Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache: 1. Rationale and description

In countries where headache services exist at all, their focus is usually on specialist (tertiary) care. This is clinically and economically inappropriate: most headache disorders can effectively and more efficiently (and at lower cost) be treated in educationally supported primary care. At the same time, compartmentalizing divisions between primary, secondary and tertiary care in many health-care systems create multiple inefficiencies, confronting patients attempting to navigate these levels (the "patient journey") with perplexing obstacles.High demand for headache care, estimated here in a needs-assessment exercise, is the biggest of the challenges to reform. It is also the principal reason why reform is necessary.The structured headache services model presented here by experts from all world regions on behalf of the Global Campaign against Headache is the suggested health-care solution to headache. It develops and refines previous proposals, responding to the challenge of high demand by basing headache services in primary care, with two supporting arguments. First, only primary care can deliver headache services equitably to the large numbers of people needing it. Second, with educational supports, they can do so effectively to most of these people. The model calls for vertical integration between care levels (primary, secondary and tertiary), and protection of the more advanced levels for the minority of patients who need them. At the same time, it is amenable to horizontal integration with other care services. It is adaptable according to the broader national or regional health services in which headache services should be embedded.It is, according to evidence and argument presented, an efficient and cost-effective model, but these are claims to be tested in formal economic analyses.

Patient and economic burdens of postherpetic neuralgia in China.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the patient-reported and economic burdens of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) among China's urban population. METHODS: This noninterventional study was conducted among adults ≥40 years with PHN who were seeking medical care at eight urban hospitals in China. At one study site, patients completed a questionnaire evaluating the patient-reported disease burden (N=185). The questionnaire consisted of validated patient-reported outcomes including the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), 5-dimension, 3-level EuroQol (EQ-5D-3L), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Specific Health Problems. Questions on non-pharmacologic therapy and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses were also included. At all study sites, physicians (N=100) completed a structured review of patient charts (N=828), which was used to derive health care resource utilization and associated costs from the societal perspective. Annual costs in Chinese Yuan Renminbi (RMB) for the year 2016 were converted to US dollars (US$). RESULTS: Patients (N=185, mean age 63.0 years, 53.5% female) reported pain of moderate severity (mean BPI score 4.6); poor sleep quantity (average of 5.3 hrs per night) and quality; and poorer health status on the EQ-5D-3L relative to the general Chinese population. Respondents also reported average annual OOP costs of RMB 16,873 (US$2541) per patient, mainly for prescription PHN medications (RMB 8990 [US$1354]). Substantial work impairment among employed individuals resulted in annual indirect costs of RMB 28,025 (US$4221). In the chart review, physicians reported that patients (N=828) had substantial health resource utilization, especially office visits; 98% had all-cause and 95% had PHN-related office visits. Total annual direct medical costs were RMB 10,002 (US$1507), mostly driven by hospitalizations (RMB 8781 [US$1323]). CONCLUSION: In urban China, PHN is associated with a patient-reported burden, affecting sleep, quality-of-life, and daily activities including work impairment, and an economic burden resulting from direct medical costs and indirect costs due to lost productivity. These burdens suggest the need for appropriate prevention and management of PHN.

Diagnosis, prevalence estimation and burden measurement in population surveys of headache: presenting the HARDSHIP questionnaire.

The global burden of headache is very large, but knowledge of it is far from complete and needs still to be gathered. Published population-based studies have used variable methodology, which has influenced findings and made comparisons difficult. The Global Campaign against Headache is undertaking initiatives to improve and standardize methods in use for cross-sectional studies. One requirement is for a survey instrument with proven cross-cultural validity. This report describes the development of such an instrument. Two of the authors developed the initial version, which was used with adaptations in population-based studies in China, Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Zambia and 10 countries in the European Union. The resultant evolution of this instrument was reviewed by an expert consensus group drawn from all world regions. The final output was the Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap and Impaired Participation (HARDSHIP) questionnaire, designed for application by trained lay interviewers. HARDSHIP is a modular instrument incorporating demographic enquiry, diagnostic questions based on ICHD-3 beta criteria, and enquiries into each of the following as components of headache-attributed burden: symptom burden; health-care utilization; disability and productive time losses; impact on education, career and earnings; perception of control; interictal burden; overall individual burden; effects on relationships and family dynamics; effects on others, including household partner and children; quality of life; wellbeing; obesity as a comorbidity. HARDSHIP already has demonstrated validity and acceptability in multiple languages and cultures. Modules may be included or not, and others (e.g., on additional comorbidities) added, according to the purpose of the study and resources (especially time) available.

The burden of headache in China: validation of diagnostic questionnaire for a population-based survey.

The objective of this study was to test the validity, in the Chinese population, of the Lifting The Burden diagnostic questionnaire for the purpose of a population-based survey of the burden of headache in China. From all regions of China, a population-based sample of 417 respondents had completed the structured questionnaire in a door-to-door survey conducted by neurologists from local hospitals calling unannounced. They were contacted for re-interview by telephone by headache specialists who were unaware of the questionnaire diagnoses. A screening question ascertained whether headache had occurred in the last year. If they had, the specialists applied their expertise and ICHD-II diagnostic criteria to make independent diagnoses which, as the gold standard, were later compared with the questionnaire diagnoses. There were 18 refusals; 399 interviews were conducted in 202 women and 197 men aged 18-65 years (mean age 44.4±12.6 years). In comparison to the specialists' diagnoses, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Cohen's kappa (95% CI) of the questionnaire for the diagnosis of migraine were 0.83, 0.99, 0.83, 0.99 and 0.82 (0.71-0.93), respectively; for the diagnosis of tension-type headache (TTH), they were 0.51, 0.99, 0.86, 0.92 and 0.59 (0.46-0.72), respectively. In conclusion, the questionnaire was accurate and reliable in diagnosing migraine (agreement level excellent), less so, but adequate, for TTH (sensitivity relatively low, false negative rate relatively high and agreement level fair to good). The non-specific features of TTH do not lend themselves well to diagnosis by questionnaire.