Integrated headache care

Integrated Care in Neurology: The Current Landscape and Future Directions

The rising burden of neurological disorders poses significant challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. There has been an increasing momentum to apply integrated approaches to the management of several chronic illnesses in order to address systemic healthcare challenges and improve the quality of care for patients. The aim of this paper is to provide a narrative review of the current landscape of integrated care in neurology. We identified a growing body of research from countries around the world applying a variety of integrated care models to the treatment of common neurological conditions. Based on our findings, we discuss opportunities for further study in this area. Finally, we discuss the future of integrated care in Canada, including unique geographic, historical, and economic considerations, and the role that integrated care may play in addressing challenges we face in our current healthcare system.

Headache clinicians' perspectives on the remote monitoring of patients' electronic diary data: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

We assessed headache clinicians' viewpoints on potential remote access to patients' digital headache diary data and the practicalities of data utilization.

BACKGROUND

With the ubiquitous nature of electronic medical records and the existence of remote monitoring (RM) for many medical conditions, there is now the potential for remote symptom monitoring for patients with headache disorders. While patients are asked to utilize headache diaries, clinicians may or may not have access to the data before patient visits, and their perspectives regarding this emerging technology are currently unknown.

METHODS

After recruiting participants from the National Institutes of Health Pain Consortium Network, the American Headache Society Special Interest Section listservs, and Twitter and Facebook social media platforms, we conducted 20 semi-structured qualitative interviews of headache providers across the United States from various types of institutions and asked them their perspectives on remote access to patient headache diary data. We transcribed the interviews, which were then coded by two independent coders. Themes and sub-themes were developed using inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

All clinicians felt the RM data needed to be integrated into the electronic medical record. Six themes emerged from the interviews: (i) Clinician perspectives on how RM could be beneficial but at other times could create obstacles/challenges, (ii) operationally, data integration could benefit headache care, (iii) there should be initial logistical considerations for bringing RM into clinical care, (iv) education may need to be provided to both patients and clinicians, (v) there are likely research benefits associated with RM, and (vi) additional suggestions for considering potential integration of RM into practice.

CONCLUSIONS

While headache clinicians had mixed opinions on the benefits/challenges that RM presents to patient care, patient satisfaction, and visit time, new ideas emerged that may help advance the field.

Multidisciplinary headache clinic-impact of a new model for headache care in Dubai

INTRODUCTION

Primary headache disorders pose a huge burden to health systems around the world. A new model for headache care was introduced at two primary health centers (PHCs) in Dubai, UAE. Our objective is to describe the model, and the impact it had on increasing the number of patients receiving specialist care as well as on patient's response and satisfaction level.

METHODS

The model consisted of a weekly multi-disciplinary headache clinic with a neurologist, a general physician, a psychologist and a nurse, at each of the two PHCs. Patients were referred from all PHCs in Dubai. Follow up visits were either with the general physician or through tele-headache with the neurologist. We used the HURT questionnaire to evaluate the headache for each patient at baseline and then again at follow up. Information on patient satisfaction was also collected. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 21.

RESULTS

The model proved to be effective in terms of increase in the number of headache patients receiving specialist care. Using HURT questionnaire, improvement was seen in good control and in the sense of control over headache, and in risk of medication overuse between baseline and follow up visits. Patient satisfaction with various aspects of headache care was 80-90% after the first visit and improved further at follow up.

CONCLUSION

Our multi-disciplinary headache model improved the access of patients to neurologists, and resulted in improved headache control and patient satisfaction levels. Other countries can adopt such models to improve headache care for their patients.

Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache: 1. Rationale and description

In countries where headache services exist at all, their focus is usually on specialist (tertiary) care. This is clinically and economically inappropriate: most headache disorders can effectively and more efficiently (and at lower cost) be treated in educationally supported primary care. At the same time, compartmentalizing divisions between primary, secondary and tertiary care in many health-care systems create multiple inefficiencies, confronting patients attempting to navigate these levels (the "patient journey") with perplexing obstacles.High demand for headache care, estimated here in a needs-assessment exercise, is the biggest of the challenges to reform. It is also the principal reason why reform is necessary.The structured headache services model presented here by experts from all world regions on behalf of the Global Campaign against Headache is the suggested health-care solution to headache. It develops and refines previous proposals, responding to the challenge of high demand by basing headache services in primary care, with two supporting arguments. First, only primary care can deliver headache services equitably to the large numbers of people needing it. Second, with educational supports, they can do so effectively to most of these people. The model calls for vertical integration between care levels (primary, secondary and tertiary), and protection of the more advanced levels for the minority of patients who need them. At the same time, it is amenable to horizontal integration with other care services. It is adaptable according to the broader national or regional health services in which headache services should be embedded.It is, according to evidence and argument presented, an efficient and cost-effective model, but these are claims to be tested in formal economic analyses.

Comparison of a pediatric practice-based therapy and an interdisciplinary ambulatory treatment in social pediatric centers for migraine in children: a nation-wide randomized-controlled trial in Germany: "moma - modules on migraine activity"

Background

Migraine is common in childhood, peaks in adolescents and persists into adulthood in at least 40% of patients. There is need for early interventions to improve the burden of disease and, if possible, reduce chronification. The aim of the project is to compare two types of ambulatory treatment strategies regarding their effect on headache days and quality of life in 6 to 11 year old children with migraine: 1) the routine care in pediatricians’ practices (intervention group A) and 2) a structured interdisciplinary multimodal intervention administered at social pediatric centers (intervention group B).

Methods

The study is a nation-wide cluster-randomized study. Based on the postal codes the regions are randomly assigned to the two intervention-strategies. Children with migraine are recruited in the pediatric practices, as common outpatient-care in the German health-care system. Parents rate headache frequency, intensity and acute medication intake at a daily basis via a digital smartphone application specifically designed for the study. Migraine-related disability and quality of life are assessed every 3 months. Study duration is 9 months for every participant: 3 months of baseline at the pediatric practice (both groups); 3 months of intervention at the pediatric practice (intervention group A) or at the social pediatric center (intervention group B), respectively; 3 months of follow-up at the pediatric practice (both groups).

Discussion

Results of the planned comparison of routine care in pediatric practices and interdisciplinary social pediatric centers will be relevant for treatment of children with migraine, both for the individual and for the health care system.

Trial registration

The study was approved by the ethics committee at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich (number 18–804) and was retrospectively registered on 27 April 2021 in the WHO approved German Clinical Trials Register (number DRKS00016698).

Translation and validation of an extended German version of ID Migraine™ as a migraine screening tool

Background and purpose:

Diagnosing a patient with headache as a migraineur is critical for state-of-the-art migraine management. Screening tools are imperative means to improve the diagnostic yield in the primary care settings and specialized clinics. This study aims to translate and assess the diagnostic accuracy of a German version of the ID Migraine™ as a widely used and efficient screening instrument.

Methods:

The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy translation methodology was used to translate the original three-item ID Migraine™, including a fourth question for aura, from the English language into the German language. Diagnostic accuracy of the German ID Migraine™ and predictors of false screening results were assessed among patients presenting to a headache outpatient clinic of a tertiary care center in Germany over a 6-month period.

Results:

The translation procedure yielded a harmonized German ID Migraine™ and its diagnostic accuracy was assessed in 105 patients (80 female, 46.5 ± 17.2 years of age), including 79 patients (75.2%) with migraine. The three-item German ID Migraine™ provides a sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 68%, and positive and negative predictive values of 90% and 95%, respectively, using a cutoff of ≥2. Positive and negative predictive values in a general headache population are estimated to be 74% and 98%, respectively. The aura question identified 18 out of 20 migraineurs with aura.

Conclusions:

The German ID Migraine™ is an accurate screening tool for migraine even in a challenging population of a specialized outpatient clinic. Its diagnostic accuracy indicates a potential utility for screening in primary health care.

Lost productivity associated with headache and depression: a quality improvement project identifying a patient population at risk

OBJECTIVE

This quality improvement project was implemented in order to highlight the association between headache, mTBI and depression on lost productivity and resource utilization.

BACKGROUND

Mood disorders, environment and traumatic brain injury are common in patients with headache, and have been shown to influence clinical course, treatment response and outcome. Although widely recognized, the association of these factors on clinical outcomes, resource utilization and productivity is not well understood.

METHODS

All patients presenting to a military referral center for migraines are assessed for presence of traumatic brain injury, Headache Impact Score (HIT-6) and Patient Depression Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Based on screening, patients are offered referral to mental health and a multidisciplinary headache education course.

RESULTS

237 patients were seen for headache or migraine. 180 patients had severely disabling headaches. These patients accounted for 146 emergency room visits over the course of one year. Of headache patients, 65% met criteria for depression and 15% of patients had severe depression. Only 37% of these patients carried a formal diagnosis of depression and 38% had been seen by mental health. Lost productivity and duty limitations were significantly associated with severity of depression. In service members screening positively for mild, moderate or severe depression, duty restrictions had been placed on 8.3%, 32.5% and 53.8%, respectively. Only 3.8% of patients who did not screen for depression had similar duty limitations. A history of mTBI strongly correlated with comorbid depression. Lost productivity and duty limitations were not impacted by other headache characteristics or HIT-6 scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This quality improvement project identified a practice gap for treatment of comorbid depression in patients presenting to Neurology for headache. Depression strongly correlated with productivity loss, highlighting a possible target for the economic burden of headache.

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.

Migraine Care Challenges and Strategies in US Uninsured and Underinsured Adults: A Narrative Review, Part 2

OBJECTIVE

To review the challenges and potential solutions in treatment options for quality migraine care in adult patients who are under or uninsured.

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act has improved access to health care for many; however, those who are underserved continue to face treatment disparities and have inadequate access to appropriate migraine management.

METHODS

This manuscript is the second of a 2-part narrative review which was performed after a series of discussions within the Underserved Populations in Headache Medicine Special Interest Section meetings of the American Headache Society. Literature was reviewed for key concepts underpinning conceptual boundaries and a broad overview of the subject matter. Published guidelines, state-specific Medicaid websites, headache quality measurement sets, literature review, and expert opinion were used to tailor suggested treatment options and therapeutic strategies. In this second part of our narrative review, we explored migraine care strategies and considerations for underserved and vulnerable adult populations with migraine.

RESULTS

Although common, migraine remains untreated, particularly among those of low socioeconomic status. Low socioeconomic status may play an important role in the disease progression, prescription of hazardous medications such as opioids, outcomes, and quality of life of patients with migraine and other headache disorders. There are some evidence-based and guideline supported treatment options available at low cost that include prescription medications and supplements, though approved devices are costly. Resources available online and simple nonpharmacological strategies may be particularly useful in the underserved migraine population.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified and discussed migraine treatment barriers that affect underserved populations in the US and summarized practical, cost-effective strategies to surmount them. However, more research is needed to identify the best cost-effective measures for migraine management in underserved and vulnerable patients who are uninsured or underinsured.

Headache service quality: the role of specialized headache centres within structured headache services, and suggested standards and criteria as centres of excellence

In joint initiatives, the European Headache Federation and Lifting The Burden have described a model of structured headache services (with their basis in primary care), defined service quality in this context, and developed practical methods for its evaluation.Here, in a continuation of the service quality evaluation programme, we set out ten suggested role- and performance-defining standards for specialized headache centres operating as an integral component of these services. Verifiable criteria for evaluation accompany each standard. The purposes are five-fold: (i) to inspire and promote, or stimulate the establishment of, specialized headache centres as centres of excellence; (ii) to define the role of such centres within optimally structured and organized national headache services; (iii) to set out criteria by which such centres may be recognized as exemplary in their fulfilment of this role; (iv) to provide the basis for, and to initiate and motivate, collaboration and networking between such centres both nationally and internationally; (v) ultimately to improve the delivery and quality of health care for headache.

[Not Available]

Zusammenfassung. Chronische Kopfschmerzen stellen ein häufiges Problem in der Praxis dar. Die Behandlung beinhaltet eine Kombination von medikamentösen und nichtmedikamentösen Therapieverfahren im Rahmen eines multimodalen Settings. Neben der chronischen Migräne steht der Medikamentenübergebrauchskopfschmerz im Vordergrund. Hierbei ist ein zusätzliches Ziel, die Patienten vorausgehend im ambulanten oder stationären Setting von den übermässig konsumierten Schmerz- und Migränemittel zu entziehen. Mit der Kombination von einem Medikamentenentzug mit der nachfolgenden Optimierung der Migränebehandlung akut und prophylaktisch lässt sich in den allermeisten Fällen eine Verminderung der Kopfschmerzfrequenz und dadurch eine Verbesserung der Lebensqualität erreichen.

The Sleep Hygiene Inventory for Pediatrics: Development and Validation of a New Measure of Sleep in a Sample of Children and Adolescents With Chronic Headache

Sleep plays a pivotal role in children and adolescents with headache. Although several sleep measures exist, no developed measures target the sleep issues common in pediatric patients with headache. The Sleep Hygiene Inventory for Pediatrics (SHIP) was developed for clinical purposes to fulfill this need. The aim of this study was to validate the SHIP for potential research applications in a sample of 1078 children and adolescents (7-17 years) with a primary headache diagnosis. Measure validation included assessments of internal consistency, construct validity, and criterion validity. The SHIP demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.84). The SHIP differentiated well between participants for whom sleep was and was not a clinical concern ( P < .001; d =1.65), and was positively correlated with anxiety, depression, and disability. These analyses suggest that the SHIP is a psychometrically strong and valid assessment of sleep habits in pediatric patients with headache.

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.

Integrated multidisciplinary care of headache disorders: A narrative review

Background

Recent evidence shows that multidisciplinary treatment is effective in chronic pain syndromes, especially in headache disorders.

Aim

The aim of this review is to summarize current knowledge on integrative care concepts in headache patients regarding the optimal and necessary treatment parts, optimal duration and setting.

Methods

We present a narrative review reporting current literature and personal experience.

Results and conclusion

Based on current knowledge, multidisciplinary treatment programs appear to be reasonable and efficient in headache disorders. Sufficient controlled studies regarding the need for individual parts of the integrative care approach are missing as yet. Recommendations are therefore at least partly based on personal experiences. It seems to be unambiguous that patients should be referred to a specialized headache center offering such a program instead of being sent sequentially to various medical specialists. The extent and kind of required therapy (e.g. personal consultation versus group sessions) is not known yet. All patients should learn relaxation training, although it is unclear yet which training is the best for which patient. Physiotherapy with guidance on more activity and individual exercises should be used in all patients. Some patients might benefit from cognitive behavioral therapy. However, therapies often depend more on country-specific health care systems than on clinical needs or scientific data.

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.

[Classification and therapy of medication-overuse headache: impact of the third edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders]

The diagnosis of medication-overuse headache (MOH) is of central importance because this secondary headache disorder can be treated very effectively and patients do not usually respond to headache prophylaxis as long as MOH persists. The article describes important changes in the diagnostic criteria of different MOH subtypes after publication of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3beta) in 2013. The new classification has a crucial and direct impact on prevention and treatment of MOH. In addition interactions exist with the new criteria of chronic migraine. With a controlled medication intake scheme according to the 10-20 rule and using a medication break, MOH usually remits in most patients. If patient education and advice does not lead to remission of MOH, a specialized managed medication break or withdrawal treatment becomes necessary. This can be done on an outpatient, day clinic or inpatient basis. In uncomplicated cases, the results of these three treatment settings do not differ. From a cost-effectiveness standpoint, the outpatient treatment should be given priority. In complicated cases, a fully inpatient withdrawal treatment using a multimodal treatment concept is significantly superior.

Detoxification in medication-overuse headache, a retrospective controlled follow-up study: Does care by a headache nurse lead to cure?

AIM

J.A.P. and M.A.L. contributed equally to this manuscript.The aim of this article is to determine whether support by a headache nurse in the treatment of medication-overuse headache (MOH) increases successful withdrawal, and to study determinants of response to withdrawal therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective, controlled follow-up study was performed with 416 MOH patients. All patients were treated with outpatient withdrawal therapy, with two treatment arms: with or without the support of a specialised headache nurse. The outcome measures were: i) successful withdrawal, defined as discontinuation of all headache medication according to the study protocol; and ii) the responder rate, defined as the percentage of patients with ≥ 50% reduction in headache days after successful withdrawal and iii) relative reduction in headache days after successful withdrawal.

RESULTS

Successful withdrawal percentages were significantly higher in the group supported by the headache nurse than in the group without support (73.1% vs. 60.7%; p = 0.008), which was confirmed in multivariate analysis (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.11-2.71, p = 0.016). Support by a headache nurse was not associated with response. The underlying primary headache diagnosis, determined after withdrawal, was significantly correlated with response.

CONCLUSION

The support by a headache nurse results in an increased adherence to detoxification.

Diagnosis, pathophysiology and management of chronic migraine: a proposal of the Belgian Headache Society

Chronic migraine (CM) is a disabling neurological condition affecting 0.5-2 % of the population. In the current third edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders, medication overuse is no longer an exclusion criterion and CM is diagnosed in patients suffering from at least 15 headache days per month of which at least eight are related to migraine. CM is difficult to treat, and preventive treatment options are limited. We provide a pathogenetic model for CM, integrating the latest findings from neurophysiological and neuroimaging studies. On behalf of the Belgian Headache Society, we present a management algorithm for CM based on the international literature and adapted to the Belgian situation. Pharmacological treatment options are discussed, and recent data on transcranial and invasive neuromodulation studies in CM are reviewed. An integrated multimodal treatment programme may be beneficial to refractory patients, but at present, this approach is only supported by a limited number of observational studies and quite variable between centres.

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.

Headache in school children: prevalence and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Recurrent headache is a common problem in school children. Evaluation generally leads to the diagnosis of a primary headache syndrome (migraine or tension-type headache). This review is addressed to the question whether headaches in school children are becoming more common and, if so, what risk factors are associated with the rise in frequency.

METHOD

We selectively searched the PubMed database for pertinent publications that contained the terms "primary headache AND children/adolescent AND risk factors/prevalence." Articles published in either English or German up to April 2013 were considered. Articles on secondary types of headache were excluded.

RESULTS

Headaches are becoming more common among school children. At present, 66% to 71% of 12- to 15- year-olds have at least one headache every three months, and 33% to 40% have at least one per week. Headache is often accompanied by other physical and/or emotional manifestations. Studies from Scandinavia reveal increasing prevalence in age groups from 8 years of age and upward. Various studies have identified the following risk factors for headache or for its chronification (up to 5.8-fold elevation of risk): a dysfunctional family situation, the regular consumption of alcohol, caffeine ingestion, smoking, a low level of physical activity, physical or emotional abuse, bullying by peers, unfair treatment in school, and insufficient leisure time.

CONCLUSION

Headaches are becoming more common among children and adolescents. They are often associated with other physical and emotional complaints.

[Psychological therapy of migraine: systematic review]

This review summarizes the various forms of behavioral treatment of migraine which could demonstrate empirical efficacy. The main unimodal kinds of treatment are thermal and electromyography (EMG) biofeedback training and progressive muscle relaxation. The various relaxation techniques do not differ in their efficacy in treating migraine. On average a reduction in migraine frequency of 35-45 % is achieved. The mean effect sizes (ES) of various biofeedback techniques are between 0.4 and 0.6. Cognitive-behavioral treatment is applied as a multimodal treatment and on average achieves an improvement in migraine activity by 39 % and an ES of 0.54. All behavioral procedures can be used in combination or as an alternative to drug prophylaxis with comparable success. A combination of pharmacological and behavioral treatment can achieve additional success. There is strong evidence for the clinically significant efficacy of all forms of behavioral treatment in childhood and adolescence. There are no signs of differential indications.

[Integrated headache care network. Kiel Migraine and Headache Center and German National Headache Treatment Network]

Migraine and other headaches affect 54 million people in Germany. They rank among the ten most severely disabling complaints and the three most expensive neurological disorders. Nevertheless, they are not adequately recognized in the healthcare system with sketchy diagnoses and inadequate treatment. This inadequate care is not primarily due to a lack of medical and scientific knowledge on the development and treatment of headaches but is predominantly due to organizational deficits in the healthcare system and in the implementation of current knowledge. To overcome the organizational barriers the national headache treatment network was initiated in Germany. For the first time it allows national cross-sectoral and multidisciplinary links between inpatient and outpatient care. A hand in hand treatment programme, better education, better information exchange between all partners and combined efforts using clearly defined treatment pathways and goals are the basis for state of the art and efficient treatment results. The treatment network is geared towards the specialized treatment of severely affected patients with chronic headache disorders. A national network of outpatient and inpatient pain therapists in both practices and hospitals works hand in hand to optimally alleviate pain in a comprehensive cross-sectoral and multidisciplinary manner. For therapy refractive disorders, a high-intensive supraregional fully inpatient treatment can be arranged. This concept offers for the first time a nationwide coordinated treatment without limitation by specialization and bureaucratic remuneration sectors.

Long-term improvement in refractory headache following ozone therapy

BACKGROUND

Headache afflicts approximately 10%-15% of the general population. Mixed results are obtained from various therapies, usually drugs, but also oxygen inhalation, behavioral psychology, physical therapy, and peripheral or central neurostimulation. When refractory to treatment, it has severe impact on quality of life. OBJECTIVES/SUBJECTS: Five (5) patients are presented who had suffered from severe/persistent headache refractory to standard management (including 5-HT1 agonist triptan drugs) and were treated with ozone therapy.

INTERVENTIONS

Ozone administration was by major autohemotherapy. The procedure involved venous blood drawn into a sterile single-use glass bottle containing anticoagulant, gently mixed with an equal volume of O3/O2 gas mixture (prefiltered through a sterile 0.20-μm filter) and slowly reinfused back into the donor patient via the antecubital vein.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The analyzed parameters were analgesia requirements, days of sick leave due to headache, number of headache events, and pain intensity according to the visual analogue scale (VAS); these recorded at three time points: pre-ozone therapy, post-ozone therapy, and before the last follow-up (mean: 64.6±36.8 months).

RESULTS

The number of headache episodes pretreatment (n=80; range 5-200) was significantly decreased during the first 6 months post-treatment (n=0, range 0-1; p=0.042) and over the 6 months before the last follow-up visit (n=1, range 0-2; p=0.043). The corresponding VAS scores were 8.7±0.8 pretreatment versus 1.1±2.5 the 6 months post-treatment (p=0.003) and versus 3.1±3.3 the 6 months before last follow-up visit (p=0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

Ozone therapy decreased headache episodes and pain severity over a protracted period. This novel approach is effective and merits further research.

Multidisciplinary integrated headache care: a prospective 12-month follow-up observational study

This prospective study investigated the effectiveness of a three-tier modularized out- and inpatient multidisciplinary integrated headache care program. N = 204 patients with frequent headaches (63 migraine, 11 tension-type headache, 59 migraine + tension-type headache, 68 medication-overuse headache and 3 with other primary headaches) were enrolled. Outcome measures at baseline, 6- and 12-month follow-ups included headache frequency, Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), standardized headache diary and a medication survey. Mean reduction in headache frequency was 5.5 ± 8.5 days/month, p < 0.001 at 6 months’ follow-up and 6.9 ± 8.3 days/month, p < 0.001 after 1 year. MIDAS decreased from 53.0 ± 60.8 to 37.0 ± 52.4 points, p < 0.001 after 6 months and 34.4 ± 53.2 points, p < 0.001 at 1 year. 44.0 % patients demonstrated at baseline an increased HAD-score for anxiety and 16.7 % of patients revealed a HAD-score indicating a depression. At the end of treatment statistically significant changes could be observed for anxiety (p < 0.001) and depression (p < 0.006). The intake frequency of attack-aborting medication decreased from 10.3 ± 7.3 days/month at admission to 4.7 ± 4.1 days/month, p < 0.001 after 6 months and reached 3.8 ± 3.5 days/month, p < 0.001 after 1 year. At baseline 37.9 % of patients had experience with non-pharmacological treatments and 87.0 % at 12-month follow-up. In conclusion, an integrated headache care program was successfully established. Positive health-related outcomes could be obtained with a multidisciplinary out- and inpatient headache treatment program.

Aerobic endurance training versus relaxation training in patients with migraine (ARMIG): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Migraine is one of the most frequent headache diseases and impairs patients’ quality of life. Up to now, many randomized studies reported efficacy of prophylactic therapy with medications such as beta-blockers or anti-epileptic drugs. Non-medical treatment, like aerobic endurance training, is considered to be an encouraging alternative in migraine prophylaxis. However, there is still a lack of prospective, high-quality randomized trials. We therefore designed a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of aerobic endurance training versus relaxation training in patients with migraine (ARMIG).

Methods

This is a single-center, open-label, prospective, randomized trial. Sixty participants with migraine are randomly allocated to either endurance training or a relaxation group. After baseline headache diary documentation over at least 4 weeks, participants in the exercise group will start moderate aerobic endurance training under a sport therapist’s supervision at least 3 times a week over a 12-week period. The second group will perform Jacobson’s progressive muscle relaxation training guided by a trained relaxation therapist, also at least 3 times a week over a 12-week period. Both study arms will train in groups of up to 10 participants. More frequent individual training is possible. The follow-up period will be 12 weeks after the training period. The general state of health, possible state of anxiety or depression, impairments due to the headache disorder, pain-related disabilities, the headache-specific locus of control, and the motor fitness status are measured with standardized questionnaires.

Discussion

The study design is adequate to generate meaningful results. The trial will be helpful in gaining important data on exercise training for non-medical migraine prophylaxis.

Trial registration

The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01407861.

Psychological interventions for headache in children and adolescents

Headache in children and adolescents represents a number of complex and multifaceted pain syndromes that can benefit from psychological intervention. There is good evidence for the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy, relaxation training, and biofeedback. The choice of intervention is influenced by patients' age, sex, family and cultural background, as well as the nature of stressors and comorbid psychiatric symptoms. Management must always be family-centered. Psychological treatments are essential elements of the multidisciplinary, biopsychosocial management of primary headache disorders, particularly for those with frequent or chronic headache, a high level of headache-related disability, medication overuse, or comorbid psychiatric symptoms. Future studies of efficacy and effectiveness of psychological treatment should use the International Headache Society's definition and classification of headache disorders, and stratify results by headache type, associated conditions, and treatment modality.

Recurrent headaches with visual disturbance

Headache, particularly migraine, is the commonest neurological problem with which patients present to general practitioners and neurologists. Episodic migraine affects up to 18% of women and 6% of men. Acute migraine attacks can be severely disabling and chronic migraine is even more disabling. Of the mental and neurological disorders, migraine ranks eighth worldwide in terms of disability. Migraine is one of the primary headaches and may occur with or without aura. Differentiation from other severe primary headaches, such as cluster headache, is important for management. The vast majority of patients with migraine can be satisfactorily helped and treated. This involves acute and prophylactic drug therapy and management of triggers. In patients with migraine, medication overuse headache and chronic migraine need to be identified and treated.

Evaluating integrated headache care: a one-year follow-up observational study in patients treated at the Essen headache centre

Background

Outpatient integrated headache care was established in 2005 at the Essen Headache Centre in Germany. This paper reports outcome data for this approach.

Methods

Patients were seen by a neurologist for headache diagnosis and recommendation for drug treatment. Depending on clinical needs, patients were seen by a psychologist and/or physical therapist. A 5-day headache-specific multidisciplinary treatment programme (MTP) was provided for patients with frequent or chronic migraine, tension type headache (TTH) and medication overuse headache (MOH). Subsequent outpatient treatment was provided by neurologists in private practice.

Results

Follow-up data on headache frequency and burden of disease were prospectively obtained in 841 patients (mean age 41.5 years) after 3, 6 and 12 months. At baseline mean headache frequency was 18.1 (SD = 1.6) days per month, compared to measurement at 1 year follow-up a mean reduction of 5.8 (SD = 11.9) headache days per month was observed in 486 patients (57.8%) after one year (TTH patients mean: -8.5 days per month; migraine mean: -3.2 days per month, patients with migraine and TTH mean: -5.9 days per month). A reduction in headache days ≥ 50% was observed in 306 patients (36.4%) independent of diagnosis, while headache frequency remains unchanged in 20.9% and increase in 21.3% of the patient.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary outpatient headache centres offer an effective way to establish a three-tier treatment offer for difficult headache patients depending on clinical needs.