlled trials is warranted.

Modifiable Risk Factors for Migraine Progression

Migraine is a chronic-recurrent disorder that progresses in some individuals. Transformed migraine is the result of this progression. Since migraine does not progress in most patients, identifying the risk factors for progression has emerged as a very important public health priority. If risk factors can be identified, that might provide a foundation for more aggressive preventive intervention. Risk factors for progression may be divided into non-remediable (gender, age, race) and remediable categories. In this paper, we focus on several already identified remediable risk factors, including frequency of migraine attacks, obesity, acute medication overuse, caffeine overuse, stressful life events, depression, and sleep disorders. We present the evidence for each risk factor and discuss possible interventions to address them.

Medication-overuse headache: Description, treatment, and relapse prevention

Medication-overuse headache (MOH) has increasingly become a focus within the field of headache. The biologic and physiopathologic origin for MOH likely resides in receptor physiology, but it also is probable that the initiation and sustaining dynamics of this pathologic condition involve several other factors. Not all patients with frequent headache eventually overuse their medications, but when it happens (the percentage is approximately 1%), the diagnosis of MOH is clinically important because patients rarely respond to preventive medications while overusing acute medications. Properly treating medication overuse and preventing relapse require recognition of the different factors that contribute to its development and perpetuation, including some behaviors and psychologic elements that are important in sustaining the overuse of medication. The problem regarding the diagnosis, the classification, and clinical aspects of MOH is reviewed in this article. The different therapeutic approaches, initial outcomes, and long-term durability of treatment also are discussed.

Cognitive-behavioral group treatment for disabling headache

OBJECTIVES

Severe, disabling headache is costly to individual sufferers, through pain and reduced functioning, and to society, through decreased work productivity and increased health care use. First-line prophylactic agents combined with triptans do not adequately benefit many disabled headache sufferers. We sought to investigate whether a cognitive-behavioral treatment targeting the psychological and behavioral factors that contribute to disabling headache may provide additional benefit and whether using a group format may provide a more intensive clinic-based treatment without increasing the cost of service delivery.

DESIGN

We developed and piloted a cognitive-behavioral group treatment for chronic, disabling headache. We evaluated its effectiveness in decreasing headache, reducing symptomatic medication use, and improving quality of life.

SETTING

A behavioral headache management program of an academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Sixty-two individuals suffering from primary headache disorder with moderate to severe headache-related disability who completed treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

Individuals completed a pretreatment evaluation, the 10-session cognitive-behavioral group treatment, and a 1-month-posttreatment evaluation.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The impacts of treatment on headache (frequency, intensity, and duration), medication use, and quality of life were assessed.

RESULTS

Separate multivariate analyses of variance revealed significant improvements in headache, symptomatic medication use, and quality of life. Overall, 50% of participants experienced at least a 50% reduction in headache frequency from pre- to posttreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide preliminary evidence that delivering a clinic-based, group-format cognitive-behavioral treatment to moderately to severely disabled headache sufferers can decrease headache activity, reduce symptomatic medication use, and improve quality of life.