Educational initiatives in headache medicine: A 20-year scoping review

BACKGROUND

Headache disorders are among the most common and disabling medical conditions worldwide, have a great societal impact and are a common reason to seek medical care. Headache disorders are often misdiagnosed and undertreated, and the number of headache fellowship-trained physicians cannot meet patient demand. Educational initiatives for non-headache-specialist clinicians may be an avenue to increase clinician competency and patient access to appropriate management.

OBJECTIVE

To undertake a scoping review of the educational initiatives in headache medicine for medical students, trainees, general practitioners/primary care physicians, and neurologists.

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for scoping reviews, an author (M.D.), with the help of a medical librarian, conducted a search of the Embase, Ovid Medline, and PsychInfo databases for articles related to medical educational initiatives on headache medicine in medical students, residents, and physicians over the last 20 years.

RESULTS

A total of 17 articles met the inclusion criteria for this scoping review. Six articles were identified for medical students, seven for general practitioners/primary care physicians, one for emergency medicine residents, two for neurology residents, and one for neurologists. Certain educational initiatives were headache-focused while others had headaches as one of the educational topics. Educational content was delivered and assessed via diverse and innovative means, such as flipped classroom, simulation, theatrical performance, repeated quizzing and study, and a formalized headache elective.

CONCLUSION

Education initiatives in headache medicine are important to improve competency and patient access to appropriate management of various headache disorders. Future research should focus on using innovative and evidence-based methods of content delivery, knowledge, and procedural assessment, and evaluating changes in practice behaviors.

Acupuncture Based on Regulating Autonomic Nerves for the Prevention of Migraine Without Aura: A Prospective, Double-Dummy, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Background

Migraine without aura (MWoA) is a nervous system disease, which is closely related to autonomic nerves dysfunction. As a popular non-pharmacological alternative treatment for preventing migraine, it remains unclear whether the acupuncture can prevent MWoA. Thus, this trial aims to evaluate the preventive effect and safety of the acupuncture method of stimulating acupoints that regulate autonomic nerves in MWoA patients.

Methods

This is a single-center, prospective, double-dummy, randomized controlled clinical trial. A total of ninety-six patients with MWoA are randomly allocated to acupuncture combined with the placebo group and sham acupuncture combined with the medication group in a 1:1 ratio. All subjects will receive intervention for 8 weeks and follow-up assessments three times (one month, three months, and six months in follow-up visiting). The frequency of acupuncture in both groups is three times a week for eight weeks. The primary outcome will be evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the number of migraine attacks per four weeks. The secondary outcome measures will include the migraine-specific quality of life (MSQOL) scale and headache needs assessment survey (HANA) questionnaire scale.

Results

The acupoint selection of this clinical trial is based on the combination of traditional Chinese medicine theory with modern medicine, thereby evaluating the efficacy and safety of the acupuncture method of stimulating acupoints that regulate autonomic nerves in the prevention of MWoA. The results may provide evidence of the beneficial effects of acupuncture on the prevention of MWoA by regulating autonomic nerves dysfunction.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04766762.

The headache registry of the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG): baseline data of the first 1,351 patients

Background

Although good treatment options exist for many headache disorders, not all patients benefit and disability continues to be large. To design strategies for improving headache care, real-world data observing standard care is necessary. Therefore, the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG) has established the DMKG Headache Registry. Here we present methods and baseline data.

Methods

Accredited German headache centers (clinic-based or private practice) can offer participation to their patients. Patients provide headache history, current headache load (including a mobile headache diary), medication and comorbidities and answer validated questionnaires, prior to their physician appointment. Physicians use these data as the base of their history taking, and add, change or confirm some central information. Before the next visit, patients are asked to update their data. Patients will continuously be included over the next years.

Results

The present analysis is based on the first 1,351 patients (1110 females, 39.6 ± 12.9 years) with a completed first visit. Most participants had a migraine diagnosis. Participants had 14.4 ± 8.5 headache days and 7.7 ± 6.1 acute medication days per month and 63.9% had a migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) grade 4 (severe disability). 93.6% used at least one acute headache medication, most frequently a triptan (60.0%) or non-opioid analgesic (58.3%). 45.0% used at least one headache preventive medication, most frequently an antidepressant (11.4%, mostly amitriptyline 8.4%) or a CGRP(receptor) antibody (9.8%). Most common causes for discontinuation of preventive medication were lack of effect (54.2%) and side effects (43.3%).

Conclusion

The DMKG Headache Registry allows to continuously monitor headache care at German headache centers in both a cross-sectional and a longitudinal approach.

Trial registration

The DMKG Headache Registry is registered with the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00021081).

Headache as a reason for consultation: the primary care perspective

INTRODUCTION

Headache is a frequent reason for consultation with primary care (PC) physicians. However, the condition is underdiagnosed and undertreated. One reason for this may be the lack of specific training on headache in PC.

METHODS

We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study of data gathered with a self-administered survey that was completed by PC physicians from our health district. We collected sociodemographic data and information on previous training in neurology and headache, and training needs.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 104 PC physicians, 53% of whom were women; mean age was 49 years. Most respondents worked in urban settings (42.3%) and had been trained via residency (77.9%). Although 65.4% spent more time with patients with headache than with other patients, only 32.7% used the International Classification of Headache Disorders. In our sample, 68.3% of respondents reported a high or very high interest in headache, and 75.9% wished to receive further training on the condition; theoretical and practical courses and update lectures were regarded as the most useful tools. In clinical practice, 90% used triptans and 78% used preventive treatments. The most frequently used drug was amitriptyline; only 22.1% choose topiramate.

CONCLUSIONS

PC physicians are in frequent contact with patients with headache and show interest in receiving training on this condition. This could be helpful in designing training programmes aimed at improving quality of care in this area.

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

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

Introduction of a smartphone based behavioral intervention for migraine in the emergency department

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a smartphone application (app) with an electronic headache diary and a progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) intervention is feasible and acceptable to people presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with migraine.

METHODS

This single arm prospective study assessed feasibility by actual use of the app and acceptability by satisfaction with the app. We report preliminary data on change in migraine disability and headache days.

RESULTS

The 51 participants completed PMR sessions on a mean of 13 ± 19 (0,82) days for the 90-day study period, lasting a median of 11 min (IQR 6.5, 17) each. Median number of days of diary use was 34 (IQR 10, 77). Diaries were completed at least twice a week in half of study weeks (337/663). Participants were likely (≥4/5 on a 5-point Likert scale) to recommend both the app (85%) and PMR (91%). MIDAS scores significantly decreased by a mean of 38 points/participant (p < 0.0001). More frequent PMR use was associated with a higher odds of headache free days (p = 0.0148).

CONCLUSION

Smartphone-based PMR introduced to patients who present to the ED for migraine is feasible and acceptable. More frequent users have more headache free days. Future work should focus on intervention engagement.

Smartphone-Delivered Progressive Muscle Relaxation for the Treatment of Migraine in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Scalable, accessible forms of behavioral therapy for migraine prevention are needed. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) delivered by a smartphone application (app) in the Primary Care setting.

METHODS

This pilot study was a non-blinded, randomized, parallel-arm controlled trial of adults with migraine and 4+ headache days/month. Eligible participants spoke English and owned a smartphone. All participants were given the RELAXaHEAD app which includes an electronic headache diary. Participants were randomized to receive 1 of the 2 versions of the app-one with PMR and the other without PMR. The primary outcomes were measures of feasibility (adherence to the intervention and diary entries during the 90-day interval) and acceptability (satisfaction levels). We conducted exploratory analyses to determine whether there was a change in Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) scores or a change in headache days.

RESULTS

Of 139 participants (77 PMR, 62 control), 116 (83%) were female, mean age was 41.7 ± 12.8 years. Most patients 108/139 (78%) had moderate-severe disability. Using a 1-5 Likert scale, participants found the app easy to use (mean 4.2 ± 0.7) and stated that they would be happy to engage in the PMR intervention again (mean 4.3 ± 0.6). For the first 6 weeks, participants practiced PMR 2-4 days/week. Mean per session duration was 11.1 ± 8.3 minutes. Relative to the diary-only group, the PMR group showed a greater non-significant decline in mean MIDAS scores (-8.7 vs -22.7, P = .100) corresponding to a small-moderate mean effect size (Cohen's d = 0.38).

CONCLUSION

Smartphone-delivered PMR may be an acceptable, accessible form of therapy for migraine. Mean effects show a small-moderate mean effect size in disability scores.

Primary Care Access to an Online Decision Support Tool is Associated With Improvements in Some Aspects of Pediatric Migraine Care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether primary care provider (PCP) access to an online decision support tool is associated with a change in evidence-based primary care medical management of pediatric migraine.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, PCPs serving a target community were educated on the availability and use of an online clinical decision support tool that was developed to inform treatment of pediatric migraine. For 9 months before and after implementation of the decision tool, the proportions of children with migraine prescribed evidence-based and contraindicated medications by PCPs in the target region were monitored using electronic medical record query and statistically compared to these same proportions for patients in surrounding (control) regions. Rates of visits to the emergency department for migraine also were tracked pre- and postimplementation as an indirect measure of impact of the decision tool. Provider usage of the decision tool was monitored and summarized using web analytics.

RESULTS

Approximately half (56%) of target region PCPs used the online tool at least once over the project period. Relative to control regions and baseline trends, the proportion of children residing in the target region who were prescribed recommended abortive and preventive medications for treating migraine was statistically significantly higher following implementation of the tool. No significant changes to frequency of emergency care visits for migraine by youth in the target region were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Availability to PCPs of an online decision support tool for pediatric migraine is associated with a modest change in some aspects of evidence-based medical care.

Manual therapy as a prophylactic treatment for migraine: design of a randomized controlled trial

Background

People with migraine often experience disability with serious consequences for their social life and work productivity. The pharmacological prophylactic management of migraine is effective in reducing migraine attacks. However, many people are reluctant to use daily prophylactic medication, leading to a demand for non-pharmacological treatment options. We present the design for and discuss the feasibility of a pragmatic, randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of a multimodal manual therapy (MT) treatment compared to usual care by the general practitioner (GP) for the prophylactic treatment of migraine.

Methods

Eligible participants will be recruited in primary care using the International Classification of Headache Disorders III criteria for migraine of the International Headache Society. Participants will be randomized to either multimodal MT treatment or usual care provided by the GP. GPs will be asked to treat the usual care group according to the Dutch GP guideline for headache. The multimodal MT intervention will include manual pressure techniques, neck muscle-strength exercises and mobilization of the cervical and thoracic spine.

The trial will consist of a 12-week treatment period and follow-up measurements at 12, 26 and 52 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the number of migraine days per 4 weeks, assessed with a headache diary. Secondary outcome measures are the number of migraine attacks, medication use, disability due to headache, headache intensity, number of participants reporting a 50% migraine reduction, measurement of cervical pressure pain thresholds, presence of allodynia, endurance of cervical flexor muscles, days of absence of work and global perceived effect.

Discussion

The results of the trial will show whether a multimodal MT intervention is an effective non-pharmacological treatment option for people with migraine.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register, NL7504. Registered on 7 February 2019.

Headache as a reason for consultation: the primary care perspective

INTRODUCTION

Headache is a frequent reason for consultation with primary care (PC) physicians. However, the condition is underdiagnosed and undertreated. One reason for this may be the lack of specific training on headache in PC.

METHODS

We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study of data gathered with a self-administered survey that was completed by PC physicians from our health district. We collected sociodemographic data and information on previous training in neurology and headache, and training needs.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 104 PC physicians, 53% of whom were women; mean age was 49 years. Most respondents worked in urban settings (42.3%) and had been trained via residency (77.9%). Although 65.4% spent more time with patients with headache than with other patients, only 32.7% used the International Classification of Headache Disorders. In our sample, 68.3% of respondents reported a high or very high interest in headache, and 75.9% wished to receive further training on the condition; theoretical and practical courses and update lectures were regarded as the most useful tools. In clinical practice, 90% used triptans and 78% used preventive treatments. The most frequently used drug was amitriptyline; only 22.1% choose topiramate.

CONCLUSIONS

PC physicians are in frequent contact with patients with headache and show interest in receiving training on this condition. This could be helpful in designing training programmes aimed at improving quality of care in this area.

Migraine-preventive prescription patterns by physician specialty in ambulatory care settings in the United States

Many adults with migraine who require preventive therapy are often not prescribed the proper medications. The most likely reason is that primary care physicians are unacquainted with preventive medications for migraine. The present study assessed the migraine-preventive prescription patterns in office visits using data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2006 to 2009 in the United States. Patients who were 18 years or older and diagnosed with migraine were included in the analysis. In accordance with the recommendations of the headache guidelines, we included beta-blockers, antidepressants, triptans for short-term prevention of menstrual migraine, and other triptans for acute treatment. Weighted visits of adults with migraine prescribed with preventive medication ranged from 32.8% in 2006 to 38.6% in 2009. Visits to primary care physicians accounted for 72.6% of the analyzed adult migraine visits. Anticonvulsants (odds ratio [OR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14–0.57, p < 0.001) and triptans for menstrual migraine (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28–0.91, p = 0.025) were less frequently prescribed by primary care physicians compared with specialty care physicians, such as neurologists and psychiatrists. There were no significant differences in the prescription patterns of antidepressants and beta-blockers between primary and specialty care physicians. Beta-blockers were prescribed to patients with comorbidity of hypertension, and antidepressants were used by patients with comorbidity of depression. There are differences in the prescription patterns of certain type of preventive medications between primary care physicians and specialty care physicians.

•

Anticonvulsants were less used by primary care physicians than specialty care physicians.

•

Triptans for prevention were also less used by primary care physicians.

•

No differences were found in patterns of antidepressants and beta-blockers.

•

Beta-blockers were used for patients with comorbidity of hypertension.

•

Antidepressants were used for patients with comorbidity of depression.

Follow-up over 20 months confirms gains of online behavioural training in frequent episodic migraine

Aim This study examined the change over 20 months in 178 participants with frequent episodic migraine under adequate treatment as usual, who had completed online behavioural training (oBT) in migraine self-management either directly (group 1, n = 120) or after 10 months of watchful waiting (group 2, n = 58). Methods Participants completed questionnaires and an online headache diary and migraine monitor following the International Classification of Headache Disorders at T0 (baseline), T1 (post-training), T2 (6-month follow-up; extended baseline in group 2), T3 (post-training, group 2 only) and T4 (group 1: 16-month follow-up; group 2: 6-month follow-up). Statistical analyses were conducted on the observed data without imputation of missing observations. Results Both groups were highly comparable. The data over time revealed benefits in response to oBT, with significant between-group differences in the change achieved in the training episodes T2-T0 (group 1) and T4-T2 (group 2). Improved attack frequency ( M = -23%) was higher in participants with more (i.e. 4-6) attacks per month at baseline, and the effects of oBT were durable over 16 months of follow-up. Conclusions oBT is beneficial in frequent episodic migraine, which deserves special efforts in care. Self-management variants such as oBT reach patients easily and supplement these efforts with durable results.

[Formalized consensus: clinical practice recommendations for the management of the migraine in African adult patients]

Migraine is a primary headache disorder (according to the latest International Headache Society criteria) affecting approximately 8% of African population. Women are more often affected than men and attacks usually occur before the age of 40 years Although some treatments, hygienic-dietary measures and other non-pharmacological methods can reduce the intensity and frequency of attacks, medicinal treatment of migraine attack is often necessary. Availability of treatments and access to care differ in Africa and led to the implementation of the first expert consensus recommendations for the management of the migraine in african adult patients. This multinational collaborative study is intended for health practitioners. It aims to provide 16 simple, evidence-based recommendations and is adapted to african medical practice.

A migraine management training program for primary care providers: An overview of a survey and pilot study findings, lessons learned, and considerations for further research

BACKGROUND

There are five to nine million primary care office visits a year for migraine in the United States. However, migraine care is often suboptimal in the primary care setting. A prior study indicated that primary care physicians (PCPs) wanted direct contact with headache specialists to improve the migraine care they provide.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to further examine PCPs' knowledge of migraine management and assess the feasibility of a multimodal migraine education program for PCPs.

METHODS

We conducted a survey assessing PCPs' knowledge about migraine. We then held three live educational sessions and developed an email consultative service for PCPs to submit questions they had about migraine. We report both quantitative and qualitative findings.

RESULTS

Twenty-one PCPs completed the survey. They were generally familiar with the epidemiology of migraine (mean prevalence of migraine reported was 12.6% ± 10.1), the psychiatric comorbidities (mean prevalence of comorbid depression was 24.5% ± 16.7, mean prevalence of comorbid anxiety was 24.6% ± 18.3), and evidence-based behavioral treatments. Fifty-six percent cited cognitive behavioral therapy, 78% cited biofeedback, and 61% cited relaxation therapy as evidence based treatments. Though most were aware of the prevalence of psychiatric comorbidities, they did not routinely assess for them (43% did not routinely assess for anxiety, 29% did not routinely assess for depression). PCPs reported frequently referring patients for non-level A evidence based treatments: special diets (60%), acupuncture (50%), physical therapy (30%), and psychoanalysis (20%). Relaxation therapy was a therapy recommended by 40% of the PCPs. Only 10% reported referring for cognitive behavioral therapy or biofeedback. Nineteen percent made minimal or no use of migraine preventive medications. Seventy-two percent were unaware of or only slightly aware of the American Academy of Neurology guidelines for migraine. There was variable attendance at the educational sessions (N=22 at 1st session, 6 at 2nd session, 15 at 3rd session). Very few PCPs used the email consultative service (N=4).

CONCLUSIONS

Though PCPs are familiar with many aspects of migraine care, there is a need and opportunity for improvement. The three live sessions were poorly attended and the email consultative service was rarely used. We provide an in depth discussion of targeted areas for educational intervention, of the challenges in developing a migraine educational program for PCPs, and areas for future study.

Utilisation of prescription and over-the-counter triptans: a cross-sectional study in Stockholm, Sweden

PURPOSE

Triptans are widely used in acute migraine, and in some countries, they are also available over-the-counter (OTC). In Sweden, sales have increased for both prescription and OTC triptans. This study aimed to describe current prescribing and utilisation patterns of prescription and OTC triptans in Stockholm, Sweden.

METHODS

Register data from 4759 patients dispensed triptans in 2014 were used to study documented diagnosis of migraine, concomitant acute and preventive treatment for migraine, and contraindications. Survey data from 49 patients purchasing OTC triptans in three pharmacies were used to capture physician-diagnosed migraine, concomitant acute and preventive treatment for migraine, a behaviour of combining or alternating between prescription and OTC triptans, and pharmacy counselling rates.

RESULTS

Among the prescription triptan users, 52 % had a recorded diagnosis of migraine, 48 % had no other acute treatment, preventive treatment was rare (12 %) and contraindications were found in 2 % of the patients. Among the OTC triptan users, the majority (63 %) had been diagnosed by a physician and had a history of prescription triptan use, but combining or alternating between OTC and prescription triptans was rare. Concomitant acute treatment was reported in 53 % and preventive treatment was rare (4 %), despite high self-reported migraine frequencies. Some off-label use was detected, despite moderate to high counselling rates.

CONCLUSION

Triptans are prescribed with attention to safety but with poor recording of migraine diagnosis. OTC triptan users generally have a history of prescription triptan use. Preventive treatment rates are low in both groups. Strategies to discern patients who need other treatment options should be considered.

Migraine diagnosis and treatment: A knowledge and needs assessment among primary care providers

Background

Studies reveal that migraine is often under-recognized, misdiagnosed and inadequately treated in the primary care setting.

Objective

The objective of this article is to assess primary care providers’ (PCP) knowledge and needs regarding migraine diagnosis and management.

Methods

We held semi-structured group interviews and distributed a brief questionnaire to PCPs in our hospital network. Building on the information from the interviews, we developed a comprehensive survey assessing PCPs’ knowledge about migraine. Descriptive analyses were performed.

Results

The initial interviews and brief questionnaires revealed that PCPs are aware of the prevalence of migraine but are uncertain about the details of management. Eighty-three of 120 physicians completed the comprehensive survey. Only 47% would order imaging for a new type of headache, 31% for worsening headache, and 35% for a headache unresponsive to treatment. Only 28% were familiar with the American Academy of Neurology guidelines on preventive treatment and 40% were familiar with the Choosing Wisely Campaign recommendations on migraine treatment. Just 34% were aware that opioids can cause medication-overuse headache. Non-pharmacologic treatment was not usually recommended. PCPs favored educational opportunities involving direct contact with headache physicians (56%).

Conclusions

PCPs are not universally aware of the specific recommendations for managing migraine patients. Future work should focus on innovative ways to provide decision support and education for PCPs caring for migraineurs.

Examining a possible association between human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination and migraine: results of a cohort study in the Netherlands

Since the introduction of the bivalent human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine in the Netherlands, migraine has been reported as a notable event in the passive safety surveillance system. Research on the association between HPV vaccination and migraine is needed. Therefore, potential migraine cases in 2008-2010 were selected from a group of general practitioners and linked to the vaccination registry. Data were analysed in three ways: (i) incidences of migraine postvaccination (2009/2010) were compared to pre-vaccination incidences (2008); (ii) in a cohort, incidence rates of migraine in vaccinated and unvaccinated girls were compared and (iii) in a self-controlled case series analysis, the relative incidence of migraine in potentially high-risk periods was compared to non-high-risk periods. Incidence rates of migraine for 12- to 16-year-old girls and boys postvaccination were slightly higher than pre-vaccination incidence rates. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for vaccinated compared to unvaccinated girls were not statistically significantly higher. Furthermore, the RR for migraine in the high-risk period of 6 weeks following each dose versus non-high-risk period was 4.3 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-26.6) for certain migraine.

CONCLUSION

Using different methods, no statistically significant association between HPV vaccination and incident migraine was found. However, the number of cases was low; to definitively exclude the risk, an increased sample size is needed.

Triptan use in Italy: Insights from administrative databases

Introduction

In this drug utilization study, we aimed at assessing the pattern of triptan use in Italy by means of the drug prescription databases of two local health authorities, accounting for approximately 1 million citizens.

Methods

The study population included all residents aged 18 to 84 years in the Vercelli province (about 175,000 inhabitants) and in the Umbria region (about 885,000 inhabitants), who had at least one dispensation for triptans in 2012. A frequent user, who might be at risk of medication-overuse headache (MOH), was defined as a patient being dispensed at least 10 defined daily doses (DDD) of triptans every month for at least three consecutive months.

Results

Triptans were used by 0.7%–1% of the population. While most patients were dispensed fewer than 60 DDDs per year, about 10% of all triptan users were classified as frequent users. In both areas, patients below the age of 29 were less likely to be frequent users while the 40- to 49-year-old population was the most affected, with no sex difference. About two-thirds of frequent users persisted in this behavior for an additional three-month period in the following six months.

Conclusions

Our data indicate that approximately 10% of all triptan users in the Italian population are potentially at risk for MOH. An approach based on drug prescription databases could be useful to identify patients at risk for MOH.