Headache trajectories in children and adolescents with new onset continuous headache.

BACKGROUND: New daily persistent headache (NDPH) is a challenging and understudied primary headache disorder with no known effective treatment. Although the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria require that the new onset continuous headache be present for at least three months before diagnosing NDPH, the biologic basis for when a new, continuous headache starts to behave as NDPH is unknown, and some pediatric headache experts consider that the minimum duration criterion could be shorter. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we reviewed the intake questionnaires and medical records of 5-17 year-olds seen in neurology clinic for headache at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Those with a new onset continuous headache of at least one month in duration were eligible. The patient's self-report and clinician's description both had to indicate that the headache was new, of abrupt onset, and continuous to be included, although patients were allowed to have a prior history of infrequent headaches. We compared headache outcomes at last follow-up and at one year after continuous headache onset between those who had a continuous headache duration of 1 to <3 months ("new onset headache", or NOH) at first visit vs. those with ≥3 months (NDPH). We used multivariate regression modeling to examine for predictors of headache outcomes. RESULTS: Of 472 patient records reviewed, 172 met the inclusion criteria for analysis. Of these, 84 had a headache duration of 1 to <3 months in duration and 88 had a duration of ≥3 months. Those with shorter duration continuous headache were younger (median (interquartile range) 13.5 (11.1-15.7) vs. 15.1 (12.3-16.5) years, and less likely to have previously received a prescription preventive for the continuous headache (n = 14 (17%) vs. 26 (30%), p = 0.046), but were otherwise similar to those with NDPH in terms of baseline clinical and demographic variables. Sixty-five (74%) of those with NDPH and 60 (71%) with NOH had follow-up data. At last clinic follow-up, 41/65 (63%) with NDPH and 43/60 (72%) with NOH had experienced any headache benefit (p = 0.307), although 39/65 (60%) with NDPH and 29/60 (48%) with NOH still had continuous headache (p = 0.191). Headache duration was not associated with outcomes in multivariate regression modeling. CONCLUSIONS: Headache outcomes of children and adolescents with new onset continuous headache, whether of 1 to <3 months (NOH) or ≥3 months in duration (NDPH) are suboptimal. More research is needed to improve treatment outcomes for this patient population.

Surgical Management of Headache Disorders - A Systematic Review of the Literature.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review article critically evaluates the latest advances in the surgical treatment of headache disorders. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of innovative screening tools, such as doppler ultrasound, pain drawings, magnetic resonance neurography, and nerve blocks to help identify candidates for surgery. Machine learning has emerged as a powerful tool to predict surgical outcomes. In addition, advances in surgical techniques, including minimally invasive incisions, fat injections, and novel strategies to treat injured nerves (neuromas) have demonstrated promising results. Lastly, improved patient-reported outcome measures are evolving to provide a framework for comparison of conservative and invasive treatment outcomes. Despite these developments, challenges persist, particularly related to appropriate patient selection, insurance coverage, delays in diagnosis and surgical treatment, and the absence of standardized measures to assess and compare treatment impact. Collaboration between medical/procedural and surgical specialties is required to overcome these obstacles.

Artificial Intelligence and Virtual Reality in Headache Disorder Diagnosis, Classification, and Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides an overview of the current and future role of artificial intelligence (AI) and virtual reality (VR) in addressing the complexities inherent to the diagnosis, classification, and management of headache disorders. RECENT FINDINGS: Through machine learning and natural language processing approaches, AI offers unprecedented opportunities to identify patterns within complex and voluminous datasets, including brain imaging data. This technology has demonstrated promise in optimizing diagnostic approaches to headache disorders and automating their classification, an attribute particularly beneficial for non-specialist providers. Furthermore, AI can enhance headache disorder management by enabling the forecasting of acute events of interest, such as migraine headaches or medication overuse, and by guiding treatment selection based on insights from predictive modeling. Additionally, AI may facilitate the streamlining of treatment efficacy monitoring and enable the automation of real-time treatment parameter adjustments. VR technology, on the other hand, offers controllable and immersive experiences, thus providing a unique avenue for the investigation of the sensory-perceptual symptomatology associated with certain headache disorders. Moreover, recent studies suggest that VR, combined with biofeedback, may serve as a viable adjunct to conventional treatment. Addressing challenges to the widespread adoption of AI and VR in headache medicine, including reimbursement policies and data privacy concerns, mandates collaborative efforts from stakeholders to enable the equitable, safe, and effective utilization of these technologies in advancing headache disorder care. This review highlights the potential of AI and VR to support precise diagnostics, automate classification, and enhance management strategies for headache disorders.

Six Year Old With Chronic Headache: An Unexpected Meningitis Mimic.

The constellation of fevers accompanied by headache and vomiting is a red flag for clinicians that appropriately triggers evaluation for meningitis and other life-threatening diagnoses. When symptoms persist even after these conditions are ruled out, patient care becomes more challenging. We present the case of a 6-year-old male with a history of autism spectrum disorder who presented with 6 months of headaches and associated vomiting and intermittent fevers with negative infectious workup despite cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis. Serial neuroimaging and laboratory evaluation ultimately led to a diagnosis of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) presenting as aseptic meningitis. The clinical and radiographic findings of MOGAD are widely variable and overlap with several other inflammatory conditions, which makes diagnosis challenging. This case highlights the importance of recognizing this rare MOGAD presentation as an infectious meningitis mimic.

Approach to the Diagnosis and Treatment of Headache.

Headache is consistently one of the most common complaints reported by patients in the medical setting worldwide. Headache can be a symptom of another condition or illness, secondary to the disruption of homeostasis, or can be a primary disorder with inherent variability and patterns. Headache disorders, whether primary or secondary, can cause significant disability and loss of quality of life for those affected. As such, it is important for primary care providers to feel confident evaluating and treating patients with headache, especially given the limited access to Headache Medicine subspecialists.

German language adaptation of the Cogniphobia Scale for Headache Disorders (CS-HD) and development of a new short form (CS-HD-6).

OBJECTIVE: This study is part of the ODIN-migraine (Optimization of Diagnostic Instruments in migraine) project. It is a secondary, a priori analysis of previously collected data, and aimed to assess the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Cogniphobia Scale for Headache Disorders (CS-HD). We aimed to construct a German-language version and a short version. BACKGROUND: Cogniphobia is the fear and avoidance of cognitive exertion, which the patient believes triggers or exacerbates headache. High cogniphobia may worsen the course of a headache disorder. METHODS: The 15-item CS-HD was translated into German and back translated in a masked form by a professional translator. Modifications were discussed and carried out in an expert panel. A cross-sectional online survey including the CS-HD and further self-report questionnaires was conducted in a sample of N = 387 persons with migraine (364/387 [94.1%] female, M = 41.0 [SD = 13.0] years, migraine without aura: 152/387 [39.3%], migraine with aura: 85/387 [22.0%], and chronic migraine: 150/387 [38.8%]). RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis resulted in two clearly interpretable factors (interictal and ictal cogniphobia). Confirmatory factor analysis yielded an acceptable to good model fit (χ2(89) = 117.87, p = 0.022, χ2/df = 1.32, RMSEA = 0.029, SRMR = 0.055, CFI = 0.996, TLI = 0.995). Item response theory-based analysis resulted in the selection of six items for the short form (CS-HD-6). Reliability was acceptable to excellent (interictal cogniphobia subscale: ω = 0.92 [CS-HD] or ω = 0.77 [CS-HD-6]; ictal cogniphobia subscale: ω = 0.77 [CS-HD] or ω = 0.73 [CS-HD-6]). The pattern of correlations with established questionnaires confirmed convergent validity of both the CS-HD and the CS-HD-6. CONCLUSION: Both the CS-HD and the CS-HD-6 have good psychometric properties and are suitable for the assessment of cogniphobia in migraine.

A study to investigate the prevalence of headache disorders and migraine conducted using medical claims data and linked results from online surveys: post-hoc analysis of other headache disorders.

BACKGROUND: Surveys using questionnaires to collect epidemiologic data may be subject to misclassification. Here, we analyzed a headache questionnaire to evaluate which questions led to a classification other than migraine. METHODS: Anonymized surveys coupled with medical claims data from individuals 19-74 years old were obtained from DeSC Healthcare Inc. to examine proportions of patients with primary headache disorders (i.e.; migraine, tension-type headache, cluster headache, and "other headache disorders"). Six criteria that determined migraine were used to explore how people with other headache disorders responded to these questions. RESULTS: Among the 21480 respondents, 7331 (34.0%) reported having headaches. 691 (3.2%) respondents reported migraine, 1441 (6.7%) had tension-type headache, 21 (0.1%) had cluster headache, and 5208 (24.2%) reported other headache disorders. Responses of participants with other headache disorders were analyzed, and the top 3 criteria combined with "Symptoms associated with headache" were "Site of pain" (7.3%), "Headache changes in severity during daily activities" (6.4%), and the 3 criteria combined (8.8%). The symptoms associated with headache were "Stiff shoulders" (13.6%), "Stiff neck" (9.4%), or "Nausea or vomiting" (8.7%), Photophobia" (3.3%) and "Phonophobia" (2.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of migraine as diagnosed by questionnaire was much lower than expected while the prevalence of "other headache" was higher than expected. We believe the reason for this observation was due to misclassification, and resulted from the failure of the questionnaire to identify some features of migraine that would have been revealed by clinical history taking. Questionnaires should, therefore, be carefully designed, and doctors should be educated, on how to ask questions and record information when conducting semi-structured interviews with patients, to obtain more precise information about their symptoms, including photophobia and phonophobia.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Headache Care and Research.

ABSTRACT: This article reviews the disparities faced by individuals who experience headache disorders and discusses potential solutions to deliver equitable care. Disparities exist in the diagnosis and treatment of headache disorders with regard to race, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexual orientation, geography, and socioeconomic status. Furthermore, research in the realm of headache disparities is inadequate, and the clinical trial representation of patients from underserved communities is poor. Many barriers exist to optimizing care for underserved communities and this article addresses these barriers and presents ways to combat them.

Indomethacin-Responsive Headache Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: This article describes the clinical features and treatment of the indomethacin-responsive headache disorders paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua. LATEST DEVELOPMENTS: Both paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua are treated with indomethacin at the lowest clinically useful dose. It has recently become clear that some patients with either condition may respond to treatment with noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation, which can be both indomethacin sparing and, in some cases, headache controlling. Given the lifelong nature of both paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua, brain imaging with MRI is recommended when the conditions are identified, specifically including pituitary views. ESSENTIAL POINTS: Paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua are indomethacin-responsive headache disorders that offer a rewarding and unique opportunity to provide marked clinical improvement when recognized and treated appropriately. These disorders share the final common pathway of the trigeminal-autonomic reflex, with head pain and cranial autonomic features, and are differentiated pathophysiologically by the pattern of brain involvement, which can be seen using functional imaging. They have distinct differential diagnoses to which the clinician needs to remain alert.

The burden of headache disorders in the adult general population of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: estimates from a cross-sectional population-based study including a health-care needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: We have previously shown headache to be highly prevalent among adults in Saudi Arabia. Here we estimate associated symptom burden and impaired participation (impaired use of time, lost productivity and disengagement from social activity), and use these estimates to assess headache-related health-care needs in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A randomised cross-sectional survey included 2,316 adults (18-65 years) from all 13 regions of the country. It used the standardised methodology of the Global Campaign against Headache with a culturally mandated modification: engagement by cellphone using random digit-dialling rather than door-to-door visits. Enquiry used the HARDSHIP questionnaire, with diagnostic questions based on ICHD-3 beta, questions on symptom burden, enquiries into impaired participation using the HALT index and questions about activity yesterday in those reporting headache yesterday (HY). Health-care "need" was defined in terms of likelihood of benefit. We counted all those with headache on ≥ 15 days/month, with migraine on ≥ 3 days/month, or with migraine or TTH and meeting either of two criteria: a) proportion of time in ictal state (pTIS) > 3.3% and intensity ≥ 2 (moderate-severe); b) ≥ 3 lost days from paid work and/or household chores during 3 months. RESULTS: For all headache, mean frequency was 4.3 days/month, mean duration 8.4 h, mean intensity 2.3 (moderate). Mean pTIS was 3.6%. Mean lost days from work were 3.9, from household chores 6.6, from social/leisure activities 2.0. Of participants reporting HY, 37.3% could do less than half their expected activity, 19.8% could do nothing. At population-level (i.e., for every adult), 2.5 workdays (potentially translating into lost GDP), 3.6 household days and 1.3 social/leisure days were lost to headache. According to HY data, mean total impaired participation (not distinguishing between work, household and social/leisure) was 6.8%. A total of 830 individuals (35.8%) fulfilled one or more of our needs assessment criteria. CONCLUSION: A very high symptom burden is associated with a commensurately high burden of impaired participation. The economic cost appears to be enormous. Over a third of the adult population are revealed to require headache-related health care on the basis of being likely to benefit, demanding highly efficient organization of care.

Readability analysis and concept mapping of PROMs used for headache disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the readability and the comprehensiveness of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) utilized in primary headache disorders literature. BACKGROUND: As the health-care landscape has evolved toward a patient-centric model, numerous PROMs have been developed to capture treatment outcomes in patients with headache disorders. For these PROMs to advance our understanding of headache disorders and their treatment impact, they must be easy to understand (i.e., reading grade level 6 or less) and comprehensively capture what matters to patients with headache. The aim of this study was to (a) assess the readability of PROMs utilized in headache disorders literature, and (b) assess the comprehensiveness of PROMs by mapping their content to a health-related quality of life framework. METHODS: In this scoping review, recently published systematic reviews were used to identify PROMs used in primary headache disorders literature. Readability analysis was performed at the level of individual items and full PROM using established readability metrics. The content of the PROMs was mapped against a health-related quality-of-life framework by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: In total, 22 PROMs (15 headache disorders related, 7 generic) were included. The median reading grade level varied between 7.1 (interquartile range [IQR] 6.3-7.8) and 12.7 (IQR 11.8-13.2). None of the PROMs were below the recommended reading grade level for patient-facing material (grade 6). Three PROMs, the Migraine-Treatment Assessment Questionnaire, the Eurolight, and the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version, were between reading grade levels 7 and 8; the remaining 19 PROMs were above reading grade level 8. In total, the PROMs included 425 items. Most items (n = 134, 32%) assessed physical function (e.g., work, activities of daily living). The remaining items assessed physical symptoms (n = 127, 30%; e.g., pain, nausea), treatment effects on symptoms (n = 65, 15%; e.g., accompanying symptoms relief, headache relief), treatment impact (n = 56, 13%; e.g., function, side effects), psychological well-being (n = 41, 10%; e.g., anger, frustration), social well-being (n = 29, 7%; e.g., missing out on social activities, relationships), psychological impact (n = 14, 3%; e.g., feeling [not] in control, feeling like a burden), and sexual well-being (n = 3, 1%; e.g., sexual activity, sexual interest). Some of the items pertained to treatment (n = 27, 6%), of which most were about treatment type and use (n = 12, 3%; e.g., medication, botulinum toxin), treatment access (n = 10, 2%; e.g., health-care utilization, cost of medication), and treatment experience (n = 9, 2%; e.g., treatment satisfaction, confidence in treatment). CONCLUSION: The PROMs used in studies of headache disorders may be challenging for some patients to understand, leading to inaccurate or missing data. Furthermore, no available PROM comprehensively measures the health-related quality-of-life impact of headache disorders or their treatment, resulting in a limited understanding of patient-reported outcomes. The development of an easy-to-understand, comprehensive, and validated headache disorders-specific PROM is warranted.

The burden of headache disorders in North India: methodology, and validation of a Hindi version of the HARDSHIP questionnaire, for a community-based survey in Delhi and national capital territory region.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the prevalence and attributable burden of headache disorders in India is sparse, with only two recent population-based studies from South and East India. These produced conflicting results. A study in North India is needed. We report the methodology of such a study using, and validating, a Hindi translation of the Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap, and Impaired Participation (HARDSHIP) questionnaire developed by Lifting The Burden (LTB). Almost half of the Indian population speak Hindi or one of its dialects. METHODS: The study adopted LTB's standardized protocol for population-based studies in a cross-sectional survey using multistage random sampling conducted in urban Delhi and a surrounding rural area. Trained interviewers visited households unannounced, randomly selected one adult member from each and applied the Hindi version of HARDSHIP in face-to-face interviews. The most bothersome headache reported by participants was classified algorithmically into headache on ≥ 15 days/month (H15 +), migraine (including definite and probable) or tension-type headache (including definite and probable). These diagnoses were mutually exclusive. All participants diagnosed with H15 + and a 10% subsample of all others were additionally assessed by headache specialists and classified as above. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of HARDSHIP diagnoses by comparison with the specialists' diagnoses. RESULTS: From 3,040 eligible households, 2,066 participants were interviewed. The participating proportions were 98.3% in rural areas but 52.9% in urban Delhi. In the validation subsample of 291 participants (149 rural, 142 urban), 61 did not report any headache (seven of those assessed by HARDSHIP, eight by headache specialists and 46 by both) [kappa = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.74-0.91]. In the remaining 230 participants who reported headache in the preceding year, sensitivity, specificity and kappa with (95% CI) were 0.73 (0.65-0.79), 0.80 (0.67-0.90) and 0.43 (0.34-0.58) for migraine; 0.71 (0.56-0.83), 0.80 (0.730.85) and 0.43 (0.37-0.62) for TTH and 0.75 (0.47-0.94), 0.93 (0.89-0.96) and 0.46 (0.34-0.58) for H15 + respectively. CONCLUSION: This study validates the Hindi version of HARDSHIP, finding its performance similar to those of other versions. It can be used to conduct population surveys in other Hindi-speaking regions of India.

Specific cognitive and psychological alterations are more strongly linked to increased migraine disability than chronic migraine diagnosis.

INTRODUCTION: The efficiency of The International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3) in reflecting patients' disability has recently been questioned. This prompts consideration that clinical features beyond pain may more accurately indicate the extent of underlying brain impairment than the mere frequency of headache days. Important cognitive dysfunctions and psychological impairment have been reported in burdensome cases of migraine, and the presence of these alterations has been associated with biological changes in the nervous system. This study aimed to compare migraine-related disability within a specific patient group, classified using ICHD-3 criteria or classified based on findings from a neuropsychological evaluation using machine learning. Additionally, a complementary voxel-based morphometry (VBM) comparison was conducted to explore potential neuroanatomical differences between the resulting groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included episodic and chronic migraine patients seeking consultation at a specialized headache department. A neuropsychological evaluation protocol, encompassing validated standardized tests for cognition, anxiety, depression, perceived stress, and headache-related impact (HIT-6) and disability (MIDAS), was administered. Results from this evaluation were input into an automated K-means clustering algorithm, with a predefined K=2 for comparative purposes. A supplementary Voxel-based Morphometry (VBM) evaluation was conducted to investigate neuroanatomical contrasts between the two distinct grouping configurations. RESULTS: The study involved 111 participants, with 49 having chronic migraine and 62 having episodic migraine. Seventy-four patients were assigned to cluster one, and 37 patients were assigned to cluster two. Cluster two exhibited significantly higher levels of depression, anxiety, and perceived stress, and performed worse in alternating and focalized attention tests. Differences in HIT-6 and MIDAS scores between episodic and chronic migraine patients did not reach statistical significance (HIT-6: 64.39 (±7,31) vs 62.92 (±11,61); p= 0. 42 / MIDAS: 73.63 (±68,61) vs 84.33 (±63,62); p=0.40). In contrast, patients in cluster two exhibited significantly higher HIT-6 (62.32 (±10,11) vs 66.57 (±7,21); p=0.03) and MIDAS (68.69 (±62,58) vs 97.68 (±70,31); p=0.03) scores than patients in cluster one. Furthermore, significant differences in grey matter volume between the two clusters were noted, particularly involving the precuneus, while differences between chronic and episodic migraine patients did not withstand correction for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: The classification of migraine patients based on neuropsychological characteristics demonstrates a more effective separation of groups in terms of disability compared to categorizing them based on the chronic or episodic diagnosis of ICHD-3. These findings could reveal biological changes that might explain differences in treatment responses among apparently similar patients.

The impact of primary headaches on disability outcomes: a literature review and meta-analysis to inform future iterations of the Global Burden of Disease study.

BACKGROUND: The burden and disability associated with headaches are conceptualized and measured differently at patients' and populations' levels. At the patients' level, through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs); at population level, through disability weights (DW) and years lived with a disability (YLDs) developed by the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD). DW are 0-1 coefficients that address health loss and have been defined through lay descriptions. With this literature review, we aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of disability in headache disorders, and to present a coefficient referring to patients' disability which might inform future GBD definitions of DW for headache disorders. METHODS: We searched SCOPUS and PubMed for papers published between 2015 and 2023 addressing disability in headache disorders. The selected manuscript included a reference to headache frequency and at least one PROM. A meta-analytic approach was carried out to address relevant differences for the most commonly used PROMs (by headache type, tertiles of medication intake, tertiles of females' percentage in the sample, and age). We developed a 0-1 coefficient based on the MIDAS, on the HIT-6, and on MIDAS + HIT-6 which was intended to promote future DW iterations by the GBD consortium. RESULTS: A total of 366 studies, 596 sub-samples, and more than 133,000 single patients were available, mostly referred to cases with migraine. Almost all PROMs showed the ability to differentiate disability severity across conditions and tertiles of medication intake. The indexes we developed can be used to inform future iterations of DW, in particular considering their ability to differentiate across age and tertiles of medication intake. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides reference values for the most commonly used PROMS and a data-driven coefficient whose main added value is its ability to differentiate across tertiles of age and medication intake which underlie on one side the increased burden due to aging (it is likely connected to the increased impact of common comorbidities), and by the other side the increased burden due to medication consumption, which can be considered as a proxy for headache severity. Both elements should be considered when describing disability of headache disorders at population levels.

The International Classification of Headache Disorders: History and future perspectives.

PURPOSE: The International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) is universally accepted and forms the basis of headache management and clinical, experimental and pharmacological headache research. The present review summarizes the history of the three different editions of the classification, concentrating on aspects of general interest that are still valid today. METHODS: The article is based on the memory of the chairperson of three editions of the International Classification and on his notes in the work copies and published scientific classification studies. RESULTS: Many of the crucial issues in headache classification are discussed in the review of the different editions. Some have been resolved and some remain unresolved. The 11th edition of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD) has been developed in close contact with the International Headache Society classification committee and is in fact an abbreviated version of ICHD-3. The principles of the ICHD have also been used by the International Association for Study of Pain in developing a pain classification now included in ICD-11. The many points of discussion of each of the three editions are still relevant for headache experts and all those who care for headache patients. CONCLUSION: Headache classification is a living and developing discipline of research. Here, the gradual expansion and refinement of the classification through 3 different editions are discussed with a view to present day relevance.

Initial validation of the 12-item Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia in a retrospective sample of adults with chronic headache.

INTRODUCTION: An area of emerging interest in chronic pain populations concerns fear of pain and associated fear of movement (kinesiophobia)-a cognitive appraisal pattern that is well-validated in non-headache chronic pain. However, there is limited research on whether this construct can be measured in a similar manner in headache populations. METHODS: The current project details a confirmatory factor analysis of the 12-Item Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK-12) using a clinical data set from 210 adults with diverse headache diagnoses presenting for care at a multidisciplinary pain clinic. One item (concerning an "accident" that initiated the pain condition) was excluded from analysis. RESULTS: Results of the confirmatory factor analysis for the remaining 12 items indicated adequate model fit for the previously established 2-factor structure (activity avoidance and bodily harm/somatic focus subscales). In line with previous literature, total TSK-12 scores showed moderate correlations with pain severity, pain-related interference, positive and negative affect, depressive and anxious symptoms, and pain catastrophizing. DISCUSSION: The current study is the first to examine the factor structure of the TSK-12 in an adult headache population. The results support the relevance of pain-related fear to the functional and psychosocial status of adults with chronic headache, although model fit of the TSK-12 could be characterized as adequate rather than optimal. Limitations of the study include heterogeneity in headache diagnosis and rates of comorbid non-headache chronic pain in the sample. Future studies should replicate these findings in more homogenous headache groups (eg, chronic migraine) and examine associations with behavioral indices and treatment response.

New daily persistent headache after SARS-CoV-2 infection in Latin America: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Persistent headache is a frequent symptom after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and there is currently limited knowledge about its clinical spectrum and predisposing factors. A subset of patients may be experiencing new daily persistent headache (NDPH) after COVID-19, which is among the most treatment-refractory primary headache syndromes. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in Latin America to characterize individuals with persistent headache after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and to identify factors associated with NDPH. Participants over 18 years old who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection and reported persistent headache among their symptoms completed an online survey that included demographics, past medical history, persistent headache clinical characteristics, and COVID-19 vaccination status. Based on participants' responses, NDPH diagnostic criteria were used to group participants into NDPH and non-NDPH groups. Participant data was summarized by descriptive statistics. Student's t and Mann-Whitney U tests were used according to the distribution of quantitative variables. For categorical variables, Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used according to the size of expected frequencies. Binomial logistic regression using the backward stepwise selection method was performed to identify factors associated with NDPH. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty-one participants from 11 Latin American countries met the inclusion criteria. One in four participants met the NDPH diagnostic criteria. The mean age was 40 years, with most participants being female (82%). Over 90% of the participants reported having had mild/moderate COVID-19. Most participants had a history of headache before developing COVID-19 (58%), mainly migraine type (32%). The most predominant clinical characteristics in the NDPH group were occipital location, severe/unbearable intensity, burning character, and radiating pain (p < 0.05). A higher proportion of anxiety symptoms, sleep problems, myalgia, mental fog, paresthesia, nausea, sweating of the face or forehead, and ageusia or hypogeusia as concomitant symptoms were reported in participants with NDPH (p < 0.05). Palpebral edema as a concomitant symptom during the acute phase of COVID-19, occipital location, and burning character of the headache were risk factors associated with NDPH. CONCLUSION: This is the first study in Latin America that explored the clinical spectrum of NDPH after SARS-CoV-2 infection and its associated factors. Clinical evaluation of COVID-19 patients presenting with persistent headache should take into consideration NDPH.

Sex differences in the clinical manifestations related to dependence behaviors in medication-overuse headache.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to compare sex differences in the clinical manifestations related to dependence behaviors in medication-overuse headache (MOH). METHODS: Consecutive patients with newly diagnosed chronic migraine (CM) with and without MOH based on the Third Edition of International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3) were enrolled prospectively from the headache clinic of a tertiary medical center. Demographics and clinical profiles were collected by using a questionnaire, which included current use of tobacco, alcohol, and caffeinated beverages, the Leeds Dependence Questionnaire (LDQ), the Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS), the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). RESULTS: In total, 1419 CM patients (1135F/284 M, mean age 41.7 ± 13.9 years) were recruited, including 799 with MOH (640F/159 M, mean age 42.5 ± 13.2 years) (56.3%). Smoking was associated with an increased risk for MOH in men (odds ratio [OR] = 3.60 [95% confidence interval = 1.73-7.50], p = 0.001), but not in women (OR = 1.34 [0.88-2.04], p = 0.171) (p = 0.021 for interaction). Hypnotic use ≥ 3 days/week was a risk factor for MOH (OR = 2.55 [95% confidence interval = 2.00-3.24], p < 0.001), regardless of sex. By using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves, the cutoff scores of the LDQ for MOH were determined at 7 for women and 6 for men, and those for the SDS were 5 and 4, respectively (area under curve all ≥ 0.83). Among patients with MOH, the male sex was associated with a shorter latency between migraine onset and CM onset (12.9 ± 11.1 vs. 15.4 ± 11.5 years, p = 0.008), despite less average headache intensity (6.7 ± 1.9 vs. 7.2 ± 1.9, p = 0.005), functional impacts (HIT-6: 63.4 ± 8.3 vs. 65.1 ± 8.0, p = 0.009), and sleep disturbances (PSQI: 10.9 ± 4.4 vs. 12.2 ± 4.3, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The current study identified an association between smoking and MOH in men, as well as sex-specific cutoffs of the LDQ and the SDS, for MOH. MOH was characterized by a shorter latency between migraine onset and CM onset in men and a more severe phenotype in women. Sex should be considered as an important factor in the evaluation of MOH.

Evaluation of the ICHD-3 diagnostic criteria for cardiac cephalalgia and new proposal.

BACKGROUND: The current International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3) diagnostic criteria for cardiac cephalalgia were established according to previous case reports and the opinion of experts. We aimed to assess the ICHD-3 diagnostic criteria for cardiac cephalalgia. METHODS: We conducted a series of cases study and evaluated these criteria in 54 patients with cardiac cephalalgia. Next, we assessed whether the ICHD-3 diagnostic criteria B, C and D for migraine without aura were fulfilled by these patients. RESULTS: ICHD-3 criteria A, B, C1, C2 and D for cardiac cephalalgia were met by 100% of patients, whereas criterion C3 was fulfilled by 81.5%. The least frequently fulfilled sub-criterion was C3b (accompanied by nausea) (18.5%). Moreover, we found that ICHD-3 criteria B, C and D for migraine without aura were met by a low proportion of patients: 11.1%, 46.3% and 25.9%, respectively, and no patient fulfilled the three criteria simultaneously. CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we propose revised diagnostic criteria for cardiac cephalalgia. We suggest removing criterion C3 and C4. We also suggest removing the word "migraine-like" from its description.