Headache in an Italian pediatric emergency department

The objective of this study was to assess epidemiology, diagnostic work-up, treatment and follow-up of children presenting to emergency department (ED) with headache. Records of visits for non-traumatic headache to the ED of a pediatric hospital over a period of 12 months were retrospectively reviewed. Headache center charts were analyzed one year after. Five-hundred and fifty patients (1% of all ED visits) were included. Spectrum of diagnoses was: primary headache (56.7%), with 9.6% of migraine; secondary headache (42%); unclassified headache (1.3%). Viral illnesses accounted for 90.5% of secondary headaches. A serious disorder was found in 4% of patients. Forty-four patients (8%) underwent neuroimaging studies, with 25% of abnormal findings. Only 223 patients (40.5%) received pharmacological treatment. On discharge, 212 patients (38.5%) were referred to headache center and 114 (20.7% of all patients) attended it. ED diagnosis was confirmed in 74.6% of cases. Most of ED repeated visits (82.6%) occurred in patients not referred to headache center at discharge from first ED visit. The most frequent diagnosis was primary headache; viral illnesses represented the majority of secondary headaches. Underlying serious disorders were associated with neurological signs, limiting the need of diagnostic investigations. Well structured prospective studies are needed to evaluate appropriate diagnostic tools, as well as correct therapeutic approach of pediatric headache in emergency. Collaboration with headache center might limit repeated visits and provide a correct diagnostic definition.     

Diagnosis and management of migraine headaches

Migraine headaches afflict approximately 6% of men and 18% of women in the United States, and cost billions of dollars each year in lost productivity, absenteeism, and direct medical expendi tures. Despite its prevalence and the availability of therapeutic op tions, many patients do not seek treatment, and among those who do, a significant portion are misdiagnosed. Correct diagnosis can be made by identifying the historic and physical examination finding that distinguish primary headache disorders from secondary head ache disorders, as well as the key clinical features that distinguis migraine headaches from other types. Once diagnosis is made, im proper or inadequate management of headache pain, related symp toms such as nausea, and the possible aggravating side-effects of pharmacologic therapies represent further obstacles to effective ther apy. Dissatisfaction with migraine therapy on the basis of these factors is common. Among abortive therapy options there are de livery methods available which may avoid aggravating symptom such as nausea. Recommended pharmacologic agents include non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intranasal butorphanol, ergota mine and its derivatives, and the triptans. Indications for prophylac tic in addition to abortive therapy include the occurrence o headaches that require abortive therapy more than twice a week, tha do not respond well to abortive therapy, and which are particularly severe. Research is ongoing in the pathophysiology of migraines evaluation of nonpharmacologic treatment modalities, assessment of new drug therapies, and validation of headache guidelines.     

The Child With Headache in a Pediatric Emergency Department

Objectives.— To investigate clinical features of a pediatric population presenting with headache to a pediatric emergency department (ED) and to identify headache characteristics which are more likely associated with serious, life‐threatening conditions in distinction from headaches due to more benign processes. Background.— Although headache is a common problem in children visiting a pediatric ED, a few studies thus far have attempted to identify the clinical characteristics most likely associated with suspected life‐threatening disease. Methods.— A retrospective chart review of all consecutive patients who presented with a chief complaint of headache at ED over a 1‐year period was conducted. Etiologies were classified according to the International Headache Society diagnostic criteria 2nd edition. Results.— Four hundred and thirty‐two children (0.8% of the total number of visits) aged from 2 to 18 years (mean age 8.9 years) were enrolled in our study. There were 228 boys (53%) and 204 girls (47%). School‐age group was the most represented (66%). The most common cause of headache was upper respiratory tract infections (19.2%). The remaining majority of non‐life‐threatening headache included migraine (18.5%), posttraumatic headache (5.5%), tension‐type headache (4.6%). Serious life‐threatening intracranial disorders (4.1%) included meningitis (1.6%), acute hydrocephalus (0.9%), tumors (0.7%). We found several clinical clues which demonstrated a statistically significant correlation with dangerous conditions: pre‐school age, recent onset of pain, occipital location, and child's inability to describe the quality of pain and objective neurological signs. Conclusions.— Differential diagnosis between primary and secondary headaches can be very difficult, especially in an ED setting. The majority of headaches are secondary to respiratory infectious diseases and minor head trauma. Our data allowed us to identify clinical features useful to recognize intracranial life‐threatening conditions.     

Menstrual Migraine and Intermittent Ergonovine Therapy

The treatment of patients suffering with menstrual migraine is sometimes a difficult and frustrating problem for the physician. As many menstrual migraine headaches are refractory to abortive therapy, prophylactic therapy is often needed. Ergonovine maleate, an ergot derivative with vasoconstrictive properties, has been used with some success in migraine headache patients. Forty patients who were treated with intermittent prophylactic ergonovine were studied over six months. The patients ranged in age from 22 to 40 years, and all suffered with menstrual migraine headaches which were refractory to abortive therapy. Each patient took ergonovine maleate 0.2 mg three to four times daily during menses and recorded headache occurrence and severity. After three months, 24 patients (60%) reported significantly less severe attacks, six patients (15%) reported less frequent headaches and 14 patients (35%) reported no improvement. After six months there was a decrease in effectiveness with 20 patients (50%) reporting significantly less severe headaches and two patients (5%) reporting less frequent headaches. This limited study suggests that ergonovine maleate may be of value in the treatment of difficult menstrual migraine patients.     

Canadian Headache Society criteria for the diagnosis of acute migraine headache in the ED—do our patients meet these criteria?

INTRODUCTION: We previously reported that many patients who present to the ED with "migraine" headache do not meet the International Headache Society criteria (IHSC) for the diagnosis of acute migraine. Objective The aim of the study was to compare the frequency for which ED patients with migraine headache meet the Canadian Headache Society criteria (CHSC) vs the IHSC. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study, performed at a community ED. Consecutive patients who presented to study authors with a chief complaint of headache were enrolled. Historical/clinical data were collected on a standardized form. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated and Fisher exact test was used as appropriate. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine patients were enrolled in this study. Mean age was 38 years. Females comprised 69% of patients. Thirty-seven percent of patients had prior ED visits for headaches. A positive family history of migraines was present in 35% of patients. Diagnostic imaging was previously performed in 44 of the enrollees to evaluate the cause of their headaches. A total of 43 (23%) patients had a prior diagnosis of migraine. Overall CHSC was met in 18% of patients, compared with 15% of patients who met IHSC. Discharge diagnosis of migraine was made in 41% of patients. Of these patients, 33% met CHSC and 28% met IHSC (P=.30). For patients with discharge diagnosis of migraine, 33% of females and 36% of males fit CHSC (P=.53), whereas 26% and 36% met IHSC (P=.34), respectively. For patients with a prior diagnosis of migraine, 32% met CHSC and 26% met IHSC (P=.24). Patients with a prior diagnosis of migraine and/or a discharge diagnosis of migraine met CHSC 31% (95% CI, 22%-40%) of the time vs 25% for the IHSC (95% CI, 16%-34%) (P=.26). Four patients without a discharge and/or previous diagnosis of migraine met CHSC; 3 met IHSC. CONCLUSIONS: In our study population, only a minority of patients with headache who have prior diagnosis and/or ED diagnosis of migraine headache met CHSC. The utility of CHSC and/or IHSC to standardize ED patients for headache research may be limited.     

A possible role of ID-Migraine™ in the emergency department: study of an emergency department out-patient population

Headache symptoms account for 1–3% of admissions to an emergency department (ED). Most patients affected by a primary headache (PH) have migraine, although they are often misdiagnosed as 'headache not otherwise specified'. We investigated the possibility of using ID-Migraine (ID-M) to improve migraine recognition in the ED setting. We planned a pilot study involving ED out-patients with a diagnosis of PH. Diagnoses of a blinded headache expert were subsequently matched with the ID-M results. We tested ID-M on 230 patients (199 PH, 31 secondary headaches). Considering only PH, ID-M exhibited a sensitivity of 0.94 and specificity of 0.83 with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.99. The ID-M is a simple migraine screener with high sensitivity, high specificity and high PPV, even in an ED-derived population. Methodical use of this tool in an ED setting may, once a secondary headache has been excluded, lead to rapid diagnosis of migraine.     

French general practitioners' management of children's migraine headaches

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to examine the treatment of children with migraine headaches in a prospective sample of children referred to a tertiary center for headaches. BACKGROUND: Despite the wide diffusion of guidelines for headache management in children, their application in general practice is far from optimal. METHODS: This prospective study analyzed previous headache treatment by general practitioners in 151 consecutive children (F/M: 0.82; mean age 10.4 +/- 3.2 years) referred for migraines to the Lille University Hospital Neuropediatric department between October 1, 2003, and November 30, 2005. The physician completed a questionnaire according to the parents' responses to questions about previous advice about life-style adjustments (diet, exercise, and sleep hygiene) and abortive and prophylactic treatment. Questions about abortive treatment covered ergot derivatives, triptans, and 3 aspects of ibuprofen use-appropriate dose (ie, more than 7.5 mg/kg), recommendation to administer the drug early in attacks, and warnings about drug abuse. Under the topic of prophylactic treatment, we asked about information from general practitioners about preventive therapy and advice to keep a headache diary. RESULTS: Fewer than 15% of patients had received advice about life-style adjustments. Only 30.3% had received ibuprofen at a correct dose (more than 7.5 mg/kg); only 26.5% were told to use it early during the headache; and only 9.1% were warned about drug abuse. Ergot derivatives were prescribed to 4.6% of children and triptans to 9.1%. Families of 17.9% reported that the general practitioners gave them information about prophylactic treatment. Only 8.0% were advised to keep a headache diary. CONCLUSION: This study shows the need to increase the role and the involvement of family doctors in the management of primary headache in children in general, and of pediatric migraine in particular.     

Efficacy of sumatriptan in the treatment of migraine: a review of the literature.

Advanced practice nurses treat many patients, including children and adolescents, with migraine headaches. Management of headache episodes requires a delicate balance of prophylactic and abortive therapies. Sumatriptan has been used effectively to treat adult patients with migraine headaches, but its efficacy in children has not been established. Results of a literature review provide strong evidence supporting the use of sumatriptan in treating adults with migraine headaches. Some evidence also exists for using sumatriptan to treat migraines in pediatric patients. Open prospective studies used small convenience samples, thus limiting the external validity of the research findings. Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trials found conflicting results for the efficacy of sumatriptan in the treatment of pediatric migraine. Further research is needed to determine its efficacy in children.     

Intravenous propofol: unique effectiveness in treating intractable migraine

OBJECTIVE: To report the unique effectiveness of propofol, an intravenous anesthetic agent, in treating refractory migraines and other headaches in the setting of an outpatient headache center. BACKGROUND: We initially observed the dramatic abolition of ongoing migraine in patients (n=6) being treated with propofol in preparation for epidural and other nerve blocks in the headache and pain clinic. The reduction of headache severity was virtually 100%. We decided to treat an additional cohort of patients with intravenous propofol in the headache clinic; these patients had intractable migraines that were refractory to the usual abortive treatments. Subanesthetic doses of propofol were employed in this study. This is the first known report of the utility of this agent specifically for the treatment of intractable headache. METHODS: Seventy-seven patients were treated for intractable headache in the clinic with intravenous propofol, for both migraine and nonmigrainous headache refractory to the usual methods of abortive treatment. RESULTS: The average reduction in headache intensity was 95.4% after an average of 20 to 30 minutes of intravenous propofol treatment, using a patient-rated visual analog scale of 0 to 10. Sixty-three of 77 patients reported complete abolition of their headache. The average dose of propofol was 110 mg, which is well within the usual range of preanesthetic doses and is clearly subanesthetic. Moreover, only three of the treated patients reported a return of the headache on the day following treatment. The neuropharmacology of propofol and the putative multiple mechanisms of action upon various neurotransmitter systems in the brain, particularly gamma aminobutyric acid A receptor subtypes, are discussed to explain the results in our patients. CONCLUSIONS: The use of intravenous propofol may represent a new, rapid, and highly effective form of abortive headache treatment in the headache clinic or emergency room setting and may offer an alternative to other treatment modalities for acute migraine and other severe intractable headaches. The effectiveness of propofol raises many new questions about the pathophysiology of migraine and other headaches.     

Effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan in 5- to 12-year-old children

OBJECTIVE: To assess the tolerability and effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan in the treatment of migraine in 5- to 12-year-old children. BACKGROUND: Although headaches are a common disorder and occur in up to 10.6% of children, many of the new migraine abortive agents have not been well evaluated in this population. It has recently been reported that nasal sumatriptan is effective in the treatment of migraine in adolescents. In younger children, it is yet to be characterized. In addition, many children have significant amounts of vomiting with their migraines, limiting their use of oral medications. DESIGN AND METHODS: Children with headache were evaluated by a child neurologist, child psychologist, and pediatric nurse practitioner. Clinical and International Headache Society diagnoses were established for each child. Patients with headaches that were either unresponsive to oral medications or had significant vomiting were treated with nasal sumatriptan. Initial administration and tolerability were performed in the Headache Center at Cincinnati's Children's Hospital Medical Center. Patients or their parents were contacted to assess the overall effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan after home administration. RESULTS: Ten patients aged between 5 and 12 years (mean, 9.9 years) received either a 5-mg (n = 2) or 20-mg (n = 8) dose of sumatriptan. All 10 patients had a clinical diagnosis of migraine; 7 met the International Headache Society criteria for migraine. The mean age of headache onset was 6.6 years. A total of 57 headaches were treated; 47 (82.5%) responded to sumatriptan. Of the patients who treated headaches, the mean number of headaches treated was 5.2, while the mean number of responsive headaches was 4.3. One patient had no response, 2 patients had a 50% response, and 6 patients had 100% response to the nasal sumatriptan. Three patients reported persistent "bad taste." CONCLUSIONS: This report demonstrates that nasal sumatriptan may be effective in aborting migraine in young children (aged 5 to 12 years). It also suggests that there may be subgroups for which it works well. This information suggests that double-blind, placebo-controlled studies are necessary to determine the overall effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan in this age group.     

Headache patients in the emergency department of a Greek tertiary care hospital

The aim of this study was to record the demographic and epidemiological data on adult patients with headache who attend the emergency department (ED) and the diagnoses that made by the neurologists in the ED of a tertiary care hospital in metropolitan Thessaloniki (Greece). In an open prospective study, demographic and epidemiological data were collected on all patients who reported headache (as chief complaint or not) and presented to the ED of Papageorgiou Hospital between August 2007 and July 2008. Headache patients accounted for 1.3% of all ED patients and for 15.5% of patients primarily referred to the ED neurologist. Tension type headache was the most frequent diagnosis, followed by secondary headaches and migraine. The large number of patients without final ED diagnosis and ward admission for further evaluation sheds a light on the immense workload of Greek ED physicians. Furthermore, we found evidence for the misuse of Emergency Medical Services by chronic headache patients. These findings indicate shortcomings in the pre-hospital (primary care) management of headache patients in the Greek National Health System to an extent unreported so far.     

Pediatric Headaches: A One Year Retrospective Analysis

SYNOPSIS
Epidemiologically, headaches are common in children. In order to ascertain the type of headache problems that result in a referral by pediatricians to a pediatric neurology clinic, the charts were reviewed of all patients evaluated in 1978 with the diagnosis of headache.A chief complaint of headache was given in 116 (22%) of all new patients evaluated. Final diagnostic groups were migraine headaches or variants (47%), tension headaches (28%), seizure equivalent (15%) and miscellaneous (10%). Almost two thirds of the patients were female. The mean ages of the seizure equivalent group and the tension headache group were similar, 9.3 and 9.5 years respectively. The migraine group was older with a mean age of 9.8 years. Of the 54 patients with migraine headaches, 78% were characterized as common migraine. This evaluation of the migraine patients differed from that of patients considered to have seizure equivalents on the basis of family history (63% vs 12%), abnormalities noted on neurological examination (7% vs 24%) and EEG abnormalities (20% vs 84%). Abnormalities in the tension headache group were less than 10% in all three categories evaluated.Although some overlaps exist, these data suggest a bimodel curve with migraine headaches and recurrent seizures at the extreme ends of the spectrum rather than a single entity with varying manifestations. Historically, the family history is the most distinguishing characteristic, but abnormalities on neurological evaluation, especially the EEG, were considered more significant factors in arriving at a diagnosis.     

Application of the ICHD-II criteria to the diagnosis of primary chronic headaches via a computerized structured record

BACKGROUND: The authors recently developed a software program designed to analyze clinical data from patients affected by primary headache. The program is based exclusively on the International Classification of Headache Disorders 2nd edition (ICHD-II) criteria. This software examines all the diagnoses of primary headaches on the basis of the variables needed to fulfill these mandatory criteria. METHODS: We tested the software, Primary Headaches Analyser 1.0 INT (PHA), by entering and analyzing clinical data from 200 consecutive patients affected by primary chronic headaches and evaluating the corresponding output diagnoses. RESULTS: The diagnosis of chronic migraine (1.5.1) was obtained in 68 cases (34 %) and that of probable chronic migraine (1.6.5) plus probable medication-overuse headache (8.2.8) in 46 (23%). Chronic tension-type headache (2.3) and probable chronic tension-type headache (2.4.3) plus probable medication-overuse headache (8.2.8) were diagnosed in 24 (12%) and 2 (1%) patients, respectively. Moreover, 4 and 12 patients, respectively, received both the diagnosis of chronic migraine (1.5.1) plus chronic tension-type headache (2.3) and of probable migraine (1.6.1) without aura plus chronic tension-type headache (2.3). In the remaining 44 cases (22%), none of the chronic primary headaches disorders defined by ICHD-II received an output diagnosis from the program. This was due mainly to the fact that the criteria fulfilled were insufficient for the diagnoses of migraine without (1.1) aura plus chronic migraine or, more infrequently, chronic tension-type headache. CONCLUSIONS: Our software program permitted diagnoses of chronic migraine, chronic tension-type or their probable forms (with or without MOH) in 78% of 200 patients with headache 15 or more days per month. In the remaining cases the inability to provide a specific diagnosis may be explained in part by the fact that the criteria for both diagnoses are too stringent and do not accurately reflect variations of the headache pattern in these chronic forms.     

Chronic Daily Headache in Children and Adolescents

SYNOPSIS
Recurrent headache is a relatively frequent problem in children and adolescents, with the majority of the research attention focused on pediatric migraine. This study assessed differences in consequences to headaches, coping with headaches, and associated disability in children and adolescents attending a headache clinic who were diagnosed with migraine, chronic daily headache, or carried both diagnoses. Results, generally indicated higher levels of impairment for patient's with chronic daily headaches. These patients were also more likely to use blaming others and wishful thinking as coping mechanisms. Gender and racial status interacted with headache diagnosis to predict parent response patterns and disability outcomes. The results provide initial support for the applicability of Martin's functional model of chronic headaches to a pediatric population.     

Behavioral dependence in patients with medication overuse headache: a cross-sectional study in consulting patients using the DSM-IV criteria

Objective.— The aim of this study was to assess behavioral dependence on migraine abortive drugs in medication‐overuse headache (MOH) patients and identify the predisposing factors. Background.— It is common occurrence that MOH patients relapse after medication withdrawal. Behavioral determinants of medication overuse should therefore be identified in MOH patients. Methods.— This was a cross‐sectional, multicenter study that included 247 MOH patients (according to International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition criteria) consulting in French headache specialty centers. Face‐to‐face interviews were conducted by senior neurologists using a structured questionnaire including the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM‐IV) criteria for the evaluation of dependence, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale for the evaluation of anxiety and depression, and 6‐item short‐form Headache Impact Test scale for the determination of functional impact. Results.— Most MOH patients had pre‐existing primary migraine (87.4%) and current migraine‐type headaches (83.0%). Treatments overused included triptans (45.8%), opioid analgesics alone or in combination (43.3% of patients), and analgesics (27.9%). Nonmigraine abortive substances (tobacco, caffeine, sedatives/anxiolytics) were overused by 13.8% of patients. Two‐thirds of MOH patients (66.8%) were considered dependent on acute treatments of headaches according to the DSM‐IV criteria. Most dependent MOH patients had migraine as pre‐existing primary headache (85.7%) and current migraine‐type headaches (87.9%), and most of them overused opioid analgesics. More dependent than nondependent MOH patients were dependent on psychoactive substances (17.6% vs 6.1%). Multivariate logistic analysis indicated that risk factors of dependence on acute treatments of headaches pertained both to the underlying disease (history of migraine, unilateral headaches) and to drug addiction (opioid overuse, previous withdrawal). Affective symptoms did not appear among the predictive factors of dependence. Conclusion.— In some cases, MOH thus appears to belong to the spectrum of addictive behaviors. In clinical practice, behavioral management of MOH should be undertaken besides pharmacological management.     

Steroids for Migraine Headaches: A Randomized Double-Blind, Two-Armed, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background: Recurrence of migraine headache after treatment in the emergency department (ED) is common. Conflicting evidence exists regarding the utility of steroids in preventing migraine headache recurrence at 24–48 h. Objective: To determine if steroids decrease the headache recurrence in patients treated for migraine headaches in the ED. Methods: Double-blind placebo-controlled, two-tailed randomized trial. Patients aged >17 years with a moderately severe migraine headache diagnosed by treating Emergency Physician were approached for participation. Enrollees received either dexamethasone (10 mg i.v.) if intravenous access was utilized or prednisone (40 mg by mouth × 2 days) if no intravenous access was obtained. Each medication was matched with an identical-appearing placebo. Patients were contacted 24–72 h after the ED visit to assess headache recurrence. Results: A total of 181 patients were enrolled. Eight were lost to follow-up, 6 in the dexamethasone group and 2 in the prednisone arm. Participants had a mean age of 37 years (±10 years), with 86% female. Eighty-six percent met the International Headache Society Criteria for migraine headache. Of the 173 patients with completed follow-up, 20/91 (22%) (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.5–30.5) in the steroid arm and 26/82 (32%) (95% CI 21.9–42.1) in the placebo arm had recurrent headaches (p = 0.21). Conclusion: We did not find a statistically significant decrease in headache recurrence in patients treated with steroids for migraine headaches.     

Randomized controlled trial of intravenous dexamethasone to prevent relapse in acute migraine headache

OBJECTIVES: Migraine headache is a common presentation in the emergency department (ED). Inflammation is thought to play a role in the pathophysiology of migraine and there is conflicting evidence regarding the effect of corticosteroids on reducing early recurrences. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to test the hypothesis that dexamethasone (DEX) reduced headaches after discharge and examine the factors associated with relapse. METHODS: Consenting adults (18 and older) presenting with acute migraine at 4 EDs were enrolled. In addition to standard intravenous (IV) abortive therapy, using concealed allocation patients were randomized to receive IV DEX (15 mg) or placebo (PLA) in a double-blind fashion. Relapse was defined as a return to the ED, an urgent clinic visit, or a headache that precluded normal activity reported during follow-up telephone interviews 48-72 hours and 7 days after ED discharge. Intention to treat was used for all final analyses. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were randomized; 126 patients are included in the analysis (one patient left prior to treatment and 3 enrolled twice); 64 received DEX and 62 received PLA. Mean age was 35 years, 81% was female; most (77%) suffered from headaches at least monthly. On a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS), the median pain scores were 8 at presentation, and 2 at discharge. At 48-72 hours, relapses occurred in 14/64 (22%) in the DEX group and 20/62 (32%) in the PLA groups (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.3-1.3). By day 7, 18/64 (28%) in the DEX group had relapsed, compared with 25/62 (40%) in the PLA group (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.3-1.3). Controlling for treatment assignment, relapse was more common when headache pain was incompletely relieved (VAS > 2) at ED discharge (OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.1-5.4). CONCLUSIONS: The overall relapse rate differed from those previously reported; however, DEX failed to reduce headache relapses after ED discharge. Relapse was closely associated with incomplete pain relief at discharge. Further research is needed to determine the factors associated with migraine relapse.     

Primary headaches: a convergence hypothesis

After reviewing the historic differentiation between migraine and tension-type headache, the authors note that the similarities between these two types of primary headaches outweigh the differences, and so hypothesize that these headaches share a common pathophysiology. The convergence hypothesis for primary headaches links the clinical features of an evolving headache to current pathophysiological models. The authors suggest that successive symptoms experienced clinically reflect an escalating pathophysiological process, beginning with the premonitory period and progressing into tension-type headache and, if uninterrupted, finally into migraine. The clinical manifestations of other headache types, such as so-called sinus headache or temporomandibular headache, may also be explained by this model. A convergence hypothesis for primary headaches has important implications for earlier recognition, diagnosis, and treatment.     

Do patients with recurrent headaches attempt abortive therapy before their emergency department visit?

Headache is one of the most frequent symptoms prompting an emergency department (ED) visit. For many patients this is an exacerbation of a recurrent or chronic headache pattern. Our objective in this study was to determine if ED patients with recurrent headaches attempt abortive analgesics before seeking ED care. Patients with five or greater similar headache episodes presenting to the ED with the chief complaint of headache were included. There were 150 patients enrolled into the study group. Fourteen percent (95% confidence interval 1-41) of patients did not attempt abortive medication before an ED visit. Males were significantly less likely to utilize pain medication than females before their ED visit (69% vs. 91%; p = 0.003). Of those patients previously seen by a neurologist, 5% did not attempt analgesia before ED arrival, compared to 22% of those who did see a neurologist (p = 0.004). A small, but significant percentage of patients with recurrent headaches do not attempt abortive analgesic therapy before ED encounter. In particular, males and those patients not previously evaluated by a neurologist were significantly less likely to utilize such medications. Further education and selective neurology referral by practitioners may reduce ED utilization in this subset of patients.