Cluster Headache: Clinical Characteristics and Opportunities to Enhance Quality of Life.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cluster headache is a highly disabling primary headache disorder characterized by severe pain and autonomic features. We present the existing body of literature on psychological factors associated with cluster headache and recommendations to address gaps in current clinical care with regards to psychological treatments for cluster headache. RECENT FINDINGS: People with cluster headache often endorse depressive symptoms, are more likely than the general population to report suicidal ideation and behaviors, and experience significantly decreased quality of life. Psychological treatments such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy may be particularly valuable for patients with cluster headache given that they are transdiagnostic in nature and can therefore simultaneously address the disease burden and common psychiatric comorbidities that present. Greater understanding of the debilitating nature of cluster headache and behavioral interventions that seek to reduce the burden of the disease and improve the quality of life of people with cluster headache is paramount.

Direct and indirect costs of cluster headache: a prospective analysis in a tertiary level headache centre.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache (CH) is the most frequent trigemino-autonomic cephalgia. CH can manifest as episodic (ECH) or chronic cluster headache (CCH) causing significant burden of disease and requiring attack therapy and prophylactic treatment. The few data available on the economic burden of CH come from retrospective studies based on questionnaires, population surveys and medical insurance claims database. Although all these studies showed an important economic burden, they provided different estimates depending on variability of CH awareness and management, healthcare systems, available therapies and use of treatments according to different guidelines. METHODS: This prospective study aimed to quantify the total direct and indirect cost of ECH and CCH over a cluster period, both for the patient and for the National Health System (NHS), using data from subjects who consecutively attended an Italian tertiary headache centre between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018. RESULTS: A total 108 patients (89 ECH, 19 CCH) were included. Mean attack frequency was 2.3 ± 1.4 per day. Mean total cost of a CH bout was €4398 per patient and total cost of CCH was 5.4 times higher than ECH (€13,350 vs. €2487, p <  0.001). Direct costs represented the 72.1% of total cost and were covered for the 94.8% by the NHS. The costs for any item of expense were higher for CCH than for ECH (p <  0.001). Mean indirect costs for a CH bout were €1226 per patient and were higher for CCH compared to ECH (€3.538 vs. €732), but the difference was not significant. Days with reduced productive capacity impacted for the 64.6% of the total indirect costs. The analysis of the impact CH on work showed that 27%% of patients felt that CH had limited their career, 40% had changed their work pattern, 20% had changed their place of employment and 10% had lost a job due to the disease. CONCLUSION: Our results provide a valuable estimate of the direct and indirect costs of ECH and CCH in the specific setting of a tertiary headache centre and confirm the high economic impact of CH on both the NHS and patients.

Cluster headache: Prevalence, sickness absence, and disability pension in working ages in Sweden.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of cluster headache in working-aged people, compare sickness absence rates and disability pension in cluster headache patients to rates in a matched comparison group, and explore associations of sociodemographic factors with such rates. METHODS: Through population-based registers, we identified 3,240 people aged 16-64, living in Sweden in 2010, who at least once during 2001-2010 received inpatient or specialized outpatient health care with cluster headache (ICD-10 code G44.0) as main diagnosis. A comparison group (n = 16,200), matched for age, sex, type of living area, and educational level, from the total population aged 16-64 (n = 5,945,895) was used. Outcomes were sickness absence (>14 days) and disability pension during 2010. Crude and adjusted prevalence rates and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were computed. RESULTS: The prevalence of cluster headache in working-aged people was 0.054%. In 2010, 17.30% of the cluster headache group and 9.16% of the comparison group had been on sickness absence. In the cluster headache group, female patients had higher sickness absence rates (25.31%) and full-time disability pension (13.17%) than male patients (13.38% and 8.79%). Cluster headache patients older than 35 had higher rates than those of the same age in the comparison group. Further, cluster headache patients born outside Sweden were more likely to have full-time disability pension than patients born in Sweden. CONCLUSIONS: Much higher rates of the patients had sickness absence or disability pension than in the comparison group. Further shown differences related to sex, age, and other sociodemographic factors need to be addressed.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for treatment of cluster headache: early UK clinical experience.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supports the use of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS; gammaCore®) as a promising therapeutic option for patients with cluster headache (CH). We conducted this audit of real-world data from patients with CH, the majority of whom were treatment refractory, to explore early UK clinical experience with nVNS used acutely, preventively, or both. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed data from 30 patients with CH (29 chronic, 1 episodic) who submitted individual funding requests for nVNS to the National Health Service. All patients had responded to adjunctive nVNS therapy during an evaluation period (typical duration, 3-6 months). Data collected from patient interviews, treatment diaries, and physician notes were summarised with descriptive statistics. Paired t tests were used to examine statistical significance. RESULTS: The mean (SD) CH attack frequency decreased from 26.6 (17.1) attacks/wk. before initiation of nVNS therapy to 9.5 (11.0) attacks/wk. (P < 0.01) afterward. Mean (SD) attack duration decreased from 51.9 (36.7) minutes to 29.4 (28.5) minutes (P < 0.01), and mean (SD) attack severity (rated on a 10-point scale) decreased from 7.8 (2.3) to 6.0 (2.6) (P < 0.01). Use of abortive treatments also decreased. Favourable changes in the use of preventive medication were also observed. No serious device-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Significant decreases in attack frequency, severity, and duration were observed in these patients with CH who did not respond to or were intolerant of multiple preventive and/or acute treatments. These real-world findings complement evidence from clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy and safety of nVNS in CH.

Health Care Utilization and Direct Costs Among Patients Diagnosed with Cluster Headache in U.S. Health Care Claims Data.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache (CH) is a rare trigeminal cephalalgia that is associated with extremely painful unilateral headache attacks and autonomic symptoms. Attacks may be episodic or chronic and associated with substantial suffering due to excruciating pain and limited treatment options. Frequent cluster headaches cause substantial burden for patients, resulting in reduced productivity caused by disability, as well as direct costs in some European countries. Less is known, however, about direct costs of recurring health care resource utilization (HCRU) in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To characterize HCRU and direct costs associated with CH in the United States from a third-party payer perspective. METHODS: This retrospective observational study analyzed claims data from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Research Databases from 2009-2014. Two cohorts were compared: CH (> 2 diagnostic CH claims) and controls (nonheadache patients). All patients were enrolled continuously for ± 12 months from date of first CH claim. HCRU and direct costs were examined during 12 months post-index as all-cause and CH-specific. Cost and HCRU differences were compared using propensity score-adjusted bin bootstrapping. RESULTS: CH and control cohorts comprised 6,562 and 143,761 patients (aged ≥ 18 years), respectively. Post-index, 36.9% of CH patients versus 16.2% of controls were admitted to the emergency department (ED), and 14.8% versus 6.1% were hospitalized for any reason, respectively (each P < 0.001). CH patients had a 2- to 3-fold significantly greater number of all-cause mean claims for outpatient visits (26.5 vs. 12.4 visits), hospital visits (0.2 vs. 0.1 visits), and ED visits (1.0 vs. 0.3 visits) versus controls (all P < 0.001). The mean number of all-cause visits with reported radiology and laboratory claims was 1.5- to 2.0-fold greater in CH patients versus controls (each P < 0.001). Mean total direct costs for all-cause claims were more than 2-fold greater in post-index ($16,530) for CH patients versus controls ($7,197, P < 0.0001). Similarly, mean direct all-cause costs attributable to outpatient, inpatient, and pharmacy claims were significantly (2-fold) greater; radiology and ED claims were 3- to 4-fold greater among CH patients versus controls (all P < 0.001). However, CH was cited infrequently as a reason for HCRU, indicating that comorbid conditions may substantially increase HCRU in CH patients. The most common reasons for ED admission in CH patients were gastric ulcer with hemorrhage, sub-arachnoid hemorrhage, and headache symptoms. The most common hospital discharge diagnoses for CH patients not observed in top 10 reasons in controls included cerebral artery occlusion/unspecified with cerebral infarction, headache symptoms, syncope/collapse, and diverticulitis. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that, from a payer perspective, CH patients incur significantly higher health care costs versus controls. However, these high costs were not exclusively headache-related. Extrapolating our cost findings to estimated U.S. prevalence rates, approximate total direct cost for CH is greater than $2.8 billion/year. DISCLOSURES: Eli Lilly and Company was the sole sponsor and funder for this study and was responsible for the study design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of data, and decision to publish the findings. All authors are employees and minor stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company.

Societal burden of cluster headache in the United States: a descriptive economic analysis.

AIM: To estimate direct and indirect costs in patients with a diagnosis of cluster headache in the US. METHODS: Adult patients (18-64 years of age) enrolled in the Marketscan Commercial and Medicare Databases with ≥2 non-diagnostic outpatient (≥30 days apart between the two outpatient claims) or ≥1 inpatient diagnoses of cluster headache (ICD-9-CM code 339.00, 339.01, or 339.02) between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014, were included in the analyses. Patients had ≥6 months of continuous enrollment with medical and pharmacy coverage before and after the index date (first cluster headache diagnosis). Three outcomes were evaluated: (1) healthcare resource utilization, (2) direct healthcare costs, and (3) indirect costs associated with work days lost due to absenteeism and short-term disability. Direct costs included costs of all-cause and cluster headache-related outpatient, inpatient hospitalization, surgery, and pharmacy claims. Indirect costs were based on an average daily wage, which was estimated from the 2014 US Bureau of Labor Statistics and inflated to 2015 dollars. RESULTS: There were 9,328 patients with cluster headache claims included in the analysis. Cluster headache-related total direct costs (mean [standard deviation]) were $3,132 [$13,396] per patient per year (PPPY), accounting for 17.8% of the all-cause total direct cost. Cluster headache-related inpatient hospitalizations ($1,604) and pharmacy ($809) together ($2,413) contributed over 75% of the cluster headache-related direct healthcare cost. There were three sub-groups of patients with claims associated with indirect costs that included absenteeism, short-term disability, and absenteeism + short-term disability. Indirect costs PPPY were $4,928 [$4,860] for absenteeism, $803 [$2,621] for short-term disability, and $3,374 [$3,198] for absenteeism + disability. CONCLUSION: Patients with cluster headache have high healthcare costs that are associated with inpatient admissions and pharmacy fulfillments, and high indirect costs associated with absenteeism and short-term disability.

Prescribing Oxygen for Cluster Headache: A Guide for the Provider.

BACKGROUND: Oxygen is the standard of care for acute treatment of cluster headache. CMS, the US Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, has made the indefensible decision to not cover oxygen for cluster headache for patients with Medicaid and Medicare insurance, despite the evidence and professional guidelines. Commercial insurance generally covers oxygen for cluster headache. OBJECTIVE: This is a "how-to" guide for successfully prescribing oxygen in the US. SUMMARY: Prescription information is provided that can be incorporated as dot phrases, smart sets, or other standard templates for prescribing oxygen for cluster patients. In many states, oxygen is affordable and can be prescribed for Medicaid and Medicare patients who wish to pay cash. Welding or nonmedical grade industrial oxygen is almost the same cost as medical oxygen. However, it is less pure, lacks the same inspection of tanks, and is delivered without regulators to provide appropriate flow rates. Patients who pay cash should be strongly encouraged to buy medical oxygen.

Economics of Inhaled Oxygen Use as an Acute Therapy for Cluster Headache in the United States of America.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache (CH) is a primary headache disorder associated with low levels of diagnosis and high unmet medical need. The pain attacks, associated anxiety, and fear in anticipation of the attacks are extremely debilitating to a patient with CH. For acute therapy, treatment guidelines recommend inhalation of high flow oxygen during the period of an attack. However, the use of oxygen for treatment of CH remains largely underutilized. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study, which covered each of the US states, were to map the current market landscape of medical grade oxygen for use in CH and to develop a cost simulator based on a patient's needs and geography. METHODS: Desk research was undertaken to obtain price lists and product catalogs from wholesale and retail suppliers of medical grade oxygen across all US states. Base case scenarios for chronic and episodic forms of CH were assumed. A cost simulator was used to calculate the cost of oxygen use using inputs including the state in USA, tank size and price, exacerbations per year, duration of exacerbation, attacks per day, flow rate and duration of flow. Information was also collected to determine if healthcare insurers covered the costs of home oxygen use for CH. RESULTS: Out of the 42 US states where pricing information of medical grade oxygen was available from suppliers, in 38 states the annual cost of high-flow oxygen for a patient with episodic CH was estimated to be <$1000. In 39 states, the annual cost of high-flow oxygen for a patient with chronic CH was estimated to be <$5000. Most of the home oxygen suppliers were familiar with CH and stocked the special non-rebreather masks and regulators necessary for this condition. It was found that many of the private commercial healthcare insurance providers reimbursed the cost of oxygen use for CH. However, the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) maintains there is insufficient evidence for coverage and continues to deny coverage for US Medicare and Medicaid patients. CONCLUSIONS: Results from our study showed that the current costs for oxygen use as an acute therapy in CH are not prohibitively expensive for patients and healthcare insurance providers. Apart from CMS, many insurers do reimburse the cost of oxygen use for CH. Our study suggests that further research is needed to determine if a lack of physician awareness about treatments and ways to prescribe are barriers for patients to access the high-flow oxygen treatment.

The comorbidity burden of patients with cluster headache: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is limited regarding the comorbidity burden of patients with cluster headache (CH). We aimed to characterize comorbid conditions in a cohort of CH patients diagnosed by headache experts, using electronic health record information from the Partners Research Patient Data Registry (RPDR). METHODS: We identified and reviewed the charts of unique patients diagnosed by headache specialists over an 11-year period, and a set of matched controls. Patients were categorized as having Definite, Unconfirmed or no CH. We calculated the prevalence of and tested for statistically significant differences of selected comorbid conditions in these populations. RESULTS: An RPDR query identified 170 patients with a free text or ICD diagnosis of cluster headache. 15 records belonging to Partners employees were excluded. 75 patients met diagnostic criteria for CH (Definite CH). 22 had headaches with some features of CH but the diagnosis was uncertain (Unconfirmed CH). In 58 the diagnosis was determined to be inaccurate due to data entry errors. Patients with Definite CH had an average age of 43.4 years; 80% were male. The average time from CH onset to diagnosis was 12.7 years (range 1-51). The average number of yearly emergency department and outpatient visits for the group of Definite CH patients was 4.5 and 25.4, respectively, compared with 1.1 and 6.9 in controls. Of the 55 examined conditions, four were statistically significantly less common in patients with definite CH compared with controls (diabetes, musculoskeletal/orthopaedic problems, "other gastrointestinal diagnoses" and skin conditions) and four were statistically significantly more common (smoking, depression, dental disorders and deviated septum). CONCLUSIONS: In this large population-based study, we identified a surprisingly small number of patients who met strict diagnostic criteria for CH. In these patients, however, we identified a distinct pattern of selected comorbidities. The pattern is somewhat but not entirely consistent with that of the "classic" CH patient depicted in the medical literature. CH patients are frequently diagnosed with sinus or dental problems. Many experience substantial delay in receiving a diagnosis. These things may in part explain the high frequency of medical visits in this population. It is difficult to distinguish conditions that are genuinely comorbid with CH from those that reflect misdiagnoses or medical scrutiny of patients in frequent contact with the healthcare system.

Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Patterns Among Patients Diagnosed With Cluster Headache in U.S. Healthcare Claims Data.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns of patients with cluster headache (CH). BACKGROUND: CH is an uncommon trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia with limited evidence-based treatment options. Patients suffer from extremely painful unilateral headache attacks and autonomic symptoms with episodic and chronic cycles. DESIGN/METHODS: This retrospective analysis used insurance claims from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® research databases from 2009 to 2014. Two cohorts were compared: CH patients (with ≥2 CH claims) were propensity score matched with 4 non-headache controls, all with continuous enrollment for 12 months before and after the date of first CH claim or matched period among controls. RESULTS: CH patients (N = 7589) were mainly male (57.4%) and 35-64 years old (73.2%), with significantly more claims for comorbid conditions vs controls (N = 30,341), including depressive disorders (19.8% vs 10.0%), sleep disturbances (19.7% vs 9.1%), anxiety disorders (19.2% vs 8.7%), and tobacco use disorders (12.8% vs 5.3%), with 2.5 times greater odds of suicidal ideation (all P < .0001). Odds of drug dependence were 3-fold greater among CH patients (OR = 2.8 [95% CI 2.3-3.4, P < .0001]). CH patients reported significantly greater use of prescription medications compared with controls; 25% of CH patients had >12 unique prescription drug claims. Most commonly prescribed drug classes for CH patients included: opiate agonists (41%), corticosteroids (34%), 5HT-1 agonists (32%), antidepressants (31%), NSAIDs (29%), anticonvulsants (28%), calcium antagonists (27%), and benzodiazepines (22%). Only 30.4% of CH patients received recognized CH treatments without opioids during the 12-month post-index period. These patients were less likely to visit emergency departments or need hospitalizations (26.8%) as compared to CH patients with no pharmacy claims for recognized CH treatments or opioids (33.6%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of CH is associated with significant co-morbidity, including substance use disorders and suicidal ideation, and treatment patterns indicating low use of recognized CH treatments.

Cluster headache in the United States of America: demographics, clinical characteristics, triggers, suicidality, and personal burden.

OBJECTIVE: To present results from the United States (US) Cluster Headache Survey including data on cluster headache demographics, clinical characteristics, suicidality, diagnostic delay, triggers, and personal burden. BACKGROUND: There are few large-scale studies looking at cluster headache patients and none from the USA. This manuscript will present data from The US Cluster Headache Survey, the largest survey ever completed of cluster headache patients living in the USA. METHODS: The total survey was composed of 187 multiple-choice questions that dealt with issues related to cluster headache including demographics, clinical characteristics, comorbid medical conditions, family history, triggers, smoking history, and personal burden. The survey was placed on a Web site from October through December 2008. RESULTS: A total of 1134 individuals completed the survey (816 male, 318 female). Some key highlights from the survey include the following: (1) diagnostic delay: there remains a significant diagnostic delay for cluster headache patients on average 5+ years with only 21% receiving a correct diagnosis at time of initial presentation. (2) Suicidality: suicidal ideations are substantial, occurring in 55%. (3) Eye color: the predominant eye color in cluster headache patients is brown and blue, not hazel as suggested in previous descriptions. (4) Laterality: cluster headache has a right-sided predominance. (5) Attack profile: in US cluster headache sufferers, most attacks occur between early evening and early morning hours with peak time of headache onset between midnight and 3 am; the circadian periodicity for cluster headache is present but is not as predominant in the population as previously thought. (6) Triggers: beer is the most common type of alcohol trigger in US cluster headache patients; noted migraine triggers such as weather changes and smells are also very common cluster headache triggers. (7) Medical comorbidities: peptic ulcer disease does not have a high prevalence in US cluster headache patients as suggested by previous literature; cluster headache is associated with a low prevalence of cardiac disease as well as cerebrovascular disease even though the majority of patients are chronic heavy smokers. In US cluster headache sufferers, there appears to be comorbidity with restless leg syndrome, and this has not been demonstrated in non-US cluster headache populations. (8) Personal burden: cluster headache is disabling to the individual as almost 20% of cluster headache patients have lost a job secondary to cluster headache, while another 8% are out of work or on disability secondary to their headaches. CONCLUSION: Some findings from the US Cluster Headache Survey expound on what is currently known about cluster headache, while some of the results contradict what has been previously written, while other information is completely new about this fascinating headache disorder.

Impairment in episodic and chronic cluster headache.

Despite being an excruciating headache, little is known about the burden of cluster headache (CH) regarding its various subtypes. In a multicentre, prospective study, patients with chronic CH (n = 27), with episodic CH in the active (n = 26) and outside the active period (n = 22), migraine patients (n = 24) and healthy controls (n = 31) were included. Epidemiological data, the German version of the Headache Disability Inventory (HDI) and a screening for psychiatric complaints were applied. About 25% of chronic CH patients in our study received invalidity allowance due to CH. HDI scores (total and subscales emotion and function) indicated a severe headache-specific disability (one-way ANOVA: P < 0.01). Patients with chronic and active episodic CH were significantly more affected than patients with inactive CH and migraine. Healthy volunteers were significantly less affected than all headache patients. Symptoms suggestive of psychiatric co-morbidity were found predominantly in chronic CH: depressive symptoms (56%), signs of agoraphobia (33%) and suicidal tendencies (25%) were frequently reported. Patients with chronic and active episodic CH were severely impaired in non-economic and economic domains such as disability, working life and psychiatric complaints. Remarkably, psychiatric co-morbidity was highest in chronic CH. Thus, especially chronic CH warrants special medical and further supportive care.

Inhaled oxygen and cluster headache sufferers in the United States: use, efficacy and economics: results from the United States Cluster Headache Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To present results from the United States Cluster Headache Survey concerning the use of inhaled oxygen as acute treatment for cluster headache (CH). BACKGROUND: Several small clinic and community-based investigations have indicated that more than 50% of CH patients have never used oxygen for the treatment of their headaches. This statistic is alarming and the reasons why they have not tried oxygen have not been determined. METHODS: The United States Cluster Headache Survey is the largest study ever completed looking at CH sufferers living in the United States. The total survey consisted of 187 multiple choice questions, 84 questions dealt with oxygen use, efficacy and economics. The survey was placed on a website from October to December 2008. RESULTS: A total of 1134 individuals completed the survey (816 male, 318 female). Among them 868 patients had episodic CH while 266 had chronic CH. Ninety-three percent of survey responders were aware of oxygen as a CH therapy; however, 34% had never tried oxygen. Forty-four percent of patients had to suggest oxygen to their physicians to get prescribed. Twelve percent of physicians refused to prescribe oxygen. Fifty percent using oxygen never received training on proper use. Forty-five percent had to find their own source for oxygen. On prescriptions only 45% specified flow rate, 50% stated CH as diagnosis and 28% indicated mask type. Seventy percent of the surveyed population felt oxygen was effective but only 25% was presently using oxygen. Potential reasons for this finding include: oxygen is slow to onset; prescribed oxygen flow rates are too low for efficacy and most CH patients need to raise flow rates during attacks to achieve response. The efficacy of oxygen does not vary by the age of the patient, gender, the number of CH attacks per day, and smoking history. Episodic CH responds better and faster to inhaled oxygen than chronic CH. Oxygen plus a triptan may be more efficacious and faster at aborting a CH than a triptan alone. Sixteen percent of CH patients state that oxygen is unaffordable while 12% are getting welder grade oxygen because of costs of medical grade oxygen, and this form of oxygen could be potentially dangerous to the individual user. CONCLUSIONS: Oxygen is underutilized by CH patients living in the United States. Current recommended oxygen treatment regime is not meeting the needs of many CH patients. Prescribed oxygen flow rates are too low for efficacy. Oxygen can be expensive and very difficult to obtain. Physicians need to be better educated on the use of inhaled oxygen for CH.

Use of complementary and alternative medicine by patients with cluster headache: results of a multi-centre headache clinic survey.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the rates, pattern, satisfaction with, and presence of predictors of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in a clinical population of patients with cluster headache (CH). DESIGN AND SETTING: One hundred CH patients attending one of three headache clinics were asked to undergo a physician-administered structured interview designed to gather information on CAM use. RESULTS: Past use of CAM therapies was reported by 29% of the patients surveyed, with 10% having used CAM in the previous year. Only 8% of the therapies used were perceived as effective, while a partial effectiveness was reported in 28% of CAM treatments. The most common source of recommendation of CAM was a friend or relative (54%). Approximately 62% of CAM users had not informed their medical doctors of their CAM use. The most common reason for deciding to try a CAM therapy was that it offered a "potential improvement of headache" (44.8%). Univariate analysis showed that CAM users had a higher income, had a higher lifetime number of conventional medical doctor visits, had consulted more headache specialists, had a higher number of CH attacks per year, and had a significantly higher proportion of chronic CH versus episodic CH. A binary logistic regression analysis was performed and two variables remained as significant predictors of CAM use: income level (OR=5.7, CI=1.6-9.1, p=0.01), and number of attacks per year (OR=3.08, CI=1.64-6.7, p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that CH patients, in their need of and quest for care, seek and explore both conventional and CAM approaches, even though only a very small minority finds them very satisfactory.

Burden of cluster headache.

The aim was to analyse the socioeconomic burden of cluster headache in patients from a tertiary headache centre. One hundred consecutive patients from the Danish Headache Centre were invited to an interview about the socioeconomic impact of cluster headache. Work absence and use of medical services were compared with a Danish population-based survey. Eighty-five patients participated; 78% reported restrictions in daily living and 13% also outside of cluster periods; 25% reported a major decrease in their ability to participate in social activities, family life and housework. The disease caused lifestyle changes for 96%, most frequently in sleeping habits and avoidance of alcohol. The absence rate among patients was 30%, which was significantly higher than 12% among the general population (P < 0.001). Use of health services due to headache was also higher among the patients (P < 0.001). Cluster headache, although periodic in most cases, has considerable impact on social functions, quality of life and use of healthcare.