The journal of headache and pain
-
Modification of lifestyle habits is a key preventive strategy for many diseases. The role of lifestyle for the onset of headache in general and for specific headache types, such as migraine and tension-type headache (TTH), has been discussed for many years. Most results, however, were inconsistent and data on the association between lifestyle factors and probable headache forms are completely lacking. ⋯ In addition, we found no association between headache subtypes and the health index representing the sum of individual lifestyle factors. The lifestyle factors such as alcohol consumption, smoking, physical activity and overweight seem to be unrelated to migraine and TTH prevalence. For a judgement on their role in the onset of new or first attacks of migraine or TTH (incident cases), prospective cohort studies are required.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
A double-blind, randomized, multicenter, Italian study of frovatriptan versus rizatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine.
The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with acute treatment of migraine with frovatriptan or rizatriptan by preference questionnaire. 148 subjects with a history of migraine with or without aura (IHS 2004 criteria), with at least one migraine attack per month in the preceding 6 months, were enrolled and randomized to frovatriptan 2.5 mg or rizatriptan 10 mg treating 1-3 attacks. The study had a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over design, with treatment periods lasting <3 months. At the end of the study, patients assigned preference to one of the treatments using a questionnaire with a score from 0 to 5 (primary endpoint). ⋯ No significant differences were observed in sustained pain-free episodes (26% frovatriptan vs. 22% rizatriptan). The number of patients with adverse events was not significantly different between rizatriptan (34) and frovatriptan (25, p=NS). The results suggest that frovatriptan has a similar efficacy to rizatriptan, but a more prolonged duration of action.
-
Migraine is an extremely common disorder. The underlying mechanisms of this chronic illness interspersed with acute symptoms appear to be increasingly complex. An important aspect of migraine heterogeneity is comorbidity with other neurological diseases, cardiovascular disorders, and psychiatric illnesses. ⋯ It would also appear that psychiatric disorders prevail in patients with chronic headache and substance use than in patients with simple migraine. The mechanisms underlying migraine psychiatric comorbidity are presently poorly understood, but this topic remains a priority for future research. Psychiatric comorbidity indeed affects migraine evolution, may lead to chronic substance use, and may change treatment strategies, eventually modifying the outcome of this important disorder.
-
Stress induced by the events of daily life is considered a major factor in pathogenesis of primary tension-type headache. Little is known about the impact that could have a more stressful event, like a natural disaster, both in patients with chronic headache, both in people that do not had headache previously. The aim of the present study was to observe the prevalence of headache in the population following the devastating earthquake that affected the province of L'Aquila on April 6, 2009. ⋯ The drugs most used were the NSAIDs (46%) and paracetamol (36%), for impossibility of finding causal drugs. This study shows how more stressful events not only have an important role in determining acute exacerbation of chronic headache, but probably also play a pathogenic role in the emergence of primary headache. Also underlines the lack of diagnostic guidelines or operating protocols to early identify and treat headache in the emergency settings.
-
The objective of this study was to test the validity, in the Chinese population, of the Lifting The Burden diagnostic questionnaire for the purpose of a population-based survey of the burden of headache in China. From all regions of China, a population-based sample of 417 respondents had completed the structured questionnaire in a door-to-door survey conducted by neurologists from local hospitals calling unannounced. They were contacted for re-interview by telephone by headache specialists who were unaware of the questionnaire diagnoses. ⋯ In comparison to the specialists' diagnoses, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Cohen's kappa (95% CI) of the questionnaire for the diagnosis of migraine were 0.83, 0.99, 0.83, 0.99 and 0.82 (0.71-0.93), respectively; for the diagnosis of tension-type headache (TTH), they were 0.51, 0.99, 0.86, 0.92 and 0.59 (0.46-0.72), respectively. In conclusion, the questionnaire was accurate and reliable in diagnosing migraine (agreement level excellent), less so, but adequate, for TTH (sensitivity relatively low, false negative rate relatively high and agreement level fair to good). The non-specific features of TTH do not lend themselves well to diagnosis by questionnaire.