Prevalence and Burden of Headache and Migraine in Germany

Objective.— To determine prevalence and burden of headache and migraine in the general population in Germany including patterns of healthcare and medication use.
Methods.— Telephone interviews were conducted on a representative sample of the general population in Germany aged ≥18 years (n = 7341). Migraine was diagnosed according to the International Headache Society criteria.
Results.— One-year prevalence was: headache 60.2%, migraine 10.6%, nonmigrainous severe headache 24.7% (women 66.6%, 15.6%, and 27.1%; men 53.0%, 5.3%, and 22.2%). Approximately 60% of headache sufferers reported severe headaches, 30% of which were migrainous. Migraineurs reported more often frequent headaches, disability, use of analgesics, and medical consultation than individuals with nonmigrainous severe headaches. Only 42% of migraineurs had consulted a physician and the majority relied exclusively on over-the-counter medication.
Conclusion.— Migraine accounts for a great part of the healthcare impact of headaches in Germany. However, the majority of migraineurs do not seek medical care and may not be optimally treated.     

Naratriptan in the preventive treatment of refractory chronic migraine: a review of 27 cases

OBJECTIVE: To review the efficacy of naratriptan as preventive treatment in 27 patients with chronic migraine refractory to other commonly used preventive therapies. BACKGROUND: The treatment of chronic migraine often poses a major challenge to the clinician. Even when given expert care, patients with chronic migraine may continue to have daily or near-daily headaches. METHODS: Clinical records and headache calendars were reviewed of 27 patients fulfilling the following inclusion criteria: (1) aged 18 to 65 years; (2) diagnosis of chronic migraine (formerly transformed migraine), according to the criteria proposed by Silberstein et al; (3) previous failure of at least 4 preventive medications prescribed as part of a management program that included nonpharmacological measures, preventive medication, acute care medication, and detoxification from overused medication; and (4) have used daily naratriptan for no less than 2 consecutive months. The dose of naratriptan prescribed was 2.5 mg twice daily. We considered the following outcomes: (1) frequency of headache, (2) intensity of pain, (3) number of days per month with severe headache, (4) headache index (frequency times intensity), and (5) proportion of patients who reverted to an episodic pattern of pain after 6 months of treatment. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant reduction in the frequency of headache days 2 months (15.3 days versus 24.1 days at baseline, P<.001), 6 months (9.1 days, P<.001), and 1 year (7.3 days, P<.001) after daily treatment with naratriptan was initiated. There was also a statistically significant reduction in the number of days per month of severe pain at 1 month (5.6 days versus 12.5 days at baseline, P<.01), 2 months (5.7 days, P<.01), 6 months (2.8 days, P<.01), and 1 year (2.6 days, P<.01). Similarly, there was a statistically significant reduction in the headache index at 2 months (33 versus 56.4 at baseline, P<.001), 6 months (19.5, P<.001), and 1 year (17.2, P<.001). Of the 20 patients who continued to use naratriptan daily for at least 6 months, 13 (65%) reverted to an episodic pattern of pain (migraine). At 1 year, 11 (55%) still continued to experience episodic headache, 1 (5%) relapsed to chronic migraine, and 2 (10%) were lost to follow-up. No patients had intolerability to naratriptan during the treatment period, and no one stopped treatment due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Naratriptan may have a role in the preventive treatment of intractable chronic migraine. Prospective, controlled studies should be considered.     

Factors associated with triptan use in episodic migraine: results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study

Background.— Though triptans are considered the standard of acute therapy for migraine attacks with headache‐related disability, they are used by the minority of potentially eligible persons. Understanding the socio‐demographic and headache features that predict triptan use may help to clarify barriers to optimal treatment. Objective.— To assess the sociodemographic and headache features associated with triptan use in a US population sample of persons with episodic migraine. Methods.— The American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study (AMPP) is a longitudinal study conducted in a representative sample of US headache sufferers. Episodic migraineurs (n = 11,388) who provided treatment data in 2005 were included in the current analyses. We assessed factors associated with triptan use through univariate and multivariate analyses. Multivariate analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic factors, headache‐related disability, cutaneous allodynia, depression, and preventive headache medication use. Results.— Among persons with episodic migraine, 18.31% reported current use of triptans for acute headache treatment. In univariate analyses, triptan use was most common in midlife (ages 30‐59), among females, and was more common in Caucasians than in African Americans. Triptan use increased with headache frequency, headache‐related disability and allodynia, but decreased among persons with depression. In multivariate analyses, female gender, Caucasian race, age 40‐49, higher levels of education (college or higher), annual household income of ≥$40,000, having health insurance, the presence of cutaneous allodynia, greater headache‐related disability, and preventive medication use for migraine were significantly associated with triptan use. Conclusions.— Less than 1 in 5 persons with migraine in the United States who were respondents to this survey used triptans for acute headache treatment over the course of a year. Several markers of severe headache, including disability and allodynia, were associated with increased triptan use. Groups less likely to get triptans included males, African Americans, older adults, and the uninsured. Predictors of use provide insight into groups with unmet treatment needs.     

Comorbidity of headache and gastrointestinal complaints. The Head-HUNT Study

Associations between headache, including migraine, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were studied in a large questionnaire-based cross-sectional study (the Head-HUNT Study). The headache questionnaire was completed by 43 782 individuals, who answered all the questions concerning nausea, reflux symptoms, diarrhoea and constipation. In the multivariate analyses, adjusting for age, sex, educational level, medication use, depression and anxiety, a higher prevalence of headache was found in individuals with much reflux [odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2, 2.6], diarrhoea (OR 2.4, 95% CI 2.1, 2.8), constipation (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.9, 2.4) and nausea (OR 3.2, 95% CI 2.6, 3.8) compared with those without such complaints. All the GI symptoms investigated seemed to be approximately as common among persons with non-migrainous headache as among migraine sufferers, but the association between headache and GI complaints increased markedly with increasing headache frequency. This may suggest that headache sufferers generally are predisposed to GI complaints.     

The burden of illness associated with headache disorders among young adults in a representative cohort study

This study investigated the functional impairment (work and social functioning and general health status) associated with migraine and tension-type headache (TTH) among young adult members of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. Using criteria based on the International Headache Society classificatory system, the 1-year prevalence for migraine headache was 7.4%, TTH was 11.1%, and combined headache (coexisting migraine and TTH) was 4.3%. All comparisons were against a health control group (headache free) and a diagnostic control group (individuals without headache currently using medication for asthma). Although those suffering from migraine and combined headache had the most severe impairment in work- and social-related activities, those with TTH reported significantly poorer social and mental health functioning and poorer emotional and physical functioning while performing everyday roles than did headache-free controls. Study members with combined headache had the poorest self-reported health, with significantly lower ratings on physical, vitality, and mental health measures than asthmatics currently using medication. The pervasive impairment reported across multiple life domains among young headache sufferers illustrates the significant burden of illness associated with headache disorders.     

Enhancing the Effectiveness of Abortive Therapy: A Controlled Evaluation of Self-Management Training

Research suggests that approximately one half of recurrent headache sufferers fail to adhere properly to drug treatment regimens with as many as two thirds of patients failing to make optimal use of abortive medications such as ergotamine. In spite of these findings there are no controlled studies that have attempted to evaluate methods for improving adherence to drug regimens for the treatment of chronic headache disorders. In an initial effort to address this adherence problem thirty-four recurrent migraine sufferers were randomized to abortive therapy with ergotamine tartrate plus caffeine (standard abortive therapy) or to standard abortive therapy accompanied by a brief educational intervention designed to facilitate the migraine sufferer's effective use of ergotamine. Patients who received the adjunctive educational intervention attempted to abort a greater percentage of their migraine attacks (70% vs 40%) and showed larger reduction in headache activity (e.g., 40% vs 26% reduction in month two of treatment). However, patients in both treatment groups used similar amounts of abortive medication when attempting to abort a migraine attack and showed similar reductions in analgesic medication use with abortive therapy. There results suggest that brief educational interventions designed to address the problem of patient adherence may yield significant improvements in standard therapies. We argue that such educational interventions deserve more attention in the headache treatment literature than they have received to date.     

Head-HUNT: validity and reliability of a headache questionnaire in a large population-based study in Norway

We have assessed the validity and reliability of a self-administered headache questionnaire used in the 'Nord-Tr?ndelag Health Survey 1995-97 (HUNT)' in Norway, by blindly comparing questionnaire-based headache diagnoses with those made in a clinical interview of a sample of the participants. Restrictive questionnaire-based diagnostic criteria for migraine, assessed according to modified criteria of the International Headache Society, performed excellently in selecting 'definite' migraine patients (100% positive predictive value). The best agreement concerning migraine diagnoses was achieved by using a liberal set of criteria (kappa 0.59). Similar agreement was found evaluating patient status as headache sufferers, and as sufferers from frequent headaches (>6 days per month) (kappa 0.57 and 0.50, respectively). The kappa values of non-migrainous headache and chronic headache (> 14 days per month) were 0.43 and 0.44, respectively. The results suggest that our self-administered questionnaire may be suitable in identifying a population with 'definite' migraine, and the questionnaire is an acceptable instrument in determining the prevalence in Nord-Tr?ndelag of headache sufferers, migraine, non-migrainous headache, and frequent or chronic headache sufferers.     

Whites and African-Americans in headache specialty clinics respond equally well to treatment

This study sought to determine if Whites and African-Americans respond similarly to headache treatment administered in 'real-world' headache specialty treatment clinics. Using a naturalistic, longitudinal design, 284 patients receiving treatment for headache disorders completed 30-day daily diaries that assessed headache frequency and severity at pretreatment and 6-month follow-up and also provided data on their headache disability and quality of life at pretreatment and 1-, 2- and 6-month follow-up. Controlling for socioeconomic status and psychiatric comorbidity, hierarchical linear models found that African-Americans and Whites reported significant reductions in headache frequency and disability and improvements in life quality over the 6-month treatment period. African-Americans, unlike Whites, also reported significant decreases in headache severity. Nevertheless, Africans-Americans had significantly more frequent and disabling headaches and lower quality of life after treatment relative to Whites. Although Whites and African Americans responded favourably to headache treatments, more efficacious treatments are needed given the elevated level of headache frequency that remained in both racial groups following treatment.     

OnabotulinumtoxinA (botulinum toxin type-A) in the prevention of migraine

Importance of the field: Migraine is a highly prevalent disorder with the potential to progress into a chronic disease. The disability and health effects associated with frequent episodes of migraine underscore the value of preventive pharmacotherapy.

Areas covered in this review: OnabotulinumtoxinA has been studied as a migraine preventive in numerous clinical trials and in a variety of subpopulations with migraine. Overall, results from the clinical trials are mixed. However, the largest and most recent parallel studies (n = 1330) conducted on subjects with chronic migraine achieved statistically significant efficacy on numerous endpoints including the primary endpoint of reduction of headache days.

What the reader will gain: This article reviews several clinical studies using onabotulinumtoxinA in migraine prevention and highlights some of the inherent difficulties defining study endpoints and outcomes that are relevant to clinician, patients, and regulatory agencies.

Take home message: Clinical trials utilizing onabotulinumtoxinA as a preventive therapy for migraine has revealed mixed results. In part this reflects the inherent difficulties in study design such as defining different subpopulations of migraine sufferers and trial end points that are meaningful to patient populations. Recent studies of subjects with chronic migraine appear to have positive results. If confirmed this would be the first preventive medication indicated specifically for chronic migraine.     

Prevalence of frequent headache in a population sample

PURPOSE: Patients with daily or near-daily headaches are commonly seen in neurology practices and in headache subspecialty centers, but there is little information on the prevalence of this condition in the general population. We present the first US-based study describing the prevalence and characteristics of frequent headache in the general population. METHODS: In Baltimore County, Maryland, 13 343 individuals 18 to 65 years of age were selected by random-digit dialing and interviewed by telephone about their headaches. Subjects reporting 180 or more headaches per year were classified as having frequent headache. Three mutually exclusive subtypes of frequent headache were identified: frequent headache with migrainous features, chronic tension-type headache, and unclassified frequent headache. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of frequent headache was 4.1% (5.0% female, 2.8% male; 1.8:1 female to male ratio). Frequent headache was 33% more common in Caucasians (4.4%) than in African Americans (3.3%). In both males and females, prevalence was highest in the lowest educational category. Among frequent headache sufferers, more than half (52% female, 56% male) met criteria for chronic tension-type headache, almost one third (33% female, 25% male) met criteria for frequent headache with migrainous features, and the remainder (15% female, 19% male) were unclassified. Overall, 30% of female and 25% of male frequent headache sufferers met International Headache Society (IHS) criteria for migraine (with or without aura). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent headache is common in the general population and is more prevalent in Caucasians and in those with less than a high school education. Chronic tension-type headache is more common than frequent headache with migrainous features, though the latter is more disabling. Although more common in females than males, the female preponderance of frequent headache is less marked than in migraine. The sex ratio varies by frequent headache subtype.     

Osmophobia in juvenile primary headaches

This study was planned to investigate the prevalence of osmophobia in juvenile headache sufferers and to analyse the diagnostic utility of osmophobia in order to distinguish migraine without aura from episodic tension-type headache. We examined 305 consecutive patients presenting at our Paediatric Headache Centre. A semistructured questionnaire was given to 275 selected patients affected by migraine or tension-type headache. The prevalence of osmophobia during attacks was 18.5%, mainly in migraine patients (25.1%) vs. those with tension-type headache (8.3%). Osmophobia showed more specificity than phonophobia or photophobia in the differential diagnosis between migraine and tension-type headache. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that osmophobia resulted in a symptom with poor sensitivity (27.1%) but high specificity (92%) that could become a supportive diagnostic criterion even in children for the differential diagnosis between migraine without aura and tension-type headache.     

Results of screening with the brief headache screen compared with a modified IDMigraine.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic migraine and chronic daily headache syndromes have greater morbidity than patients with episodic migraine, and are less frequently diagnosed. A screening tool which identifies daily headache syndromes as well as migraine would promote more patients receiving appropriate treatment, including prophylaxis. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of data obtained to evaluate the prevalence of somatic symptoms in primary care patients was conducted on a convenience sample of primary care patients who completed the Patient Health Questionnaire portion of the PRIME-MD (Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders). Patients who endorsed the symptom of headache were asked to complete the Brief Headache Screen (BHS), a 4-item screening tool, supplemented by 3 clinical questions (nausea, light sensitivity, and noise sensitivity). The data obtained allowed a post-hoc comparison of the BHS with a modified version of the screening tool, IDMigraine(TM) (IDM(TM)). Diagnostic interviews were performed on patients whose diagnoses differed by the 2 screening methods, and on patients who screened positive for daily headache on BHS. RESULTS: Of the 1000 patients who completed the PRIME-MD, 302 (30.2%) indicated headache as a concern, and there were sufficient data for both the BHS and IDM(TM) for 259. There was substantial concordance between the 2 instruments with 82.6% agreement in identified migraine (95% confidence interval: 77.8%-87.4%). The BHS screened positive for migraine in an additional 15.1% of patients who were not identified by IDM(TM), whereas the IDM(TM) identified an additional 2.3% of patients. Of the 173 which both tools recognized as migraine, the BHS identified 42.8% as having a daily headache syndrome (chronic migraine: 23.1%; episodic migraine + chronic tension-type headache [CTTH]: 19.7%). BHS also identified 7 non-migraine patients as having CTTH alone. Diagnostic interviews confirmed that 6/18 (33%) of BHS+ but IDM-, and one of 2 (50%) patients BHS-/IDM+ met full criteria for migraine. Additionally, interviews confirmed the diagnoses of 85.4% of those patients who the BHS identified with daily headache and 67% of those who were identified as medication overuse headache. CONCLUSION: The BHS and a modified IDM(TM) are concordant in screening for migraine in 82.6% of a primary care population who endorsed the symptom of headache. However, the BHS screens effectively not only for migraine but also for chronic daily headache and medication overuse. A screening paradigm based on headache frequency and the frequency of medication use can rapidly and sensitively identify migraine, daily headache syndromes, and medication overuse. This paradigm may improve clinical care by identifying patients who merit preventive as well as acute therapy for migraine.     

A face-to-face interview of participants in HUNT 3: the impact of the screening question on headache prevalence

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the screening question phrasing on the 1-year prevalence figures of headache disorders, including migraine. Of a random sample of 563 invited participants in the Nord-Trøndelag Health Survey 2006–2008 in Norway, 297 (53%) met to a face-to-face interview. There were 74.1% that reported having had headache during the last year, whereas only 31.0% stated that they had suffered from headache in the same period. The 1-year prevalence of migraine was 17.2% and of tension-type headache (TTH) 51.9%. Migraine was ten times more likely (OR = 9.96, 95% CI 4.75–20.91) among those who stated that they were headache sufferers than among those who were not. Only headache sufferers had chronic TTH or medication-overuse headache. Thus “Have you suffered from headache?” can be a useful screening question in population-based questionnaire studies if the goal is to identify most migraineurs and almost all individuals with chronic headache.     

A pivotal moment in 50 years of headache history: the first American Migraine Study

Objective.— To describe the magnitude and distribution of the public health problem posed by migraine in the United States by examining migraine prevalence, attack frequency, and attack‐related disability by gender, age, race, household income, geographic region, and urban vs rural residence. Design.— In 1989, a self‐administered questionnaire was sent to a sample of 15,000 households. A designated member of each household initially responded to the questionnaire. Each household member with severe headache was asked to respond to detailed questions about symptoms, frequency, and severity of headaches. Setting.— A sample of households selected from a panel to be representative of the US population in terms of age, gender, household size, and geographic area. Participants.— After a single mailing, 20,468 subjects (63.4% response rate) between 12 and 80 Years of age responded to the survey. Respondents and nonrespondents did not differ by gender, household income, region of the country, or urban vs rural status. Whites and the elderly were more likely to respond. Migraine headache cases were identified on the basis of reported symptoms using established diagnostic criteria. Results.— In total, 17.6% of females and 5.7% of males were found to have 1 or more migraine headaches per year. The prevalence of migraine varied considerably by age and was highest in both men and women between the ages of 35 to 45 years. Migraine prevalence was strongly associated with household income; prevalence in the lowest‐income group (less than $10,000) was more than 60% higher than in the 2 highest‐income groups (greater than or equal to $30,000). The proportion of migraine sufferers who experienced moderate to severe disability was not related to gender, age, income, urban vs rural residence, or region of the country. In contrast, the frequency of headaches was lower in higher‐income groups. Attack frequency was inversely related to disability. Conclusions.— A projection to the US population suggests that 8.7 million females and 2.6 million males suffer from migraine headache with moderate to severe disability. Of these, 3.4 million females and 1.1 million males experience 1 or more attacks per month. Females between ages 30 and 49 years from lower‐income households are at especially high risk of having migraines and are more likely than other groups to use emergency care services for their acute condition.