The headache under-response to treatment (HURT) questionnaire, an outcome measure to guide follow-up in primary care: development, psychometric evaluation and assessment of utility

Neurasites®-A Standardized Plant Extract in the Treatment and Prevention of Migraine Attacks

Background/Objectives: Migraine is one of the most common diseases in highly developed countries, being even more common than diabetes and asthma. Migraines can affect emotional, social, and physical wellbeing as well as professional life. The most common symptoms are severe headaches associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia and sonophobia, difficulty concentrating, sensitivity and emotional disorders. Many studies have been published to establish the best migraine-management drugs, but not many of them refer to plant extracts, which have been given more attention by patients lately. Among these generically called herbal medicines, the effect of tussilago hybrida standardized extract has been studied since the early twenties. This stands as the fundamental component of Neurasites® and the reason for research on materials and methods, results on treatment schemes for diminishing migraine attack features, as well as migraine prevention. Methods: There are two directions of research (herbal and placebo medicine) considered to be of interest due to the actual trend toward natural medicine and against chemicals and associated drugs. For quantitative research, the research tool used was that of the Neurasites® Questionnaire Survey (NQS). Results: The obtained results prove the efficacy of treatment by reducing the duration of headache attacks, diminishing pain intensity and decreasing the frequency of migraine episodes. Conclusions: Further research development should focus on other dosages and treatment schemes and on other similar natural products to be used in migraine attack treatment.

The state of art on the use of patient reported outcomes in migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to explore the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in migraine. Traditionally assessed through specific features, recent adoption of PROMs allows for a more objective and quantifiable evaluation. PROMs, which are standardized questionnaires collecting health information directly from a patients' perspective, cover various aspects, including migraine specific aspects. The review focuses on delineating the applications and interpretation of commonly used PROMs in migraine research, with an emphasis on their integration in clinical care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Generic and migraine-specific PROMs play a crucial role in clinical research, particularly in assessing health-related quality of life, disability, impact, and associated comorbidities. Some of these measures are strongly recommended to be used by the International Guidelines and are, in fact, mandated by the FDA for product labeling. Recently, there has been an expansion in the use of PROMs to assess migraine in diverse populations, in particular pediatric patients. However, the application of these measures in clinical care shows considerable heterogeneity, and some have not been validated specifically for migraine. The existing multitude of PROMs, coupled with ongoing development of new ones to better capture patient concerns, creates complexity in their research and clinical application. To address these challenges, it becomes imperative to streamline their use, focusing on those that are more validated and better aligned with the patients' perspective including different populations' needs.

SUMMARY

The utilization of PROMs in evaluating migraine enables a more holistic assessment, helps quantify the impact of the disease facilitating change measurement, improves communication between healthcare providers and patients and, guides treatment decisions for improved outcomes. However, the increasing number of PROMs questionnaires, underscores the importance of validating these tools for migraine and, the dynamic nature of the disease makes it relevant to decide with whom, why and when these should be used.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for Controlled Clinical Trials in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension

The quality of clinical trials is essential to advance treatment, inform regulatory decisions and meta-analysis. With the increased incidence of idiopathic intracranial hypertension and the emergence of clinical trials for novel therapies in this condition, the International Headache Society Guidelines for Controlled Clinical Trials in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension aims to establish guidelines for designing state-of-the-art controlled clinical trials for idiopathic intracranial hypertension.

The 5-HT1F receptor as the target of ditans in migraine - from bench to bedside

Migraine is a leading cause of disability in more than one billion people worldwide, yet it remains universally underappreciated, even by individuals with the condition. Among other shortcomings, current treatments (often repurposed agents) have limited efficacy and potential adverse effects, leading to low treatment adherence. After the introduction of agents that target the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway, another new drug class, the ditans - a group of selective serotonin 5-HT_1F receptor agonists - has just reached the international market. Here, we review preclinical studies from the late 1990s and more recent clinical research that contributed to the development of the ditans and led to their approval for acute migraine treatment by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency.

Retrospective Observational Study Amidst Myriad Conundrums and Myths of Pediatric Headaches: A Critique on Diagnostics and Effectiveness of Interventions

Objective To study the etiological profile of pediatric headaches (PH) in a tertiary child neurology clinic and to determine the utility of diagnostics, interventions, and long-term prognosis. Methods Children (ages 4-15) observed over four years were recruited retrospectively. In primary headaches, the headache frequency and impact on quality of life (QOL) parameters at pre-treatment (T1) were compared post-treatment at follow-up (T2). Results Of the 311 eligible patients, 285 had primary headaches (Tension-Type Headache {TTH}: 156; Migraine: 129), and 26 had secondary headaches. The mean (±SD) onset age was 10 (±3) years with a male-to-female ratio of 2.3:1. Migraine was more common in children aged less than seven years (17/28) and TTH in older patients (146/283). The most common causes of secondary headache were intracranial hypertension (ICH) in 11/26 patients (four idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), four following aseptic meningitis, three with cortical vein thrombosis), and ophthalmologic causes in 7/26 (of these five had convergence insufficiency). Hypertension was a rare cause of secondary headaches (2/26 patients). Neuroimaging was performed in 173/311 (56%), primarily for parental anxiety (160/173; 92%), and was abnormal in only four. At T2 (Median time to follow-up: 29 months; Interquartile range: 22-37 months), data were collected in 207/285 patients with primary headaches (TTH: 109; Migraine: 98). In both migraine and TTH groups, there were statistically significant reductions (p-value <0.0001) in headache frequency and QOL parameters. Conclusion In our study, TTH was the most common cause of PH. Neuroimaging was normal in most cases. Psychological interventions were effective but underutilized. The symptoms of primary headaches improved significantly over time, despite poor adherence to prophylactic medications.

Telephone follow-up on treatment and patient satisfaction at a Danish tertiary headache center: A prospective study

OBJECTIVE

We investigated whether telephone follow-up consultations could lead to appropriate adjustment of treatments and a higher degree of patient satisfaction among patients with migraine and tension-type headache (TTH).

BACKGROUND

Migraine and TTH are disabling headache forms requiring optimized treatment.

METHODS

In a prospective, non-randomized, quality control study with controls comparing telephone-interview intervention (TeII) with business-as-usual (BAU) treatment, we included newly referred patients with migraine and/or TTH. The TeII group was contacted by telephone by healthcare professionals at 8 and 16 weeks after the first visit addressing headache treatment. Electronic questionnaires were sent to all participants before the first visit and after 6 months. Predefined outcomes were number of patients with change in preventive and acute medication; change in headache frequency; migraine frequency; scores from the eight-item Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT-8) questionnaire, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS); and patient satisfaction after 6 months.

RESULTS

From May 2020 to April 2021, there were 230 patients enrolled in the TeII program, whereof 96 patients were included in the analysis. For the BAU group, 91 patients with similar sex and age distribution were identified via medical-record reviews in the same period. More patients in the TeII group than in the BAU group had a change in acute medication (27/96 [28%] vs. five of 91 [6%], p < 0.001) and preventive medication (28/96 [29%] vs. 12/91 [13%], p = 0.006). Headache days per month decreased in the TeII group (-4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.5 to -2.7; p = 0.001) and the BAU group (-2.5, 95% CI -4.6 to -0.4; p = 0.018), without significant difference between the groups (p = 0.080). There was no difference in migraine frequency between the groups (TeII: 1.0 day, 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.0; BAU: 1.0 day, 95% CI, -2.5 to 0.5; p = 0.718) or HURT-8 score (TeII: 10.5, 95% CI 9.5-11.5; BAU: 13.0, 95% CI 11.7-14.2; p = 0.053). There were no changes in the ISI score (TeII: 1.0, interquartile range [IQR] 6; p = 0.152; BAU: 0.5, IQR 4.5; p = 0.824), HADS-Anxiety score (TeII: -5, IQR 5.3; p = 0.186; BAU: 1.0, IQR 4.0; p = 0.445), or HADS-Depression score (TeII: 0.0, IQR 3.0; p = 0.163; BAU: 0.0, IQR 2.0; p = 0.303) in any of the groups. There was a higher degree of patient satisfaction in the TeII group compared with the BAU group in treatment (median [IQR] score 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p < 0.001), headache improvement (median [IQR] 3 [2-4] vs. 2 [1-3], p = 0.002), the headache program (median [IQR] 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p < 0.001), and information (median [IQR] 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Patients with migraine and/or TTH benefit from a telephone follow-up approach within the first 6 months of their treatment course in terms of more efficient treatment and higher patient satisfaction.

The Global Campaign turns 18: a brief review of its activities and achievements

The Global Campaign against Headache, as a collaborative activity with the World Health Organization (WHO), was formally launched in Copenhagen in March 2004. In the month it turns 18, we review its activities and achievements, from initial determination of its strategic objectives, through partnerships and project management, knowledge acquisition and awareness generation, to evidence-based proposals for change justified by cost-effectiveness analysis.

Diagnosis and management of migraine in ten steps

Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder that directly affects more than one billion people worldwide. Despite its widespread prevalence, migraine remains under-diagnosed and under-treated. To support clinical decision-making, we convened a European panel of experts to develop a ten-step approach to the diagnosis and management of migraine. Each step was established by expert consensus and supported by a review of current literature, and the Consensus Statement is endorsed by the European Headache Federation and the European Academy of Neurology. In this Consensus Statement, we introduce typical clinical features, diagnostic criteria and differential diagnoses of migraine. We then emphasize the value of patient centricity and patient education to ensure treatment adherence and satisfaction with care provision. Further, we outline best practices for acute and preventive treatment of migraine in various patient populations, including adults, children and adolescents, pregnant and breastfeeding women, and older people. In addition, we provide recommendations for evaluating treatment response and managing treatment failure. Lastly, we discuss the management of complications and comorbidities as well as the importance of planning long-term follow-up.

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.

A universal outcome measure for headache treatments, care-delivery systems and economic analysis

BACKGROUND

The first manuscript in this series delineated a model of structured headache services, potentially cost-effective but requiring formal cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). We envisaged a need for a new outcome measure for this purpose, applicable to all forms of treatment, care and care-delivery systems as opposed to comparisons of single-modality treatments.

CONCEPTION AND DELINEATION

A literature review confirmed the lack of any suitable established measure. We prioritised construct validity, simplicity, comprehensiveness and expression in intuitive units. We noted that pain was the key burdensome symptom of migraine and episodic tension-type headache (TTH), that pain above a certain level was disabling, that it was difficult to put economic value to pain but relatively easy to do this for time, a casualty of headache leading to lost productivity. Alleviation of pain to a non-disabling level would be expected to bring restoration of function. We therefore based the measure on time spent in the ictal state (TIS) of migraine or TTH, either as total TIS or proportion of all time. We expressed impact on health, in units of time, as TIS*DW, where DW was the disability weight for the ictal state supplied by the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) studies. If the time unit was hours, TIS*DW yielded hours lived with (or lost to) disability (HLDs), in analogy with GBD's years lived with disability (YLDs).

UTILITY ASSESSMENT

Acute treatments would reduce TIS by shortening attack duration, preventative treatments by reducing attack frequency; health-care systems such as structured headache services would have these effects by delivering these treatments. These benefits were all measurable as HLDs-averted. Population-level estimates would be derived by factoring in prevalence, but also taking treatment coverage and adherence into account. For health-care systems, additional gains from provider-training (promoting adherence to guidelines and, therefore, enhancing coverage) and consumer-education (improving adherence to care plans), increasing numbers within populations gaining the benefits of treatments, would be measurable by the same metric.

CONCLUSIONS

The new outcome measure expressed in intuitive units of time is applicable to treatments of all modalities and to system-level interventions for multiple headache types, with utility for CEA and for informing health policy.

Headache service quality evaluation: implementation of quality indicators in primary care in Europe

BACKGROUND

Lifting The Burden (LTB) and European Headache Federation (EHF) have developed a set of headache service quality indicators, successfully tested in specialist headache centres. Their intended application includes all levels of care. Here we assess their implementation in primary care.

METHODS

We included 28 primary-care clinics in Germany (4), Turkey (4), Latvia (5) and Portugal (15). To implement the indicators, we interviewed 111 doctors, 92 nurses and medical assistants, 70 secretaries, 27 service managers and 493 patients, using the questionnaires developed by LTB and EHF. In addition, we evaluated 675 patients' records. Enquiries were in nine domains: diagnosis, individualized management, referral pathways, patient education and reassurance, convenience and comfort, patient satisfaction, equity and efficiency of headache care, outcome assessment and safety.

RESULTS

The principal finding was that Implementation proved feasible and practical in primary care. In the process, we identified significant quality deficits. Almost everywhere, histories of headache, especially temporal profiles, were captured and/or assessed inaccurately. A substantial proportion (20%) of patients received non-specific ICD codes such as R51 ("headache") rather than specific headache diagnoses. Headache-related disability and quality of life were not part of routine clinical enquiry. Headache diaries and calendars were not in use. Waiting times were long (e.g., about 60 min in Germany). Nevertheless, most patients (> 85%) expressed satisfaction with their care. Almost all the participating clinics provided equitable and easy access to treatment, and follow-up for most headache patients, without unnecessary barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated that headache service quality indicators can be used in primary care, proving both practical and fit for purpose. It also uncovered quality deficits leading to suboptimal treatment, often due to a lack of knowledge among the general practitioners. There were failures of process also. These findings signal the need for additional training in headache diagnosis and management in primary care, where most headache patients are necessarily treated. More generally, they underline the importance of headache service quality evaluation in primary care, not only to identify-quality failings but also to guide improvements. This study also demonstrated that patients' satisfaction is not, on its own, a good indicator of service quality.

Migraine: integrated approaches to clinical management and emerging treatments

Migraine is a highly disabling neurological disorder that directly affects more than 1 billion individuals worldwide. Available treatment options differ between countries and include acute, preventive, and non-pharmacological therapies. Because of major progress in the understanding of migraine pathogenesis, novel mechanism-based medications have emerged and expanded the armamentarium of treatments. We provide a comprehensive overview of the current standard of care that will enable informed clinical management. First, we discuss the efficacy, tolerability, and safety profile of various pharmacological therapies for acute and preventive treatment of migraine. Second, we review the current knowledge on non-pharmacological therapies, such as neuromodulation and biobehavioural approaches, which can be used for a multidisciplinary approach to clinical management. Third, we emphasise that any effective treatment strategy starts with building a therapeutic plan tailored to individual clinical characteristics, preferences, and needs. Finally, we explore the outlook of emerging mechanism-based treatments that could address unmet challenges in clinical management of migraine.

Severe migraine and its control: A proposal for definitions and consequences for care

Currently many patients with severe migraine do not receive appropriate treatment and are never referred to specialist headache centres. On the other hand, specialist headache centres are frequently attended by patients whose migraines could be managed adequately in the community. One reason for this may be the absence of standardised definitions of migraine severity and control and of a treatment algorithm for orientating difficult-to-treat patients to specialist headache centres. Based on a review of the relevant literature and consensus meetings, proposals have been made for these items. We propose that migraine should be considered severe if headache frequency is at least eight migraine days per month or, if headaches are less frequent, the HIT-6 score is ≥60 or ≥50% of headaches require complete interruption of activity. The proposed definition of migraine control is defined on the basis of appropriate response to acute headache therapy and to preventative therapy. A treatment algorithm is proposed to assess migraine control regularly and to adapt therapy accordingly. These proposals may contribute to developing and testing strategies for management of severe disease with appropriate and effective preventive treatment strategies. With the anticipated introduction of new possibilities for migraine prevention in the near future, the time is ripe for a holistic approach to migraine management.

Unmet Acute Treatment Needs From the 2017 Migraine in America Symptoms and Treatment Study

Objectives

To characterize unmet treatment needs in a sample of Migraine in America Symptoms and Treatment (MAST) Study participants using oral, acute prescription migraine medications.

Background

The MAST Study is a 2017 study of US adults with migraine that profiles current treatment patterns and identifies and quantifies unmet treatment needs.

Methods

Cross‐sectional data from an online survey of US adults meeting ICHD‐3 beta criteria for migraine. For inclusion in this paper, respondents self‐reported a history of 3 or more monthly headache days (MHDs) in the past 3 months and at least 1 MHD in the past 30 days, and current use of orally administered acute prescription medication for headache. Three domains of unmet need were identified: inadequate treatment response (ie, inadequate 2‐hour pain freedom, recurrence within 24 hours of initial relief), demanding attack characteristics (rapid onset of attack, headache associated with sleep), and unique patient characteristics (opioid or barbiturate overuse, cardiovascular comorbidity). Sociodemographics, oral medication use, and coexisting conditions and symptoms (ie, level of treatment optimization, psychological symptoms, attack‐related cutaneous allodynia, and migraine symptom severity) were assessed for each domain and by the number of unmet need domains.

Results

Overall, 15,133 respondents met inclusion criteria, 26.0% (3930/15,133) reported current use of oral acute prescription medication to treat headache. Eligible participants had a mean age of 45.0 years, 73.6% [2892/3930] were women and 81.1% [3186/3930]) were White. A total of 95.8% (3765/3930) of respondents had at least 1 unmet acute treatment need; 89.5% (3516/3930) reported demanding attack characteristics, 74.1% (2912/3930) reported inadequate treatment response, and 16.1% (634/3930) presented with unique patient characteristics. Common areas of unmet need were rapid headache onset (65.3% [2567/3930]), moderate to severe disability (55.6% [2187/3930]), inadequate 2‐hours pain freedom (49.0% [1892/3930]), and headache recurrence within 24 hours (38.0% [1493/3930]). An increasing number of unmet treatment need domains was associated with worsening psychological symptoms, attack‐related cutaneous allodynia and migraine symptom severity.

Conclusion

Nearly all MAST Study respondents using acute oral prescription medications for migraine reported at least 1 unmet treatment need. As unmet needs increased, so did coexisting conditions and symptom severity.

Impact of Medical Care on Symptomatic Drug Consumption and Quality of Life in Headache: A One-Year Population Study

Background: Chronic headache is one of the most common pain conditions, often leading to symptomatic drug overuse. The aim of this study was to provide data on symptomatic drug consumption in an Italian outpatient population and to describe how the clinical picture of headache may change after headache experts take charge of the care of affected individuals.

Methods: A total of 199 adults complaining of chronic headache were recruited through 32 pharmacies in the Pavia health district. Participants underwent four evaluations: a baseline assessment (T0) and three follow-up evaluations performed by a neurologist at 3, 6, and 12 months (T3, T6, and T12, respectively). On each occasion, they underwent a complete neurological assessment and received therapeutic adjustments to achieve better management of their headache.

Results: On the basis of a preliminary telephone interview, the prevalence rates of chronic headache and medication overuse headache (MOH) were 16 and 12%, respectively. At 12 months of follow-up, we observed a significant decrease in the frequency of attacks (T0: 9 ± 9/month vs. T12: 2 ± 2/month; p < 0.001), in the number of days/month with headache (T0: 11 ± 9 vs. T12: 4 ± 4; p < 0.001) and in single attack duration (T0: 34 ± 30 h vs. T12: 10 ± 19 h; p < 0.001). Careful headache management resulted in a significant decrease in analgesic consumption (T0: 12 ± 16 vs. T12: 4 ± 6 doses/month; p = 0.014) and a significant increase in quality of life, measured using the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) and Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) scales (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Headache management by a specialist is more effective than self-treatment, resulting in an overall benefit for headache patients.

Aids to management of headache disorders in primary care (2nd edition) : on behalf of the European Headache Federation and Lifting The Burden: the Global Campaign against Headache

The Aids to Management are a product of the Global Campaign against Headache, a worldwide programme of action conducted in official relations with the World Health Organization. Developed in partnership with the European Headache Federation, they update the first edition published 11 years ago.The common headache disorders (migraine, tension-type headache and medication-overuse headache) are major causes of ill health. They should be managed in primary care, firstly because their management is generally not difficult, and secondly because they are so common. These Aids to Management, with the European principles of management of headache disorders in primary care as the core of their content, combine educational materials with practical management aids. They are supplemented by translation protocols, to ensure that translations are unchanged in meaning from the English-language originals.The Aids to Management may be individually downloaded and, as is the case for all products of the Global Campaign against Headache, are available without restriction for non-commercial use.

Complete withdrawal is the most effective approach to reduce disability in patients with medication-overuse headache: A randomized controlled open-label trial

Background

Medication-overuse headache leads to high disability and decreased quality of life, and the best approach for withdrawal has been debated.

Aim

To compare change in disability and quality of life between two withdrawal programs.

Methods

We randomized medication-overuse headache patients to program A (two months without acute analgesics or migraine medications) or program B (two months with acute medications restricted to two days/week) in a prospective, outpatient study. At 6 and 12 months, we measured disability and headache burden by the Headache Under-Response to Treatment index (HURT). We estimated quality of life by EUROHIS-QOL 8-item at 2-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. Primary endpoint was disability change at 12 months.

Results

We included 72 medication-overuse headache patients with primary migraine and/or tension-type headache. Fifty nine completed withdrawal and 54 completed 12-month follow-up. At 12-month follow-up, 41 patients completed HURT and 38 completed EUROHIS-QOL 8-item. Disability reduction was 25% in program-A and 7% in program-B ( p = 0.027). Headache-burden reduction was 33% in program-A and 3% in program-B ( p = 0.005). Quality of life was increased by 8% in both programs without significant difference between the programs ( p = 0.30). At 2-month follow-up, quality of life increased significantly more in program-A than program-B ( p = 0.006).

Conclusion

Both withdrawal programs reduced disability and increased quality of life. Withdrawal without acute medication was the most effective in reducing disability in medication-overuse headache patients.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02903329).