Effect of biofeedback-assisted autogenic training on headache activity and mood states in Korean female migraine patients

Temporomandibular Myofascial Pain Syndrome-Aetiology and Biopsychosocial Modulation. A Narrative Review

This review elaborates on the aetiology, diagnosis, and treatment of temporomandibular (TMD) myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) regulated by psychosocial factors. MPS impairs functioning in society due to the accompanying pain. Directed and self-directed biopsychosocial profile modulation may be beneficial in the treatment of MPS. Moreover, nutrition is also a considerable part of musculoskeletal system health. A fruit and vegetable diet contributes to a reduction in chronic pain intensity because of its anti-inflammatory influence. Cannabidiol (CBD) oils may also be used in the treatment as they reduce stress and anxiety. A promising alternative treatment may be craniosacral therapy which uses gentle fascia palpation techniques to decrease sympathetic arousal by regulating body rhythms and release fascial restrictions between the cranium and sacrum. MPS is affected by the combined action of the limbic, autonomic, endocrine, somatic, nociceptive, and immune systems. Therefore, the treatment of MPS should be deliberated holistically as it is a complex disorder.

Lifestyle Modifications to Help Prevent Headache at a Developmental Age

Headache is the world's seventh most significant cause of disability-adjusted-life in people aged between 10 and 14 years. Therapeutic management is based on pharmacological approaches and lifestyle recommendations. Many studies show associations between each migraine-promoting lifestyle, behavioral triggers, frequency, and intensity of headaches. Nevertheless, the overall aspects of this topic lack any definitive evidence. Educational programs advise that pediatric patients who suffer from migraines follow a correct lifestyle and that this is of the utmost importance in childhood, as it will improve quality of life and assist adult patients in avoiding headache chronicity, increasing general well-being. These data are important due to the scarcity of scientific evidence on drug therapy for prophylaxis during the developmental age. The "lifestyle recommendations" described in the literature include a perfect balance between regular sleep and meal, adequate hydration, limited consumption of caffeine, tobacco, and alcohol, regular physical activity to avoid being overweight as well as any other elements causing stress. The ketogenic diet is a possible new therapeutic strategy for the control of headache in adults, however, the possible role of dietary factors requires more specific studies among children and adolescents. Educational programs advise that the improvement of lifestyle as a central element in the management of pediatric headache will be of particular importance in the future to improve the quality of life of these patients and reduce the severity of cephalalgic episodes and increase their well-being in adulthood. The present review highlights how changes in different aspects of daily life may determine significant improvements in the management of headaches in people of developmental age.

Psychological therapies for the prevention of migraine in adults

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common neurological problem associated with the highest burden amongst neurological conditions in terms of years lived with disability. Medications can be used as prophylaxis or rescue medicines, but are costly and not always effective. A range of psychological interventions have been developed to manage migraine.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of psychological therapies for the prevention of migraine in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from their inception until July 2018, and trials registries in the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand for randomised controlled trials of any psychological intervention for adults with migraine.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of a psychological therapy for people with chronic or episodic migraine, with or without aura. Interventions could be compared to another active treatment (psychological or medical), an attention-placebo (e.g. supportive counselling) or other placebo, routine care, or waiting-list control. We excluded studies where fewer than 15 participants completed each arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted study characteristics and outcome data at post-treatment and the longest available follow-up. We analysed intervention versus control comparisons for the primary outcome of migraine frequency. We measured migraine frequency using days with migraines or number of migraine attacks measured in the four weeks after treatment. In addition, we analysed the following secondary outcomes: responder rate (the proportion of participants with a 50% reduction in migraine frequency between the four weeks prior to and the four weeks after treatment); migraine intensity; migraine duration; migraine medication usage; mood; quality of life; migraine-related disability; and proportion of participants reporting adverse events during the treatment. We included these variables, where available, at follow-up, the timing of which varied between the studies. We used the GRADE approach to judge the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 21 RCTs including 2482 participants with migraine, and we extracted meta-analytic data from 14 of these studies. The majority of studies recruited participants through advertisements, included participants with migraine according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) criteria and those with and without aura. Most intervention arms were a form of behavioural or cognitive-behavioural therapy. The majority of comparator arms were no treatment, routine care or waiting list. Interventions varied from one 20-minute session to 14 hours of intervention. No study had unequivocally low risk of bias; all had at least one domain at high risk of bias, and 20 had two to five domains at high risk. Reporting of randomisation procedures and allocation concealment were at high or unclear risk of bias. We downgraded the quality of evidence for outcomes to very low, due to very serious limitations in study quality and imprecision. Reporting in trials was poor; we found no preregistrations stipulating the outcomes, or demonstrating equivalent expectations between groups. Few studies reported our outcomes of interest, most only reported outcomes post treatment; follow-up data were sparse.Post-treatment effectsWe found no evidence of an effect of psychological interventions for migraine frequency in number of migraines or days with migraine (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.13; 4 studies, 681 participants; very low-quality evidence).The responder rate (proportion of participants with migraine frequency reduction of more than 50%) was greater for those who received a psychological intervention compared to control: 101/186 participants (54%) with psychological therapy; 37/152 participants (24%) with control (risk ratio (RR) 2.21, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.98; 4 studies, 338 participants; very low-quality evidence). We found no effect of psychological therapies on migraine intensity (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.02; 4 studies, 685 participants). There were no data for migraine duration (hours of migraine per day). There was no effect on migraine medication usage (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.24; 2 studies, 483 participants), mood (mean difference (MD) 0.08, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.49; 4 studies, 432 participants), quality of life (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.26; 4 studies, 565 participants), or migraine-related disability (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.34 to 0.00; 6 studies, 952 participants). The proportion of participants reporting adverse events did not differ between those receiving psychological treatment (9/107; 8%) and control (30/101; 30%) (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 7.85; 2 studies, 208 participants). Only two studies reported adverse events and so we were unable to draw any conclusions.We rated evidence from all studies as very low quality.Follow-upOnly four studies reported any follow-up data. Follow-ups ranged from four months following intervention to 11 months following intervention. There was no evidence of an effect on any outcomes at follow-up (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identified 21 studies of psychological interventions for the management of migraine. We did not find evidence that psychological interventions affected migraine frequency, a result based on four studies of primarily brief treatments. Those who received psychological interventions were twice as likely to be classified as responders in the short term, but this was based on very low-quality evidence and there was no evidence of an effect of psychological intervention compared to control at follow-up. There was no evidence of an effect of psychological interventions on medication usage, mood, migraine-related disability or quality of life. There was no evidence of an effect of psychological interventions on migraine frequency in the short-term or long-term. In terms of adverse events, we were unable to draw conclusions as there was insufficient evidence. High and unclear risk of bias in study design and reporting, small numbers of participants, performance and detection bias meant that we rated all evidence as very low quality. Therefore, we conclude that there is an absence of high-quality evidence to determine whether psychological interventions are effective in managing migraine in adults and we are uncertain whether there is any difference between psychological therapies and controls.

Efficacy of psychological treatment for headache disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Headache disorder is not only a common complaint but also a global burden. Pharmacotherapeutic and non-pharmacotherapeutic approaches have been developed for its treatment and prophylaxis. The present study included a systematic review of psychological treatments for primary headache disorder accessible in Korea.

METHODS

We included English and Korean articles from EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane library database, SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycArticles and Korean database, KoreaMed and KMBASE which studied primary headache and medication-overuse headache. The primary efficacy measure was the number of headache days per month, while secondary efficacy measures were the number of headache attacks per week, headache index, treatment response rate, and migraine disability assessment. The meta-analysis was performed using R 3.5.1. to obtain pooled mean difference and pooled relative risk with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data and dichotomous data, respectively.

RESULTS

From 12,773 identified articles, 27 randomized clinical trials were identified. Primary outcome showed significant superiority of psychological treatments (pooled mean difference = - 0.70, 95% CI [- 1.22, - 0.18]). For the secondary outcomes, the number of headache attacks (pooled mean difference = - 1.15, 95% CI [- 1.63, - 0.67]), the headache index (pooled mean difference = - 0.92, 95% CI [- 1.40 to - 0.44]) and the treatment response rate (pooled relative risk = 3.13, 95% CI [2.24, 4.37]) demonstrated significant improvements in the psychological treatment group over the control group.

CONCLUSION

Psychological treatments for primary headache disorder reduced headache frequency and the headache index. Future research using standardized outcome measures and strategies for reducing bias is needed.

[Relaxation techniques and behavioural therapy for the treatment of migraine : Guidelines from the German Migraine and Headache Society]

Besides pharmacological and interventional possibilities nonpharmacological options, deriving from behavioural approaches may be helpful in the treatment of migraine. Already consulting a patient reduces frequency of attacks. Relaxation (especially progressive muscle relaxation), endurance sports, and biofeedback as well as cognitive behavioural therapy are effective in treatment of migraine. The combination of these treatment options also with pharmacological treatment increase the positive effects.

Effectiveness of autogenic training on headache: A systematic review

PURPOSE

To investigate the impact of length of autogenic training (AT) use, alone and with the addition of adjunct treatments, on intensity and duration of primary headache in adults age 19 and older.

METHODS

We searched articles published in English and Korean from 1926 to 2016. A search of seven domestic and foreign databases was conducted from September 25, 2016 to December 30, 2016 using the search terms "autogenic training," "autogen," "relaxation," and "headache." The search was documented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The search yielded a total of 262 papers; a multi-step screening and selection process ultimately yielded six articles of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the systematic review. Cochrane's Risk of Bias Tool was used to evaluate the quality of the selected papers.

RESULTS

Five of the six studies demonstrated statistically significant reduction in headache by AT-only or biofeedback-assisted AT. The reviewed studies varied in characteristics of subjects, length of autogenic training and practice, use of adjunct therapies, and use of headache measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The small number of studies retrieved in this review, with their variations in AT interventions used, in AT training/practice time, and headache measures used, did not facilitate rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness of specific AT approaches nor of the optimum length of AT practice for reduction of headache. More research is needed on the effectiveness of AT-only for headache, the most effective duration of autogenic training and practice, and the type(s) of headache for which it is most effective.

Psychological interventions for migraine: a systematic review

Migraine causes major health impairment and disability. Psychological interventions offer an addition to pharmacotherapy but they are not currently recommended by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) or available in the National Health Service. We aimed to systematically review evidence on the efficacy of psychological interventions for migraine in adults. A search was done of MEDLINE, psychINFO, http://www.opengrey.eu , the meta-register of controlled trials and bibliographies. Twenty-four papers were included and rated independently by two people using the Yates scale, which has 35 points. Cochrane recommendations are that high quality reports score above the mid-point (18 points). Methods used in 17/24 papers were rated 'high quality'. However, frequently descriptions of key areas such as randomisation methods were omitted. Eighteen studies measured effects of psychological interventions on headache-related outcomes, fifteen reporting significant improvements, ranging 20-67 %. Interventions also produced improvements in psychological outcomes. Few trials measured or reported improvement in disability or quality of life. We conclude that evidence supports the efficacy of psychological interventions in migraine. Over half of the studies were from the USA, which did not provide universal health care at the time of the study, so it is difficult to generalise results to typical populations in receipt of publically funded health services. We agree with the NICE recommendation that high quality pragmatic randomised controlled trials are needed in the UK.

What Factors Contribute to Headache-Related Disability in Teens?

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to describe the relationship between risk factors, such as stress, depression, and anxiety, and potentially protective factors against pediatric headache-related disability, such as mindfulness, resilience, and self-compassion, and to determine teens' interest in mind-body skills training to help reduce headache-related disability.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional survey among adolescents seen in an academic neurology clinic reporting four or more headaches monthly using standardized instruments to determine the relationship between putative risk and protective factors as well as physiologic markers of inflammation and vagal tone and headache-related disability.

RESULTS

Among the 29 participants, 31% were male, the average age was 14.8 years, average headache frequency was 11.6 per month, and the most commonly reported trigger was stress (86%). The only risk or protective factor significantly associated with headache-related disability was depression (r = 0.52, P = 0.004). Depression was negatively correlated with mindfulness, resilience, and self-compassion (P < 0.01 each) and positively correlated with stress, sleep disturbance, and anxiety (P < 0.01 each). Biomarkers of vagal tone and inflammation were correlated with each other but not with headache-related disability or depression. There was strong interest in learning skills like slow, deep breathing practices supported by a smart phone application to reduce stress and the negative impact of headaches on daily life.

DISCUSSION

Among teens with frequent migraine headaches, depression is the strongest risk factor for headache-related disability. Stress is viewed as a headache trigger, and teens reported wanting to learn simple stress management strategies supported by a smart phone application to help reduce headache-related disability.

Complementary and conventional medicine use among youth with recurrent headaches

OBJECTIVE

To identify prevalence and patterns of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among youth with recurrent headaches (HA) and evaluate associations with co-occurring health problems and limitations as well as with the use and expenditures for conventional medical care.

METHODS

Variables were constructed for youth aged 10 to 17 by using linked data from the 2007 National Health Interview Survey and the 2008 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey. Bivariate, logistic, and 2-part regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

Of the 10.6% of youth experiencing HA, 29.6% used CAM, rising to 41% for the many HA sufferers who also experienced difficulties with emotions, concentration, behavior, school attendance, or daily activities. Biologically based products (16.2%) and mind-body therapies (13.3%) were most commonly used, especially by the 86.4% of youth with HA experiencing at least 1 other chronic condition. Compared with non-CAM users, youth with HA who used CAM also had higher expenditures for and use of most types of conventional care.

CONCLUSIONS

CAM use is most common among youth with HA experiencing multiple chronic conditions and difficulties in daily functioning. Associations among CAM use, multiple chronic conditions, and higher use of conventional care highlight the need for medical providers to routinely ask about CAM use to meet the complex health needs of their patients and facilitate the optimal integration of care. Research is needed to identify models for coordinating complementary and conventional care within a medical home and to understand the health benefits or risks associated with CAM use in conjunction with conventional treatments for patients with HA.

Biofeedback no tratamento de transtornos relacionados ao estresse e à ansiedade: uma revisão crítica

O treinamento em biofeedback tem sido utilizado para o tratamento de diferentes quadros clínicos e para a prevenção/alívio de sintomas relacionados ao estresse/ansiedade. Este trabalho analisou a literatura de 2008 a 2012 sobre o tema "biofeedback, estresse e ansiedade" publicada nas bases MEDLINE, LILACS e Web of Sciences, utilizando como palavras-chave "biofeedback", "anxiety", "stress", "psychology" e "biofeedback training". Os resultados demonstram que técnicas de biofeedback são eficazes no manejo do estresse/ansiedade nas diferentes populações estudadas. Entretanto, todos os estudos encontrados foram realizados fora do Brasil, o que sugere que técnicas de biofeedback como ferramenta terapêutica não tem sido utilizadas no país, por algum motivo que merece ser melhor investigado.

Knowledge about and use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological headache therapies

OBJECTIVE

To analyse knowledge and use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies in headache patients referred to a tertiary headache centre.

METHODS

We included 114 consecutive patients referred by a neurologist and asked them to fill out a comprehensive questionnaire immediately before their first appointment at our outpatient headache clinic. The questionnaire covered 23 compounds for acute treatment, 21 prophylactic drugs, and 30 complementary and alternative treatments.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients who knew at least one acute therapy stood at 92 %; 62 % knew at least one pharmaco-prophylaxis and 80 % knew at least one non-pharmacological treatment. Even though 87 % of the patients with migraine had ³ 4 disabling headache days per month, only 41 % had used triptans and not more than 19 % had taken drugs of first choice for migraine prophylaxis for at least 3 months. In contrast, 75 % had used complementary or alternative treatments. Univariate analyses showed several predictors for the use of pharmaco-prophylaxis and non-pharmacological treatment, of which only knowledge about pharmaco-prophylaxis predicted use of alternative treatments in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

In Austria, a significant proportion of patients suffering from frequent recurrent headaches or migraines who are referred to a tertiary headache centre do not know and do not use triptans and pharmacological prophylaxis, while there is obviously broad acceptance and frequent use of mostly questionable alternative treatments. Improvement of primary and secondary care as well as patient education is desirable.

Migraine-like headache in a patient with complement 1 inhibitor deficient hereditary angioedema

We report on an angioedema patient with a genetic defect in complement 1 inhibitor, manifesting migraine-like episodes of headache, effective prophylaxis with Danazol, and triptan for a treatment of acute clinical episode. The patient was 44-yr-old Korean man with abdominal pain and headache, who was brought into the Emergency Department of Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul. He suffered from frequent attacks of migraine-like headache (3-7 per month), pulsating in nature associated with nausea. Severities were aggravated by activity and his headache had shown recent progression with abdominal pain. No remarkable findings were observed on radiologic examination, brain magnetic resonance images and intracranial and extracranial magnetic resonance angiography. Danazol 200 mg every other day was subsequently used. Following administration of Danazol, symptoms showed improvement and the patient was discharged. While taking Danazol, the migraine-like episodes appeared to be prevented for about 2 yr. At the eighth month, he suffered a moderate degree of migraine-like headache; however, administration of naratriptan 2.5 mg resolved his problem. A case of genetic defect of C1-INH deficiency presented with headache episodes, and was controlled by Danazol and triptan. It suggests that pathogenic mechanism of headache in hereditary angioedema may be mediated by the neurogenic inflammatory-like physiology of migraine.