Exercise and Manual Therapy for the Treatment of Primary Headache: An Umbrella and Mapping Review

OBJECTIVE

The main aim of this study was to assess through systematic review the efficacy of exercise and manual therapy (MT) interventions in individuals with primary headache.

METHODS

In this umbrella review, 2 authors reviewed systematic reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, PEDro, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Systematic reviews that evaluated the effectiveness of MT. Exercise-based interventions, or both in patients with primary headaches were included. Methodological quality was analyzed using the ROBIS scale, and the strength of evidence was established according to the Grading Criteria of the Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee.

RESULTS

Thirty-one systematic reviews containing 79 trials and involving 9103 patients were included. The 7 exercise-related systematic reviews reported beneficial effects on primary headache based on unclear to moderate evidence. Of the 23 MT-related systematic reviews, 11 reported enhanced effectiveness compared with usual care; however, overall heterogeneity and risk of bias were high. Systematic reviews that evaluated the effectiveness of MT, exercise-based interventions, or both in patients with primary headaches were included.

CONCLUSION

Results show that exercise could be an effective therapy for the treatment of primary headache, with moderate to limited quality of evidence regarding the positive effects in terms of pain intensity and frequency and duration of headache. Moderate quality of evidence was found regarding the ability of MT to reduce pain intensity in patients with tension-type headaches, but quality of evidence was limited in terms of frequency of headache and disability and pain reduction in patients with migraine.

IMPACT

Exercise could be an effective treatment in patients with primary headache. Manual therapy showed limited evidence to reduce pain intensity in patients with tension-type headache. It is not possible to establish a preferential exercise protocol or MT program, so psychosocial and behavioral variables need to be considered in future studies.

Clinical Reasoning Behind Non-Pharmacological Interventions for the Management of Headaches: A Narrative Literature Review

Headache is the clinical syndrome most commonly observed by neurologists in daily practice. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments are commonly used for the management of headaches; however, the clinical reasoning behind these interventions is not properly applied. We conducted a narrative literature review using as data sources for academic PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, EBSCO, PEDro, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Collaboration Trials Register, and SCOPUS. This narrative literature review mainly considered systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised clinical trials, and expert opinions published after the year 2000 discussing clinical reasoning for application of non-pharmacological interventions in individuals with tension-type, migraine, and cervicogenic headaches. After the data extraction, we organized the literature thematically as follows: (1) mapping of theoretical aspects of non-pharmacological interventions; (2) summarizing most updated literature about effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions grouped by targeted tissue and headache; (3) identifying research gaps in the existing literature and proposing hypotheses for better understanding of current clinical reasoning. We found that there are many non-pharmacological treatment strategies used for headaches, including beyond the tissue-based impairment treatments (bottom-up) and strategies targeting the central nervous system (top down). Bottom-up strategies include joint-biased, soft-tissue biased, or needling interventions, whereas top-down strategies include exercise and cognitive interventions. Evidence shows that the effectiveness of these interventions depends on the application of proper clinical reasoning, since not all strategies are effective for all headaches. For instance, evidence of non-pharmacological interventions is more controversial for migraines than for tension-type or cervicogenic headaches, since migraine pathogenesis involves activation of sub-cortical structures and the trigemino- vascular system, whereas pathogenesis of tension-type or cervicogenic headaches is most associated to musculoskeletal impairments of the cervical spine. We conclude that current literature suggests that not all non-pharmacological interventions are effective for all headaches, and that multimodal, not isolated, approaches seem to be more effective for patients with headaches. Most published studies have reported small clinical effects in the short term. This narrative literature review provides some hypotheses for discrepancies in the available literature and future research. Clinical reasoning should be applied to better understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions.

Prevalence and factors associated with the use of primary headache diagnostic criteria by chiropractors

Background

The diagnosis of primary headaches assists health care providers in their decision-making regarding patient treatment, co-management and further evaluation. Chiropractors are popular health care providers for those with primary headaches. The aim of this study is to examine the clinical management factors associated with chiropractors who report the use of primary headache diagnostic criteria.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was distributed between August and November 2016 to a random sample of Australian chiropractors who are members of a practice-based research network (n = 1050) who had reported ‘often’ providing treatment for patients with headache disorders to report on practitioner approaches to headache diagnosis, management, outcome measures and multidisciplinary collaboration. Multiple logistic regression was conducted to assess the factors that are associated with chiropractors who report using International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) primary headache diagnostic criteria.

Results

With a response rate of 36% (n = 381), the majority of chiropractor’s report utilising ICHD primary headache diagnostic criteria (84.6%). The factors associated with chiropractors who use ICHD primary headache diagnostic criteria resulting from the regression analysis include a belief that the use of ICHD primary headache criteria influences the management of patients with primary headaches (OR = 7.86; 95%CI: 3.15, 19.60); the use of soft tissue therapies to the neck/shoulders for tension headache management (OR = 4.33; 95%CI: 1.67, 11.19); a belief that primary headache diagnostic criteria are distinct for the diagnosis of primary headaches (OR = 3.64; 95%CI: 1.58, 8.39); the use of headache diaries (OR = 3.52; 95%CI: 1.41, 8.77); the use of ICHD criteria improves decision-making regarding primary headache patient referral/co-management (OR = 2.35; 95%CI: 1.01, 5.47); referral to investigate a headache red-flag (OR = 2.67; 95%CI: 1.02, 6.96) and not referring headache patients to assist headache prevention (OR = 0.16; 95%CI: 0.03, 0.80).

Conclusion

Four out of five chiropractors managing headache are engaged in the use of primary headache diagnostic criteria. This practice is likely to influence practitioner clinical decision-making around headache patient management including their co-management with other health care providers. These findings call for a closer assessment of headache characteristics of chiropractic patient populations and for further enquiry to explore the role of chiropractors within interdisciplinary primary headache management.

The Impact of Spinal Manipulation on Migraine Pain and Disability: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Several small studies have suggested that spinal manipulation may be an effective treatment for reducing migraine pain and disability. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to evaluate the evidence regarding spinal manipulation as an alternative or integrative therapy in reducing migraine pain and disability.

METHODS

PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for clinical trials that evaluated spinal manipulation and migraine-related outcomes through April 2017. Search terms included: migraine, spinal manipulation, manual therapy, chiropractic, and osteopathic. Meta-analytic methods were employed to estimate the effect sizes (Hedges' g) and heterogeneity (I² ) for migraine days, pain, and disability. The methodological quality of retrieved studies was examined following the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

Our search identified 6 RCTs (pooled n = 677; range of n = 42-218) eligible for meta-analysis. Intervention duration ranged from 2 to 6 months; outcomes included measures of migraine days (primary outcome), migraine pain/intensity, and migraine disability. Methodological quality varied across the studies. For example, some studies received high or unclear bias scores for methodological features such as compliance, blinding, and completeness of outcome data. Due to high levels of heterogeneity when all 6 studies were included in the meta-analysis, the 1 RCT performed only among chronic migraineurs was excluded. Heterogeneity across the remaining studies was low. We observed that spinal manipulation reduced migraine days with an overall small effect size (Hedges' g = -0.35, 95% CI: -0.53, -0.16, P < .001) as well as migraine pain/intensity.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal manipulation may be an effective therapeutic technique to reduce migraine days and pain/intensity. However, given the limitations to studies included in this meta-analysis, we consider these results to be preliminary. Methodologically rigorous, large-scale RCTs are warranted to better inform the evidence base for spinal manipulation as a treatment for migraine.

Treatment of migraine attacks and prevention of migraine: Guidelines by the German Migraine and Headache Society and the German Society of Neurology

In collaboration with some of the leading headache centres in Germany, Switzerland and Austria, we have established new guidelines for the treatment of migraine attacks and the prevention of migraine. A thorough literature research of the last 10 years has been the basis of the current recommendations. At the beginning, we present therapeutic novelties, followed by a summary of all recommendations. After an introduction, we cover topics like drug therapy and practical experience, non-effective medication, migraine prevention, interventional methods, non-medicational and psychological methods for prevention and therapies without proof of efficacy.

The management of common recurrent headaches by chiropractors: a descriptive analysis of a nationally representative survey

BACKGROUND

Headache management is common within chiropractic clinical settings; however, little is yet known about how this provider group manage headache sufferers. The aim of this study is to report on the prevalence of headache patients found within routine chiropractic practice and to assess how chiropractors approach key aspects of headache management applicable to primary care settings.

METHODS

A 31-item cross-sectional survey was distributed to a national sample of chiropractors (n = 1050) to report on practitioner approach to headache diagnosis, interdisciplinary collaboration, treatment and outcome assessment of headache patients who present with recurrent headache disorders.

RESULTS

The survey attracted a response rate of 36% (n = 381). One in five new patients present to chiropractors with a chief complaint of headache. The majority of chiropractors provide headache diagnosis for common primary (84.6%) and secondary (90.4%) headaches using formal headache classification criteria. Interdisciplinary referral for headache management was most often with CAM providers followed by GPs. Advice on headache triggers, stress management, spinal manipulation, soft tissue therapies and prescriptive neck exercises were the most common therapeutic approaches to headache management.

CONCLUSION

Headache patients make up a substantial proportion of chiropractic caseload. The majority of chiropractors managing headache engage in headache diagnosis and interdisciplinary patient management. More research information is needed to understand the headache types and level of headache chronicity and disability common to chiropractic patient populations to further assess the healthcare needs of this patient population.

The treatment of migraine patients within chiropractic: analysis of a nationally representative survey of 1869 chiropractors

BACKGROUND

While the clinical role of manual therapies in migraine management is unclear, the use of chiropractors for this condition is considerable. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of chiropractors who frequently manage patients with migraine.

METHODS

A national cross-sectional survey of chiropractors collected information on practitioner characteristics, clinical management characteristics and practice settings. A secondary analysis was conducted on 1869 respondents who reported on their migraine caseload to determine the predictors associated with the frequent management of patients with migraine.

RESULTS

A large proportion of chiropractors report having a high migraine caseload (HMC) (n = 990; 53.0%). The strongest factors predicting a chiropractor having a HMC include the frequent treatment of patients with axial neck pain (OR = 2.89; 95%CI: 1.18, 7.07), thoracic pain (referred/radicular) (OR = 2.52; 95%CI: 1.58, 3.21) and non-musculoskeletal disorders (OR = 3.06; 95%CI: 2.13, 4.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Several practice-setting and clinical management characteristics are associated with chiropractors managing a HMC. These findings raise key questions about the therapeutic approach to chiropractic migraine management that deserves further examination. There is a need for more primary research to assess the approach to headache and migraine management provided by chiropractors and to understand the prevalence, burden and comorbidities associated with migraine found within chiropractic patient populations. This information is vital in helping to inform safe, effective and coordinated care for migraine sufferers within the wider health system.

Assessing and treating primary headaches and cranio-facial pain in patients undergoing rehabilitation for neurological diseases

BACKGROUND

Pain is a very common condition in patient undergoing rehabilitation for neurological disease; however the presence of primary headaches and other cranio-facial pains, particularly when they are actually or apparently independent from the disability for which patient is undergoing rehabilitation, is often neglected. Diagnostic and therapeutic international and national guidelines, as well as tools for the subjective measure of head pain are available and should also be applied in the neurorehabilitation setting. This calls for searching the presence of head pain, independently from the rehabilitation needs, since pain, either episodic or chronic, interferes with patient performance by affecting physical and emotional status. Pain may also interfere with sleep and therefore hamper recovery.

METHODS

In our role of task force of the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation (ICCPN), we have elaborated specific recommendations for diagnosing and treating head pains in patients undergoing rehabilitation for neurological diseases.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

In this narrative review, we describe the available literature that has been evaluated in order to define the recommendations and outline the needs of epidemiological studies concerning headache and other cranio-facial pain in neurorehabilitation.

Complementary and Integrative Medicine for Neurologic Conditions

Although many neurologic conditions are common, cures are rare and conventional treatments are often limited. Many patients, therefore, turn to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The use of selected, evidence-based CAM therapies for the prevention and treatment of migraine, carpal tunnel syndrome, and dementia are presented. Evidence is growing many of modalities, including nutrition, exercise, mind-body medicine, supplements, and acupuncture.

Concussion

Concussion has been recognized as a clinical entity for more than 1000 years. Throughout the 20th century it was studied extensively in boxers, but it did not pique the interest of the general population because it is the accepted goal of the boxer to inflict such an injury on their opponent. In 2002, however, the possibility that repetitive concussions could result in chronic brain damage and a progressive neurologic disorder was raised by a postmortem evaluation of a retired player in the most popular sports institution in the United States, the National Football League. Since that time concussion has been a frequent topic of conversation in homes, schools, and on television and has become a major focus of sports programs in communities and schools at all levels. Now all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the National Collegiate Athletic Association have enacted laws and rules to protect the athlete.

A critical review of manual therapy use for headache disorders: prevalence, profiles, motivations, communication and self-reported effectiveness

Background

Despite the expansion of conventional medical treatments for headache, many sufferers of common recurrent headache disorders seek help outside of medical settings. The aim of this paper is to evaluate research studies on the prevalence of patient use of manual therapies for the treatment of headache and the key factors associated with this patient population.

Methods

This critical review of the peer-reviewed literature identified 35 papers reporting findings from new empirical research regarding the prevalence, profiles, motivations, communication and self-reported effectiveness of manual therapy use amongst those with headache disorders.

Results

While available data was limited and studies had considerable methodological limitations, the use of manual therapy appears to be the most common non-medical treatment utilized for the management of common recurrent headaches. The most common reason for choosing this type of treatment was seeking pain relief. While a high percentage of these patients likely continue with concurrent medical care, around half may not be disclosing the use of this treatment to their medical doctor.

Conclusions

There is a need for more rigorous public health and health services research in order to assess the role, safety, utilization and financial costs associated with manual therapy treatment for headache. Primary healthcare providers should be mindful of the use of this highly popular approach to headache management in order to help facilitate safe, effective and coordinated care.

The risk associated with spinal manipulation: an overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a widely used manual treatment, but many reviews exist with conflicting conclusions about the safety of SMT. We performed an overview of reviews to elucidate and quantify the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) associated with SMT.

METHODS

We searched five electronic databases from inception to December 8, 2015. We included reviews on any type of studies, patients, and SMT technique. Our primary outcome was SAEs. Quality of the included reviews was assessed using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). Since there were insufficient data for calculating incidence rates of SAEs, we used an alternative approach; the conclusions regarding safety of SMT were extracted for each review, and the communicated opinion were judged by two reviewers independently as safe, harmful, or neutral/unclear. Risk ratios (RRs) of a review communicating that SMT is safe and meeting the requirements for each AMSTAR item, were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 283 eligible reviews, but only 118 provided data for synthesis. The most frequently described adverse events (AEs) were stroke, headache, and vertebral artery dissection. Fifty-four reviews (46%) expressed that SMT is safe, 15 (13%) expressed that SMT is harmful, and 49 reviews (42%) were neutral or unclear. Thirteen reviews reported incidence estimates for SAEs, roughly ranging from 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 250,000,000 manipulations. Low methodological quality was present, with a median of 4 of 11 AMSTAR items met (interquartile range, 3 to 6). Reviews meeting the requirements for each of the AMSTAR items (i.e. good internal validity) had a higher chance of expressing that SMT is safe.

CONCLUSIONS

It is currently not possible to provide an overall conclusion about the safety of SMT; however, the types of SAEs reported can indeed be significant, sustaining that some risk is present. High quality research and consistent reporting of AEs and SAEs are needed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42015030068 .

Effectiveness of physiotherapy for seniors with recurrent headaches associated with neck pain and dysfunction: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

A previous study demonstrated that in seniors, the presence of cervical musculoskeletal impairment was not specific to cervicogenic headache but was present in various recurrent headache types. Physiotherapy treatment is indicated in those seniors diagnosed with cervicogenic headache but could also be adjunct treatment for those with cervical musculoskeletal signs who are suspected of having transitional headaches.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of a physiotherapy program for seniors with recurrent headaches associated with neck pain and cervical musculoskeletal dysfunction, irrespective of the headache classification.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a prospective, stratified, randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Sixty-five participants with recurrent headache, aged 50-75 years, were randomly assigned to either a physiotherapy (n=33) or a usual care group (n=32).

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was headache frequency. Secondary outcomes were headache intensity and duration, neck pain and disability, cervical range of motion, quality of life, participant satisfaction, and medication intake.

METHODS

Participants in the physiotherapy group received 14 treatment sessions. Participants in the usual care group continued with their usual care. Outcome measures were recorded at baseline, 11 weeks, 6 months, and 9 months. This study was funded by a government research fund of $6,850. No conflict of interest is declared.

RESULTS

There was no loss to follow-up for the primary outcome measure. Compared with usual care, participants receiving physiotherapy reported significant reductions in headache frequency immediately after treatment (mean difference -1.6 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.5 to -0.6), at 6-month follow-up (-1.7 days, 95% CI -2.6 to -0.8), and at 9-month follow-up (-2.4 days, 95% CI -3.2 to -1.5), and significant improvements in all secondary outcomes immediately posttreatment and at 6- and 9-month follow-ups, (p<.05 for all). No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Physiotherapy treatment provided benefits over usual care for seniors with recurrent headache associated with neck pain and dysfunction.

Evidence-Based Evaluation of Complementary Health Approaches for Pain Management in the United States

Although most pain is acute and resolves within a few days or weeks, millions of Americans have persistent or recurring pain that may become chronic and debilitating. Medications may provide only partial relief from this chronic pain and can be associated with unwanted effects. As a result, many individuals turn to complementary health approaches as part of their pain management strategy. This article examines the clinical trial evidence for the efficacy and safety of several specific approaches-acupuncture, manipulation, massage therapy, relaxation techniques including meditation, selected natural product supplements (chondroitin, glucosamine, methylsulfonylmethane, S-adenosylmethionine), tai chi, and yoga-as used to manage chronic pain and related disability associated with back pain, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, neck pain, and severe headaches or migraines.

Physical therapy for headaches

Background Headache is the medical problem most commonly observed by neurologists. Non-pharmacological treatments are commonly demanded by individuals with headaches, but their evidence of effectiveness is conflicting. Aim The current review provides an updated discussion on what is supported by current scientific evidence about physical therapies for tension-type headache (TTH), migraine, and cervicogenic headache (CeH), and which gaps there still may be in our understanding of the interventions. Methods PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, EBSCO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Collaboration Trials Register, PEDro, and SCOPUS were searched from their inception through March 2015. Results/Discussion Several physical therapies including spinal joint manipulation/mobilization, soft tissue interventions, therapeutic exercises and needling therapies are proposed to be effective for the management of headaches. Current evidence has shown that the effectiveness of these interventions will depend on proper clinical reasoning since not all interventions are equally effective for all headache pain conditions. For instance, evidence of physical therapy in migraine is more controversial than in TTH, since migraine pathogenesis involves activation of sub-cortical structures and the trigemino-vascular system, whereas pathogenesis of TTH is more associated with musculoskeletal disorders, e.g. muscle pain. It seems that multimodal approaches including different interventions are more effective for patients with TTH, migraine and CeH.

Additional Effects of a Physical Therapy Protocol on Headache Frequency, Pressure Pain Threshold, and Improvement Perception in Patients With Migraine and Associated Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the additional effect provided by physical therapy in migraine treatment.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Tertiary university-based hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Among the 300 patients approached, 50 women (age range, 18-55y) diagnosed with migraine were randomized into 2 groups: a control group (n=25) and a physiotherapy plus medication group (n=25) (N=50).

INTERVENTIONS

Both groups received medication for migraine treatment. Additionally, physiotherapy plus medication patients received 8 sessions of physical therapy over 4 weeks, comprised mainly of manual therapy and stretching maneuvers lasting 50 minutes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A blinded examiner assessed the clinical outcomes of headache frequency, intensity, and self-perception of global change and physical outcomes of pressure pain threshold and cervical range of motion. Data were recorded at baseline, posttreatment, and 1-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients experienced side effects from the medication. Both groups reported a significantly reduced frequency of headaches; however, no differences were observed between groups (physiotherapy plus medication patients showed an additional 18% improvement at posttreatment and 12% improvement at follow-up compared with control patients, P>.05). The reduction observed in the physiotherapy plus medication patients was clinically relevant at posttreatment, whereas clinical relevance for control patients was demonstrated only at follow-up. For pain intensity, physiotherapy plus medication patients showed statistical evidence and clinical relevance with reduction posttreatment (P<.05). In addition, they showed better self-perception of global change than control patients (P<.05). The cervical muscle pressure pain threshold increased significantly in the physiotherapy plus medication patients and decreased in the control patients, but statistical differences between groups were observed only in the temporal area (P<.05). No differences were observed between groups regarding cervical range of motion.

CONCLUSIONS

We cannot assume that physical therapy promotes additional improvement in migraine treatment; however, it can increase the cervical pressure pain threshold, anticipate clinically relevant changes, and enhance patient satisfaction.

Clinical reasoning for manual therapy management of tension type and cervicogenic headache

In recent years, there has been an increasing knowledge in the pathogenesis and better management of chronic headaches. Current scientific evidence supports the role of manual therapies in the management of tension type and cervicogenic headache, but the results are still conflicting. These inconsistent results can be related to the fact that maybe not all manual therapies are appropriate for all types of headaches; or maybe not all patients with headache will benefit from manual therapies. There are preliminary data suggesting that patients with a lower degree of sensitization will benefit to a greater extent from manual therapies, although more studies are needed. In fact, there is evidence demonstrating the presence of peripheral and central sensitization in chronic headaches, particularly in tension type. Clinical management of patients with headache needs to extend beyond local tissue-based pathology, to incorporate strategies directed at normalizing central nervous system sensitivity. In such a scenario, this paper exposes some examples of manual therapies for tension type and cervicogenic headache, based on a nociceptive pain rationale, for modulating central nervous system hypersensitivity: trigger point therapy, joint mobilization, joint manipulation, exercise, and cognitive pain approaches.

Posttraumatic headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Posttraumatic headache (PTH) is a commonly occurring and potentially disabling consequence of concussion and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). This brief review highlights recent advances in the epidemiology, evaluation, and management of concussion, mTBI, and PTH.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current epidemiological studies suggest that previous estimates of concussion and mTBI incidence are grossly underestimated and have also helped to identify specific activities and demographic groups that might be more susceptible. Concussion results in profound metabolic derangements during which the brain is potentially vulnerable to repeat injury and permanent damage. Imaging studies such as magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy and diffusion tensor imaging have proven to be effective at identifying these abnormalities both acutely and also weeks after symptoms resolution. To date, there have been no randomized, placebo-controlled studies supporting the efficacy of any treatment for PTH and current therapeutic decisions are guided only by expert opinion and current evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of specific primary headache phenotypes, the most commonly occurring of which is migraine.

SUMMARY

Despite numerous advances in the awareness, pathophysiology, and diagnostic workup of concussion, mTBI, and PTH, there is a paucity of evidence-based guidance regarding treatment.