Validity and reliability of the Malay version of the Structured Migraine Interview (SMI) Questionnaire

The HUNT4 study: the validity of questionnaire-based diagnoses

BACKGROUND

Questionnaire-based headache diagnoses should be validated against diagnoses made by the gold standard, which is personal interview by a headache expert. The diagnostic algorithm with the best diagnostic accuracy should be used when later analysing the data.

METHODS

The Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT4) was performed between 2017 and 2019. Among HUNT4 participants, a total of 232 (19.3%) out of 1201 randomly invited were interviewed by a headache expert to assess the sensitivity, specificity and kappa value of the questionnaire-based headache diagnoses.

RESULTS

The median interval between answering the headache questions and the validation interview was 60 days (95% CI 56-62 days). The best agreements were found for self-reported lifetime migraine (sensitivity of 59%, specificity of 99%, and a kappa statistic of 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.75), self-reported active migraine (sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 97%, and a kappa statistic of 0.55, 95% 0.39-0.71), liberal criteria of migraine (sensitivity of 64%, specificity of 93%, and a kappa statistic of 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.73) and ICDH3-based migraine ≥1 days/month (sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 94%, and a kappa statistic of 0.49, 95% CI 0.30-0.68). For headache suffering ≥1 days/month a sensitivity of 90%, specificity 80%, and a kappa statistic of 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0-69 were found. For tension-type headache (TTH) ≥ 1 days/month the agreement was 0.33 (95% CI 0.17-0.49).

CONCLUSION

The HUNT4 questionnaire is a valid tool for identifying persons with lifetime migraine, self-reported active migraine and active migraine applying liberal modified criteria. The agreement for TTH was fair.

The diagnostic accuracy of headache measurement instruments: A systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on headaches associated with musculoskeletal symptoms

AIM

To systematically review the available literature on the diagnostic accuracy of questionnaires and measurement instruments for headaches associated with musculoskeletal symptoms.

DESIGN

Articles were eligible for inclusion when the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity/specificity) was established for measurement instruments for headaches associated with musculoskeletal symptoms in an adult population. The databases searched were PubMed (1966-2018), Cochrane (1898-2018) and Cinahl (1988-2018). Methodological quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (QUADAS-2) and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist for criterion validity. When possible, a meta-analysis was performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) recommendations were applied to establish the level of evidence per measurement instrument.

RESULTS

From 3450 articles identified, 31 articles were included in this review. Eleven measurement instruments for migraine were identified, of which the ID-Migraine is recommended with a moderate level of evidence and a pooled sensitivity of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.85-0.89) and specificity of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.72-0.78). Six measurement instruments examined both migraine and tension-type headache and only the Headache Screening Questionnaire - Dutch version has a moderate level of evidence with a sensitivity of 0.69 (95% CI 0.55-0.80) and specificity of 0.90 (95% CI 0.77-0.96) for migraine, and a sensitivity of 0.36 (95% CI 0.21-0.54) and specificity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.74-0.92) for tension-type headache. For cervicogenic headache, only the cervical flexion rotation test was identified and had a very low level of evidence with a pooled sensitivity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.72-0.94) and specificity of 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.91).

DISCUSSION

The current review is the first to establish an overview of the diagnostic accuracy of measurement instruments for headaches associated with musculoskeletal factors. However, as most measurement instruments were validated in one study, pooling was not always possible. Risk of bias was a serious problem for most studies, decreasing the level of evidence. More research is needed to enhance the level of evidence for existing measurement instruments for multiple headaches.

Prevalence of Primary Headache Disorders in Kuwait

Background: Only an insignificant quantum of data exists on the prevalence of primary headaches among those living in Kuwait. We aimed to determine the prevalence of primary headaches among the Kuwaiti population. Methods: This community-based study included Kuwaiti population aged 18-65 years. Using systematic random sampling, data was collected by the Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap and Impaired Participation questionnaire. Responses to the diagnostic questions were transformed into diagnoses algorithmically to confirm the diagnosis of primary headache. Results: A total of 15,523 patients were identified of whom 9,527 (61%) were diagnosed with primary headache disorder; a female predominance of 62.2% was observed. The mean age was 34.84 ± 10.19. Tension-type headache (TTH) was the most prevalent at 29% followed by episodic migraine (23.11%), chronic migraine (5.4%), and medication overuse headache (2.4%). Primary headache prevalence declined steadily from 71% in those aged 18-30 years to 23% in those over 50 (p < 0. 037). The female:male ratio was 1.7:1. Frequency and severity of primary headache were correlated significantly with lost work days (r = 0.611, p < 0.001 and r = 0.102, p = 0.001, respectively). Conclusions. In Kuwait, primary headache disorder is more frequent in young adults and females. TTH followed by episodic migraine were the more prevalent types of headache. Higher frequency and severe headaches were associated with increasing social and work-related burden.

Development and validation of an Arabic-language headache questionnaire for population-based surveys

Background

The reported prevalence of headache disorders in Arab regions varies considerably between countries. This may be due to a lack of standardized survey instruments that capture the prevalence.

Purpose of the study

Our goal was to construct and validate a structured headache questionnaire for Arabic-speaking headache patients to be used as an epidemiological survey instrument.

Methods

We developed a culturally adapted interviewer-administered questionnaire in Arabic language comprising two sets of questions. The first set included personal and sociodemographic data together with a screening question regarding the presence of headaches over the last year. The second set was designed to define the type and pattern of headaches according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria (for subjects with “yes” answers on the screening question). Validation process took place in two phases through probability random sampling selected from 1,221 headache subjects collected in an epidemiological survey 3 (n=70) and 6 months (n=232) later. A detailed assessment of patients’ headaches was performed by neurologists (blinded from the questionnaire diagnosis) who clinically assessed the patients’ headache.

Results

The validity of the questionnaire was tested in 232 subjects with a mean age of 41.2±10.9 years, 72.8% of whom were females. The mean time to complete the questionnaire was 8.4±1.7 minutes. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.903 (95% confidence interval: 0.875–0.925), the Cronbach κ coefficient was 0.775 (95% confidence interval: 0.682–0.837), and the percentage of agreement was 84.5%.

Conclusion

Our results support the use of this comprehensive questionnaire as a valid tool for headache assessment among Arabic-speaking patients.

Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the revised American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire concerning pain management in Chinese orthopedic patients

The present study tested the clinical efficiency (item grouping, internal consistency of the subscales, construct validity, and clinical feasibility) of a widely used pain assessment system, the Mandarin version of the American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire (APS-POQ-R-C), in Chinese patients. We also attempted to investigate the current quality of pain management provided in orthopedic inpatient units in China and provide baseline data. First, we investigated the test–retest reliability of APS-POQ-R-C. In total, 236 orthopedic patients were evaluated. Our results showed that APS-POQ-R-C has satisfactory internal consistency and construct validity, although some items are not appropriate for orthopedic patients. Test–retest reliability outcomes indicated that APS-POQ-R-C is a satisfactory battery with acceptable validity and reliability, and is therefore recommended for pain management in future studies.