Association between myofascial trigger point therapy and conditioned pain modulation.

INTRODUCTION: Myofascial trigger point therapy (MTrP) is a widely used therapeutic approach, although the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Mechanisms discussed include peripheral involvement of muscles as well as central pain modulating processes such as the conditioned pain modulation (CPM). The aim of this study was to investigate whether the analgesic response of MTrP and the analgesic response of CPM correlate in asymptomatic participants in order to identify shared underlying mechanisms of MTrP and CPM. METHOD: Both, CPM and MTrP protocols consisted of heat-based test stimuli (heat pain thresholds before and after the intervention) and pressure-based (conditioning) stimuli. Asymptomatic participants (n = 94) were randomly assigned to receive either mild, intense or no pressure stimuli (between-group design) to both the fingernail and the MTrP of the infraspinatus muscle (within-group design). Pressure stimuli at both locations (fingernail, MTrP) were applied with a pressure algometer for 120 s and continuously adjusted to maintain a constant pain intensity of mild or intense pain. All thermal stimuli were applied on the lower leg with a thermal stimulator. RESULTS: A significant correlation was shown between the analgesic effect of CPM and MTrP therapy for mild (r = 0.53, p = 0.002) and intensive stimuli (r = 0.73, p < 0.001). 17.3% of the variance of the MTrP effect were explained by CPM after mild stimulation, and 47.1% after intense stimulation. Pain-related characteristics did not explain the variance within the analgesic response using a regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Between the analgesic responses following MTrP and CPM paradigms, a moderate to strong correlation was observed, suggesting shared underlying mechanisms.

Body Image Measured via the Fremantle Awareness Questionnaire in Individuals With and Without Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Research suggests that pain negatively affects body image, and body image may also influence reported pain levels. This review aims to summarize the literature on differences in body image distortion between individuals with pain compared to pain-free individuals. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement and an a priori preregistered protocol. The literature was searched using 5 electronic databases. Studies assessing body image with the Fremantle Awareness Questionnaire (FAQ) in individuals with and without pain were eligible for inclusion. Screening and selection of eligible studies were performed by independent reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Meta-analyses, meta-correlations, and metamean analyses were performed using random-effect models. The primary outcome was the FAQ score; secondary outcomes were reported pain variables. Data from individuals with pain (n = 2277) and without pain (n = 615) were summarized. Significant body image distortions were found in individuals with pain compared to individuals without pain. Compared to pain-free individuals, the pain group rated significantly higher in the FAQ when experiencing back pain (standardized mean differences=1.33, 95% confidence interval=.88-1.77) or other body parts (standardized mean differences=1.25, 95% confidence interval=.51-1.99). The results of meta-correlation analyses confirmed the positive relationship between body image distortion and pain intensity (r = .31), pain at rest (r = .31), or pain during movement (r = .36), but not for pain duration. A difference in mean FAQ results was observed between individuals with pain in different areas (knee and back). PERSPECTIVE: This review confirms differences in body image distortion between pain and pain-free individuals. Pain intensity was correlated with altered body perception, but not pain duration. A moderate correlation was observed between body image distortion and reported pain variables. Body image was more impaired by knee pain than back pain. REGISTERED PROTOCOL AT PROSPERO: CRD42022309937; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022309937.

Influence of Role Expectancy on Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Patients With Migraine: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: It is usually assumed that an individual's classification as a patient or a healthy person is determined by the presence or absence of disease, but little is known about whether the mere awareness of being a patient or a healthy control can play an important role for reporting outcomes. Objective: To investigate whether assignment to the role of a patient or a healthy control has an effect on patient-reported outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single center, double-blind, 3-group randomized clinical trial included consecutive patients from a tertiary headache clinic based at a single center in Germany who were invited to participate between October 2019 and June 2023. Statistical analysis was performed from January to March 2024. Intervention: Patients with migraine were randomized into 2 groups. The first group was told that this study was centered on migraine symptoms, whereas the second group was told that healthy controls were being sought for a study about patients with vertigo. A third group of age- and sex-matched headache-free participants served as controls. All participants viewed 2 standardized roller coaster videos and provided ratings of their perceived levels of motion sickness and dizziness. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was self-reported vestibular symptoms. Secondary outcomes included differences in motion sickness, headache burden, and migraine disability. Outcomes were assessed using standardized questionnaires. Results: The final sample included 366 participants: 122 patients with migraine assigned the role of patient (MP) (migraine as patient): mean [SD] age, 37.56 [12.93] years; 105 [86.1%] female), 122 patients with migraine assigned the role of healthy participant (MH) (migraine as healthy): mean [SD] age, 37.03 [13.10] years; 107 [87.7%] female), and 122 headache-free controls (HC): mean [SD] age, 37.55 [11.56] years; 100 [82.0%] female). The assigned role of the individuals with migraine (MP vs MH) had a significant effect on self-disclosure of (1) estimation that symptoms (dizziness) will occur under specific conditions (self-reported vestibular symptoms: 79 MP [64.8%]; 29 MH [23.8%]; 9 HC [7.4%]; P < .001), (2) the increase of such symptoms (dizziness) after viewing the roller coaster video, and (3) the reported frequency (median [IQR] self-reported monthly headache days for MP: 7 [4-15] days; for MH: 5 [2-10] days; P = .008) and severity (median [IQR] migraine disability assessment score for MP: 35 [20-64] points; for MH: 25 [11-47] points; P = .005) of migraine symptoms. Statistically significant changes were also found for self-reported headache frequency and disability caused by migraine. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found an effect of expectations regarding the role of a patient with respect to clinical and study outcomes. These findings suggest that role expectations should be taken into account when, for example, invasive treatments are discussed. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06322550.

Physical Therapist Interventions to Reduce Headache Intensity, Frequency, and Duration in Patients With Cervicogenic Headache: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of physical therapist interventions on the intensity, frequency, and duration of headaches, as well as on the quality of life of patients with cervicogenic headache. METHODS: The following databases were searched up to October 2022: Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Web of Science, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of physical therapist interventions on adults with cervicogenic headache were included. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool and the Confidence in Network Meta-analysis web app. Synthesis methods were conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook. RESULTS: Of the 28 identified reports, 23 were included in the quantitative synthesis. Manipulation plus dry needling was the highest-ranked intervention to reduce the short-term headache intensity (mean difference [MD] = -4.87; 95% CI = -8.51 to -1.24) and frequency (MD = -3.09; 95% CI = -4.93 to -1.25) when compared to a control intervention. Other high-ranked and clinically effective interventions (when compared to a control intervention) were muscle-energy technique plus exercise (MD = 4.37; 95% CI = -8.01 to -0.74), as well as soft tissue techniques plus exercise (MD = -3.01; 95% CI = -5.1 to -0.92) to reduce short-term headache intensity, and dry needling plus exercise (MD = -2.92; 95% CI = -4.73 to -1.11) to reduce short-term headache frequency. These results were based on a low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSION: The 4 most highly ranked interventions can be considered in clinical practice. However, no conclusive recommendation can be made due to the low certainty of evidence. IMPACT: Combined interventions such as spinal joint manipulation plus dry needling and muscle-energy technique or soft tissue techniques or dry needling plus exercises seem to be the best interventions to reduce short-term cervicogenic headache intensity and/or frequency.

Differential Effects of Thermal Stimuli in Eliciting Temporal Contrast Enhancement: A Psychophysical Study.

Offset analgesia (OA) is observed when pain relief is disproportional to the reduction of noxious input and is based on temporal contrast enhancement (TCE). This phenomenon is believed to reflect the function of the inhibitory pain modulatory system. However, the mechanisms contributing to this phenomenon remain poorly understood, with previous research focusing primarily on painful stimuli and not generalizing to nonpainful stimuli. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate whether TCE can be induced by noxious as well as innocuous heat and cold stimuli. Asymptomatic subjects (n = 50) were recruited to participate in 2 consecutive experiments. In the first pilot study (n = 17), the parameters of noxious and innocuous heat and cold stimuli were investigated in order to implement them in the main study. In the second (main) experiment, subjects (n = 33) participated in TCE paradigms consisting of 4 different modalities, including noxious heat (NH), innocuous heat (IH), noxious cold (NC), and innocuous cold (IC). The intensity of the sensations of each thermal modality was assessed using an electronic visual analog scale. TCE was confirmed for NH (P < .001), NC (P = .034), and IC (P = .002). Conversely, TCE could not be shown for IH (P = 1.00). No significant correlation between TCE modalities was found (r < .3, P > .05). The results suggest that TCE can be induced by both painful and nonpainful thermal stimulation but not by innocuous warm temperature. The exact underlying mechanisms need to be clarified. However, among other potential mechanisms, this may be explained by a thermo-specific activation of C-fiber afferents by IH and of A-fiber afferents by IC, suggesting the involvement of A-fibers rather than C-fibers in TCE. More research is needed to confirm a peripheral influence. PERSPECTIVE: This psychophysical study presents the observation of temporal contrast enhancement during NH, NC, and innocuous cold stimuli but not during stimulation with innocuous warm temperatures in healthy volunteers. A better understanding of endogenous pain modulation mechanisms might be helpful in explaining the underlying aspects of pain disorders.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and measurement proprieties of the German version of the Allodynia Symptom Checklist (ASC-12).

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous allodynia is highly prevalent among migraineurs and is associated with a poor prognosis. The Allodynia Symptom Checklist (ASC-12) is a comprehensive questionnaire to identify the presence and severity of allodynia. Our aim was to translate and adapt the ASC-12 to German and evaluate its measurement properties. METHODS: Following the COSMIN guidelines, 80 migraine patients were enrolled in the study to evaluate the stages of translation (n=30) and measurement propriety assessment (n=50), respectively. After reaching a final version, the German ASC-12 was assessed for structural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity and absolute agreement, using mechanical and thermal pain thresholds as reference method. RESULTS: The German version of the ASC-12 presented an adequate structural validity compatible with the original version of the questionnaire. Its internal consistency ranged from 0.70 to 0.80 considering the total score and the thermic, static and dynamic mechanic subdomains. The total score presented excellent reliability (ICC: 0.85) with a standard error of measurement of 1.15 points and smallest detectable change of 3.40 points. ASC-12 total scores were correlated with headache intensity (r=0.38, p=0.004), headache disability (r=0.37, p=0.004) and cold pain thresholds (r=0.28, p=0.025). The thermic allodynia ASC-12 scores were correlated with cold (r=0.36, p=0.005) and heat (r=-0.30, p=0.010) pain thresholds, while the static mechanical allodynia ASC-12 scores correlated with mechanical pain threshold (r=0.29, p=0.019) and with mechanical pain sensitivity (r=0.24 to 0.28, p< 0.045). Despite no significant bias between methods, quantitative sensory testing (QST) results and ASC-12 scores tend to disagree. CONCLUSION: The German version of the ASC-12 is available for research and clinical settings and presented adequate measurement proprieties, as the original version. Despite the correlation between the ASC-12 and QST, one method cannot be replaced by the other.

Therapeutic Exercise Parameters, Considerations, and Recommendations for Migraine Treatment: An International Delphi Study.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to reach consensus about the best exercise prescription parameters, the most relevant considerations, and other recommendations that could be useful for prescribing exercise to patients with migraine. METHODS: This was an international study conducted between April 9, 2022 and June 30, 2022. An expert panel of health care and exercise professionals was assembled, and a 3-round Delphi survey was performed. Consensus was reached for each item if an Aiken V Validity Index ≥ 0.7 was obtained. RESULTS: The study included 14 experts who reached consensus on 42 items by the third round. The most approved prescription parameters were 30 to 60 minutes of exercise per session, 3 days per week of moderate-intensity continuous aerobic exercise, and relaxation and breathing exercises for 5 to 20 minutes every day. When considering an exercise prescription, initial exercise supervision should progress to patient self-regulation; catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, headache-related disability, anxiety, depression, physical activity baseline level, and self-efficacy could influence the patients' exercise participation and efficacy; and gradual exposure to exercise could help improve these psychological variables and increase exercise efficacy. Yoga and concurrent exercise were also included as recommended interventions. CONCLUSION: From the experts in the study, exercise prescriptions should be adapted to patients with migraine considering different exercise modalities, such as moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, relaxation, yoga, and concurrent exercise, based on the patients' preferences and psychological considerations, level of physical activity, and possible adverse effects. IMPACT: The consensus reached by the experts can help prescribe exercise accurately to patients with migraine. Offering various exercise modalities can improve exercise participation in this population. The evaluation of the patients' psychological and physical status can also facilitate the adaptation of the exercise prescription to their abilities and diminish the risk of adverse events.

One-year changes in clinical and balance parameters in individuals of different subtypes of migraine.

BACKGROUND: Migraine has been associated with balance dysfunction, more pronounced in patients with aura and chronic migraine. Also, it has been suggested that balance deficits are progressive through the migraineurs lifetime. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the one-year progression of balance parameters and clinical parameters associated with balance in female patients with and without migraine. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: The participants were distributed in four groups: control (CG; n = 27) migraine with aura (MA; n = 25), migraine without aura (MwA; n = 26), and chronic migraine (CM; n = 27). They performed the Sensory Organization Test, Motor Control Test and Adaptation Test protocols of dynamic posturography tests. Questionnaires about fear of falls, dizziness disability, and kinesiophobia were administered. These assessments were performed twice: baseline and after 1-year (follow-up). No intervention was performed for balance improvement, and the participants maintained their usual migraine treatment prescribed. RESULTS: None of the groups differed in balance tests between baseline and follow-up. We observed a reduction in migraine frequency in MA (-2.2 days, p = 0.01) and CM (-10.8 days, p < 0.001) groups, and in the migraine intensity (-2.3 points, p = 0.001) in CM group. Significant decreases in the scores of fear of falling, dizziness disability, and kinesiophobia were observed in the migraine groups (p < 0.05), but the differences did not exceed the minimal detectable change of the questionaries scores. CONCLUSION: Women with different migraine subtypes did not present balance changes in a one-year interval. The improvements in migraine's clinical features were not accompanied by improvements in balance parameters.

Balance disorders and migraine.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is associated with motion sensitivity symptoms such as kinetosis, vestibular symptoms and balance alterations. While focus is given to headache management, addressing these symptoms is often neglected, although they are related to additional migraine burden and increased disability. PURPOSE: Our aim is to disseminate the current understanding of the motion sensitivity symptoms among patients with migraine, with focus on balance impairments. We discuss the susceptibility of migraine to motion sensitivity, its suggested mechanisms, the balance alterations during quiet standing, mobility tasks and reactions to external perturbations. The role of migraine subdiagnosis, implications for clinical practice and future perspectives are also acknowledged. IMPLICATIONS: Balance disorders are one of the signs reflecting a broader and complex spectrum of motion sensitivity, which are present even between attacks. Migraineurs are especially inherent to these symptoms probably due to brain hyperexcitability and to shared pathophysiological mechanisms. Patients, especially with aura and chronic migraine, exhibit balance instability during quiet standing under different surface and visual input conditions. Migraineurs demonstrated reduced limits of stability and lower performance on walk, transposing obstacles and sit to stand tasks. Only patients with aura present impairment of motor control reactions following external perturbations. Balance alterations are associated with falls and are influenced by aura, migraine frequency and psychosocial aspects, but not by vestibular symptoms or vestibular migraine diagnosis. There is a high demand for high quality of evidence regarding the assessment and care of motion sensitivity symptoms in migraineurs, considering approaches to manage not just the pain, but its associated symptoms.

Neck pain repercussions in migraine - The role of physiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Migraine is a neurological and disabling disease whose peripheral manifestations can be addressed with physiotherapy. These manifestations can include pain and hypersensitivity to muscular and articular palpation in the neck and face region, a higher prevalence of myofascial trigger points, limitation in global cervical motion, especially in the upper segment (C1-C2), and forward head posture with worse muscular performance. Furthermore, patients with migraine can present cervical muscle weakness and greater co-activation of antagonists in maximum and submaximal tasks. In addition to musculoskeletal repercussions, these patients can also present balance impairment and a greater risk of falls, especially when chronicity of migraine frequency is present. The physiotherapist is a relevant player in the interdisciplinary team and can help these patients to control and manage their migraine attacks. PURPOSE: This position paper discusses the most relevant musculoskeletal repercussions of migraine in the craniocervical area under the perspective of sensitization and disease chronification, besides addressing physiotherapy as an important strategy for evaluating and treating these patients. IMPLICATIONS: Physiotherapy as a non-pharmacological treatment option in migraine treatment may potentially reduce musculoskeletal impairments related to neck pain in this population. Disseminating knowledge about the different types of headaches and the diagnostic criteria can support physiotherapists who compose a specialized interdisciplinary team. Furthermore, it is important to acquire competencies in neck pain assessment and treatment approaches according to the current evidence.

Widespread Proprioceptive Acuity Impairment in Chronic Back Pain: A Cross-sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether proprioceptive accuracy measured with the Joint Position Sense (JPS) in patients with chronic neck and low back pain is impaired exclusively in affected areas or also in distant areas, not affected by pain. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Interdisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation clinic for back and neck pain. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with chronic neck pain (n=30), patients with chronic low back pain (n=30), and age- and sex-matched asymptomatic control subjects (n=30; N=90). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients and asymptomatic control subjects completed a test procedure for the JPS of the cervical spine, lumbar spine, and ankle in a randomized order. Between group differences were analyzed with the univariate analysis of variance and associations of the JPS with clinical features using the Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Both patients with chronic neck pain (P<.001) and patients with chronic low back pain (P<.01) differed significantly from asymptomatic controls in the JPS of the cervical spine, lumbar spine and ankle joint, regardless of the painful area. No difference was shown between patient groups (P>.05). An association of the JPS with clinical characteristics, however, could not be shown. CONCLUSION: These results suggest widespread impairment of proprioceptive accuracy in patients with chronic and low back pain and a role for central sensorimotor processes in musculoskeletal pain conditions.

Offset analgesia is increased intra-orally.

BACKGROUND: Offset analgesia (OA) is commonly used to quantify endogenous pain inhibition. However, the potential role of afferent inputs and the subsequent peripheral factors from different body areas on the underlying mechanisms are still unclear. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare the magnitude of OA in four different body areas representing (a) glabrous and non-glabrous skin, (b) trigeminal and extra-trigeminal areas, and (c) intra- and extra-oral tissue. METHODS: OA was assessed at the oral mucosa of the lower lip, the skin of the cheek, the forearm and the palm of the hand in 32 healthy and pain-free participants. OA testing included two trials: (1) a constant trial (30 s of constant heat stimulation at an individualised temperature of Pain50 [pain intensity of 50 out of 100]) and (2) an offset trial (10 s of individualised Pain50 , followed by 5 s at Pain50 + 1°C and 15 s at Pain50 ). Participants continuously rated their pain during each trial with a computerised visual analogue scale. RESULTS: A significant OA response was recorded at the oral mucosa (p < .001, d = 1.24), the cheek (p < .001, d = 0.84) and the forearm (p < .001, d = 1.04), but not at the palm (p = .19, d = 0.24). Significant differences were shown for OA recorded at the cheek versus the mucosa (p = .02), and between palm and mucosa (p = .007), but not between the remaining areas (p > .05). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that intra-oral endogenous pain inhibition assessed with OA is enhanced and supports the role of peripheral mechanisms contributing to the OA response.

Migraine and balance impairment: Influence of subdiagnosis, otoneurological function, falls, and psychosocial factors.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the balance sensory organization among patients with migraine, considering the influence of migraine subdiagnosis, otoneurological function, falls, and psychosocial factors. BACKGROUND: Migraine has been associated with vestibular symptoms and balance dysfunction; however, neither comprehensive balance assessment nor associated factors for greater impairment have been addressed thus far. METHODS: Patients from a tertiary headache clinic with a diagnosis of episodic migraine with aura (MWA), without aura (MWoA), and chronic migraine (CM) were included for this cross-sectional study (30 patients per group). Thirty headache-free controls (CG) were recruited. Participants underwent a comprehensive evaluation protocol, including the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) and otoneurological examination. Questionnaires about fear of falls, dizziness disability, and kinesiophobia were administered. RESULTS: All migraine groups presented lower composite SOT scores than controls (CG: 82.4 [95% confidence interval (CI): 79.5-85.3], MWoA: 76.5 [95% CI: 73.6-79.3], MWA: 66.5 [95% CI: 63.6-69.3], CM: 69.1 [95% CI: 66.3-72.0]; p < 0.0001). Compared to controls and to MWoA, MWA and CM groups exhibited greater vestibular (CG: 75.9 [95% CI: 71.3-80.4], MWoA: 67.3 [95% CI: 62.7-71.8], MWA: 55.7 [95% CI: 51.2-60.3], CM: 58.4 [95% CI: 53.8-63.0]; p < 0.0001) and visual functional impairment (CG: 89.6 [95% CI: 84.2-94.9], MWoA: 83.2 [95% CI: 77.9-88.6], MWA: 68.6 [95% CI: 63.3-74.0], CM: 71.9 [95% CI: 66.5-77.2], p < 0.0001). Fall events during the assessment were documented more often among patients with migraine (CG: 0.0, interquartile range [IQR], 0.0, 0.0); MWoA: 1.0 [IQR: 1.0, 1.0], MWA: 2.0 [IQR: 1.8, 4.3], CM: 1.0 [IQR: 1.0, 2.0]; p = 0.001). The SOT scores correlated with fear of falls (r = -0.44), dizziness disability (r = -0.37), kinesiophobia (r = -0.38), and migraine frequency (r = -0.38). There was no significant influence of the vestibular migraine diagnosis in the study outcomes when used as a covariate in the analysis (composite score [F = 3.33, p = 0.070], visual score [F = 2.11, p = 0.149], vestibular score [F = 1.88, p = 0.172], somatosensory score [F = 0.00, p = 0.993]). CONCLUSIONS: Aura and greater migraine frequency were related to falls and balance impairment with sensory input manipulation, although no otoneurological alterations were detected. The diagnosis of vestibular migraine does not influence the balance performance. The vestibular/visual systems should be considered in the clinical examination and treatment of patients with migraine.

Postural control impairment in patients with headaches-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the evidence regarding static and dynamic balance alterations among patients with headache. METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science) were searched by two researchers independently up to September 2021. Two reviewers selected eligible studies, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of evidence using the Downs and Black checklist. Case-control studies were included if they involved balance assessment of any kind of headache, including objective outcome measures of dynamic and static tests such as body sway displacement, limits of stability (LOS), gait, and tandem walk tests. A meta-analysis and post hoc sensitivity analyses were performed when possible. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies (1202 patients with headache and 597 controls) were included in this review and 16 of them in the meta-analysis. Risk of bias ranged from low to moderate among all studies. Greater sway area in static posturography was shown by patients with migraine in comparison to controls, with more consistent differences in more challenging test conditions, such as over a foam surface with eyes closed (difference of 4.8 cm2 , 95% CI: 3.8-5.9). Lower performance of patients with migraine during the tandem walk test (difference of -7.8 cm/s, 95% CI: -9.0 to -6.5) and slower reaction time in the LOS test (difference of 0.3 s, 95% CI: 0.2-0.4) were also verified. There is no evidence of altered sway velocity and length in static posturography among patients with migraine (p > 0.05). The level of evidence is very low for balance alteration of any kind among patients with tension-type and cervicogenic headache owing to the limited number of studies and high heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: This review confirmed the presence of static and dynamic balance alterations among patients with migraine. Future studies with low risk of bias are needed to decrease heterogeneity in methodology and explore the role of subdiagnosis on the balance of patients with headache.

Is kinesiophobia related to fear of falling, dizziness disability, and migraine disability in patients with migraine?

INTRODUCTION: Kinesiophobia is a common symptom associated with high disability, and has been observed in patients with migraine. However, the association between kinesiophobia and clinical factors in this population is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the fear of falling, dizziness disability, and migraine disability in patients with migraine, considering the presence of kinesiophobia. METHODS: Eighty patients with migraine completed the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia and were divided into two groups according to the questionnaire cutoff point: migraine without kinesiophobia (MoK, n = 39) and migraine with kinesiophobia (MK, n = 41). Fear of falling, dizziness disability, and migraine disability were assessed in both groups using validated questionnaires. RESULTS: The MK group presented higher scores on dizziness disability, fear of falling, and migraine disability compared to the MoK (p < .05). Kinesiophobia can explain 29% of the variance in dizziness disability and 18% of migraine disability. Both kinesiophobia and the presence of dizziness can explain 14% of fear of falling variability. Also, kinesiophobia is associated with the risk of presenting fear of falling (Prevalence Ratio = 2.4, p = .012), and migraine disability (Prevalence Ratio = 2.6, p = .01). CONCLUSION: The presence of kinesiophobia should be considered in clinical practice when evaluating migraine, as it is associated with increased levels of fear of falling, dizziness disability, and migraine disability.

Psychophysical testing in chronic migraine and chronic tension type headache: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical presentation is the key to the diagnosis of patients with migraine and tension-type headache, but features may overlap when both become chronic. Psychophysical parameters may distinguish both conditions. We aimed to compare psychophysical aspects of patients with chronic migraine, chronic tension-type headache and headache-free controls, and to determine whether these can predict headache frequency. METHODS: An examiner blinded to the diagnosis assessed 100 participants (chronic migraine (n = 38), chronic tension-type headache (n = 31) and controls (n = 31)). Assessed variables included painful area, pressure pain thresholds, temporal summation, cervical range of motion, neck posture, headache and neck impact, quality of life, and kinesiophobia. Comparison between groups was performed with one-way ANOVA and multiple linear regression was used to assess the headache frequency predictors. RESULTS: We found differences of both headache groups compared to controls (p < 0.01), but not between headache groups. Neck disability was a significant predictor of headache frequency for chronic tension-type headache (adjusted R2 = 0.14; ß = 0.43; p = 0.03) and chronic migraine (adjusted R2 = 0.18; ß = 0.51; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic tension-type headache and chronic migraine showed similar psychophysical results, but were significantly worse when compared to controls. The psychophysical examination did not discriminate between headache types. The variable best explaining headache frequency for both headache types was neck disability.

Migraine With Aura Is Related to Delayed Motor Control Reaction and Imbalance Following External Perturbations.

Background: It is evidenced that migraineurs present balance deficits. However, the balance recovery following unexpected ground perturbations, which reflect conditions of everyday activities, has not been investigated in this population. Aim: We aimed to assess the reactive postural responses among patients with migraine with and without aura, chronic migraine, and controls. We further aimed to assess the factors associated with greater self-report of falls. Methods: Ninety patients diagnosed by headache specialists were equally classified into three migraine subgroups according to the presence of aura and chronic migraine. Thirty controls were also recruited. All participants underwent the motor control test (MCT) and adaptation test (ADT) protocols of dynamic posturography tests (EquiTest®, NeuroCom, USA). Clinical and headache features and information on falls in the previous year, fear of falling, and vestibular symptoms were also assessed. Results: Patients with aura presented a greater sway area in most of the MCT conditions than the other three groups (p = 0.001). The aura group also presented delayed latency responses after perturbations compared with controls and patients without aura (p < 0.03). In the ADT, a greater sway area was observed in patients with aura than in groups without aura, chronic migraine, and controls (p < 0.0001). The MCT and ADT sway area, the frequency of aura, and the fear of falling explained 46% of the falls in the previous 12 months. Conclusion: Patients with aura exhibited greater delay and sway area after unexpected ground perturbations than controls and other migraine subgroups, which are related to the reported number of falls.

Minimal important change and responsiveness of the Migraine Disability Assessment Score (MIDAS) questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: The MIDAS is the most used questionnaire to evaluate migraine-related disability, but its utility to assess treatment response remains unclear. Our aim was to estimate the MIDAS' minimal important change (MIC) value and its responsiveness. METHODS: A total of 103 patients were enrolled in a non-pharmacological, preference-based clinical trial. MIDAS and global rating of self-perceived change (GRoC) scores were collected at baseline, after 5 weeks of treatment, 4-weeks and 3-months follow-up after treatment. Anchor-based approaches were used to establish MIC values and responsiveness. FINDINGS: In all 3 timepoint comparisons, MIDAS presented a MIC of 4.5 points. A moderate positive correlation was identified between the MIDAS change and GRoC scores. The area under the curve ranged from 0.63 to 0.68. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that MIDAS has a limited responsiveness to change. A change of 4.5 points or more represents a clinically important change for patients with high frequent migraine and chronic migraine receiving non-pharmacological treatment.

Brain Processing of Visual Self-Motion Stimuli in Patients With Migraine: An fMRI Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the behavioral and neuronal responses of patients with migraine to a visual simulation of self-motion through a virtual roller coaster ride in comparison to controls. METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with migraine from a university-based hospital headache clinic and 20 controls were included. Participants underwent an experiment where a visually displayed self-motion paradigm was presented based on customized roller coaster videos during fMRI. Within each video, blocks of motion stimulation were interleaved with low-speed upward motion in a random order. In the scanning intervals and after the experiment, participants rated their perceived level of vestibular symptoms and motion sickness during the videos. We hypothesized that patients with migraine will perceive more motion sickness and that it correlates with different central processing and brain responses. RESULTS: Compared to controls, patients with migraine reported more dizziness (65% vs 30%; p = 0.03) and motion sickness (Simulator Sickness Questionnaire score 47.3 [95% confidence interval (CI), 37.1, 57.5] vs 24.3 [95% CI, 18.2, 30.4]) as well as longer symptom duration (01:19 minutes [95% CI, 00:51, 01:48] vs 00:27 minutes [95% CI, 00:03, 00:51]) and intensity (visual analogue scale score 0-100, 22.0 [95% CI, 14.8, 29.2] vs 9.9 [95% CI, 4.9, 14.7]) during the virtual roller coaster ride. Neuronal activity in patients with migraine was more pronounced in clusters within the superior (contrast estimate 3.005 [90% CI, 1.817, 4.194]) and inferior occipital gyrus (contrast estimate 1.759 [90% CI, 1.062, 2.456]), pontine nuclei (contrast estimate 0.665 [90% CI, 0.383, 0.946]), and within the cerebellar lobules V/VI (contrast estimate 0.672 [90% CI, 0.380, 0.964]), while decreased activity was seen in the cerebellar lobule VIIb (contrast estimate 0.787 [90% CI, 0.444, 1.130]) and in the middle frontal gyrus (contrast estimate 0.962 [90% CI, 0.557, 1.367]). These activations correlated with migraine disability (r = -0.46, p = 0.04) and motion sickness scores (r = 0.32, p = 0.04). We found enhanced connectivity between the pontine nuclei, cerebellar areas V/VI, and interior and superior occipital gyrus with numerous cortical areas in patients with migraine but not in controls. CONCLUSIONS: Migraine is related to abnormal modulation of visual motion stimuli within superior and inferior occipital gyrus, middle frontal gyrus, pontine nuclei, and cerebellar lobules V, VI, and VIIb. These abnormalities relate to migraine disability and motion sickness susceptibility.

Measurement properties of the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6™ Brazil) in primary and secondary headaches.

BACKGROUND: The Headache Impact Test-6™ is a widely recommended questionnaire to evaluate the impact of headaches. However, its measurement properties were never evaluated in both primary and secondary headaches, and the Brazilian Portuguese version of the questionnaire was never assessed at all. OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability, and structural and construct validity of the Headache Impact Test-Brazil™ in patients with primary and secondary headaches. METHODS: In total, 132 patients with primary and secondary headaches were included, screened from a headache tertiary clinic. They completed the Headache Impact Test-Brazil™ questionnaire, the 12-Item Short-Form Survey (SF-12), and the Headache Disability Inventory-Brazil. Pearson's correlation analysis was performed among the three questionnaires for validity assessment. One to three weeks after the first application, the Headache Impact Test-Brazil™ was answered again by 67 patients for reliability assessment. RESULTS: The validity sample consisted of 86/132 (65.1%) patients with primary and 46/132 (34.9%) secondary headaches, with mean age of 39.6 (SD: 12.7) years. The reliability sample consisted of 39/67 (58.2%) patients with primary and 28/67 (41.8%) secondary headaches, with mean age of 36.8 (12.5) years. According to the confirmatory factor analysis, the Headache Impact Test-Brazil™ consists of single factor. Its internal consistency was α = 0.97 and the question number 3 had the lowest factor loading (0.31). The Headache Impact Test-Brazil™ exhibited a moderate correlation with both the SF-12 questionnaire (r = -0.64, 95%CI: -0.72 to -0.52, p = 0.001) and the Headache Disability Inventory-Brazil (r = 0.67, 95%CI: 0.56 to 0.75, p = 0.001). The correlation between the Headache Impact Test-Brazil™ and the headache frequency was weak (r = 0.22, 95%CI: 0.04 to 0.39, p = 0.001), and with the headache intensity, moderate (r = 0.44, 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.62, p = 0.001). The Headache Impact Test-Brazil™ test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.95) with a standard error of 1.58 and a smallest detectable change of 4.38 points. CONCLUSION: The Headache Impact Test-6-Brazil™ can be considered as a valid and reliable tool to assess the impact of several headache types. Future studies may revise the questionnaire items to confirm its redundancy.