Adherence to migraine treatment does not depend on the number of prescribed medications

Evaluation of adherence to pharmacological treatments by undocumented migrants with chronic diseases: a 10-year retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the time course of medication adherence and some of the factors involved in this process in undocumented migrants with chronic diseases.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A big non-governmental organisation in Milano, Italy, giving medical assistance to undocumented migrants.

PARTICIPANTS

1918 patients, 998 females and 920 males, with at least one chronic condition (diabetes, cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), mental health disorders) seen over a period of 10 years (2011-2020). Their mean age was 49.2±13 years.

RESULTS

Adherence to medications decreased over 1 year in all patients. This was more evident during the first 2 months of treatment. Patients on only one medication were less adherent than those on more than one medication; at 6 months the percentage of patients with high adherence was 33% vs 57% (p<0.0001) for diabetes, 15% vs 46% (p<0.0001) for mental disorders and 35% vs 59% (p<0.0001) for CVDs. Patients with mental disorders had the lowest adherence: 25% at 6 months and 3% at 1 year. Mental disorders, when present as comorbidities, greatly reduced the probability of being highly adherent: risk ratio (RR) 0.72 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.91; p=0.006) at 3 months, RR 0.77, (95% CI 0.59 to 1.01; p=0.06) at 6 months, RR 0.35 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.94; p=0.04) at 1 year. This was especially evident for patients with CVDs, whose percentage of high adherents decreased to 30% (p=0.0008) at 6 months and to 3% (p=0.01) at 1 year. We also noted that highly adherent patients usually were those most frequently seen by a doctor.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to increase medication adherence of undocumented migrants with chronic diseases are necessary, particularly in the first 2 months after beginning treatment. These should be aimed at people-centred care and include more outpatient consultations. Educational interventions should especially be taken into consideration for patients on monotherapy.

Burden of migraine in Brazil: A cross-sectional real-world study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the burden and consequences of migraine in Brazil in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), work productivity and daily activities, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU).

BACKGROUND

Despite existing data on how migraine affects populations worldwide, there are limited data on the burden of migraine in Latin America.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used patient-reported data from the 2018 Brazil National Health and Wellness Survey. HRQoL scores (EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level [EQ-5D-5L]; 36-item Short Form Health Survey, version 2 [SF-36v2]; and Short Form 6-dimension [SF-6D]), impairments to work productivity and daily activities (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire), and all-cause HRU were compared between migraine respondents and matched non-migraine controls.

RESULTS

Of the 12,000 total respondents in the survey database, 1643 self-reported a physician diagnosis of migraine and were propensity score matched 1:1 with controls without migraine. HRQoL was lower in patients with migraine versus non-migraine controls, with significantly lower SF-36v2 physical (mean [± SD] 50.3 [7.5] vs. 52.0 [7.6]) and mental component (mean [± SD] 42.9 [10.2] vs. 46.0 [9.9]) summary scores and SF-6D (mean [± SD] 0.7 [0.1] vs. 0.7 [0.1]) and EQ-5D-5L (mean [± SD] 0.7 [0.2] vs. 0.8 [0.2]) utility scores (all p < 0.001). Patients with migraine reported higher levels of work productivity loss (mean [± SD], 40.6% [31.4%] vs. 28.6% [30.9%], including absenteeism 12.8% [19.1%] vs. 8.4% [17.1%] and presenteeism 35.0% [28.7%] vs. 24.8% [28.0%]; all p < 0.001); activity impairment (mean [± SD] 36.0% [28.8%] vs. 25.5% [28.1%]; p < 0.001); and significantly higher HRU in the past 6 months (healthcare provider and emergency department visits [mean [± SD] 7.2 [9.5] vs. 4.5 [6.3] and 1.7 [3.8] vs. 0.9 [2.2]; both p < 0.001] and hospitalizations [mean [± SD] 0.4 [2.7] vs. 0.2 [1.1]; p = 0.002]) than controls.

CONCLUSION

Migraine is associated with poorer HRQoL, higher all-cause HRU, and greater activity impairment and work productivity loss versus non-migraine controls in Brazil.

Medication-overuse headache. Retrospective comparison of preventive treatments

ABSTRACT Objectives: Medication-overuse headache is commonly seen in tertiary centers. Limited evidence is available regarding treatment. We compared the use of one or two drugs, three drugs, or four pharmacological agents for the prevention of headache. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of 149 consecutive patients. Sudden withdrawal and pharmacological prevention with one or more drugs were carried out. Adherence and the decrease of headache frequency of more than 50% were compared after four months between the one or two, three, and four drug groups. Results: There was no difference in adherence (p > 0.6). Headache frequency reduction was shown in 23 (54.8%, one or two drugs), 33 (70%, three drugs) and 11 (55%, four drugs); p = 0.13 and p = 0.98, not significant. There was a tendency towards significance between the one or two drug takers versus the three drug and four drug takers together (p = 0.09). Conclusions: The use of more drugs was not better at improving headache. However, there is the possibility that acting simultaneously on different sites may promote broader modulation and better outcome.

Migraine Prophylaxis and Acute Treatment Patterns Among Commercially Insured Patients in the United States

OBJECTIVES

To describe prophylactic and acute medication treatment patterns, including timing, medication type, and duration of use in migraine patients initiating prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND

Patients with migraine can be treated with acute and prophylactic therapies. Current treatment options for migraine prophylaxis are associated with poor tolerability and low adherence and persistence.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan^® Research Databases to identify adults in the United States with a migraine diagnosis who initiated migraine prophylactic medication (index event) between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2011. Prescribed prophylactic medications evaluated included topiramate, beta-blockers, and tricyclic antidepressants. Patients were required to have 12 months of pre- and post-index continuous enrollment. Patient characteristics, migraine-specific prescribed prophylactic treatment patterns (including gaps in therapy, treatment switches, and additions of index medications), and prescribed acute medication utilization were assessed.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 107,122 patients, with 52,275 (49%) initiating topiramate, 22,658 (21%) initiating beta-blockers, and 32,189 (30%) initiating tricyclic antidepressants. Mean (SD) age was 41 (12) years and 83% were female. Persistence with migraine prophylactic medication was low; 81% of patients had gaps of >90 days in their migraine prophylaxis in the first year. The gap in therapy occurred early in treatment (mean, 95 days), and only 10% of patients restarted prophylactic therapy within that year. Switching from index medication to another prophylactic medication or adding prophylaxis was uncommon (13% and 5%, respectively). One year after initiating prophylaxis, 65% of patients were not receiving any prophylactic therapies. Most patients initiating migraine prophylaxis also utilized acute treatments (81%); opioid use was more frequent than triptan use (53% vs 48%) and was common (40%) among patients without other chronic pain conditions (eg, arthritis, fibromyalgia, and lower back pain).

CONCLUSION

Patients with migraine who initiated prophylactic therapy had poor persistence with early gaps in therapy, were unlikely to switch prophylactic treatments, and most discontinued prophylaxis by the end of the first year.

Medication-Overuse Headache: Differences between Daily and Near-Daily Headache Patients

Medication-overuse headache (MOH) is a challenging neurological disease, which brings frustration for sufferers and treating physicians. The patient's lack of adherence and limited treatment evidence are frequent. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome and treatment strategies between consecutive MOH patients with daily and near-daily headache from a tertiary center.

METHODS

Every consecutive patient seen between January and December 2014 with the diagnosis of MOH was included. Psychiatric comorbidities, inability to inform baseline headache frequency, current or previous two-month use of preventive medications, and refusal to sign informed consent were exclusion criteria. The patients were evaluated in thorough initial consultations and divided in two groups based on their baseline headache frequency. The diagnosis and treatment strategies were clearly explained. The filling out of a detailed headache diary was requested from all patients. Endpoints compared headache frequency and adherence after two, four, and eight months between the two study groups.

RESULTS

One-hundred sixty-eight patients (31 male, 137 female) met the inclusion criteria. Nineteen patients (11.3%) were excluded. All patients had migraine or chronic migraine as primary headaches. Eighty had daily (DH), and 69 near-daily headache (NDH), at baseline consultation. Mean baseline frequency was 24.8 headache days/month (18.9 days/month for the near-daily group), average headache history was 20.6 years and mean time with >15 headache days/month was 4.8 years. Outpatient withdrawal, starting prevention, and enforcing the correct use of rescue therapy was carried out with all patients. After two months, 88% of the DH and 71% of the NDH groups adhered to treatment (p = 0.0002). The HF decreased to 12 and 9 headache days/month, respectively in DH and NDH groups (p > 0.05, non-significant) (Intention-to-treat (ITT) 14 DH; 12 NDH; p > 0.05). After four and eight months, 86.3% and 83.7% of the DH patients, and 59.4% and 55% of the NDH patients were still under treatment (p = 0.0003 and p = 0.0001). The HF decreased, respectively, to nine and nine headache days/month in the DH patients compared to 6 and 7 headache days/month in the NDH group (p > 0.05) (ITT, 12; 12; DH; 10; 11; NDH; p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although open studies provide limited conclusions, withdrawing overused medications and starting prevention may have helped the favorable outcomes. However, daily headache patients had a significantly higher adherence and lower relapse rates than near-daily headache patients, despite a considerable reduced headache frequency in both groups. Additionally, real-world patient studies are scarce and the comparison between these two subsets of patients may be useful to guide clinicians in approaching their patients. Controlled studies are necessary to confirm these observations.

[Possibilities of preventive therapy in frequent episodic tension-type headache]

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy and safety of tenoten in the preventive treatment of frequent episodic tension-type headache (FETHA) compared to patients treated with pain relievers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A study included 60 patients with FETHA. Patients of the main group (n=30) received tenoten in addition to standard treatment. The study comprised 3 visits: beginning of treatment, after one month and after three months. All patients underwent physical and clinical/neurological examinations. In each visit, treatment efficacy was assessed according the following parameters: VAS scores (0-10) for assessment of pain and tension in pericranial muscles in 6 standard points, mean frequency and duration of the headache episode, quality of life indices, Beck depression scores, Spilberger trait and state anxiety, autonomic symptom severity, parameters of sleep disorders, frequency of adverse effects, CGI scores (0-7).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Tenoten as a preventive medication reduced the frequency of headache episodes that allowed to diagnose patients with rare episodic tension-type headache in the end of treatment. At the same time, there was a significant reduction in headache intensity during the episode and decrease in amount of analgesics used by the patients.

Treatment adherence in patients with headache: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review and critically evaluate the extant research literature pertaining to adherence in youth and adults with headache and to provide recommendations for future research.

BACKGROUND

This article provides the first systematic review of pediatric headache adherence and updates a previous review of treatment adherence in adults with headache.

DESIGN

Systematic review of empirical literature.

METHODS

A literature search with no date restriction was conducted using PubMed and PsycINFO electronic databases and bibliographies of relevant articles.

RESULTS

Adherence rates in adults with headache range considerably from 25% to 94% across treatment, assessment method, and definition of adherence utilized. Methods to assess adherence included retrospective prescription claims data, paper or electronic diaries, follow-up appointment attendance, written and verbal self-report of general adherence, verbal self-report of adherence over a specific amount of time via in person interview or telephone, validated adherence measures, adherence questionnaires without validation, and counselor ratings of homework. Each methodology and assessment tool demonstrated strengths and weaknesses. No studies have systematically examined medication adherence in children with headache, and the few available studies examining adherence to behavioral treatment have documented adherence rates ranging from 52% to 86%.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence research in adults with headache is growing, but studies demonstrate a number of methodological shortcomings. Adherence research in children with headache, and adherence intervention research in both adults and children, is scant. Future research should use objective measures of adherence, consider over-the-counter medications and medication overuse, examine demographic, psychological, and behavioral correlates of adherence, assess adherence to botulinum toxin type A, and examine the efficacy of adherence interventions in individuals with headache.