Equity and Disparities in Diagnosis, Management, and Research of Post-Traumatic Headache.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There are notable health disparities and inequities in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and concussion by race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, and geography. This review will evaluate these disparities and inequities and assess the social determinants of health that drive outcomes for post-traumatic headache. Interventions for achieving this are also discussed. RECENT FINDINGS: Significant disparities and inequities exist in TBI and concussion among people of different races, socioeconomic status, and geographic locations. Migraine is a common symptom post-concussion, for which disparities and social determinants of health are also discussed. Overall, multi-level interventions to reduce these disparities and inequities are reviewed for post-traumatic headache but require further investigation. Interventions are needed to reduce disparities and inequities including public health initiatives, improvements in clinical care, diversity/inclusion training, and research efforts. As literature expands, we can form guidance to identify solutions for eliminating disparities in care of diverse populations.

Assessment of the efficacy of tuina on treating cervicogenic headache: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cervicogenic headache is a secondary headache characterized by unilateral headache, symptoms, and signs of neck involvement. It is often worsened by neck movement, sustained awkward head position, or external pressure over the upper cervical or occipital region on the symptomatic side. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of massage therapy for the treatment of cervicogenic headache. METHODS: We searched the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Wanfang Database, China Doctoral Dissertations Full-Text Database, China Master's Theses Full-Text Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and Embase. We will select all eligible studies published on or before April 1, 2021. We will use Review Manager 5.4, provided by the Cochrane Collaborative Network for statistical analysis. We then assessed the quality and risk of the included studies and observed the outcome measures. RESULTS: This meta-analysis further confirmed the benefits of tuina in the treatment of cervicogenic headache. CONCLUSION: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to explore the effect of tuina on patients with cervicogenic headache and to provide more options for clinicians and patients to treat cervicogenic headache. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of tuina in the treatment of cervicogenic headache. Since all the data included were published, the systematic review did not require ethical approval. REGISTRATION NUMBER: INPLASY202150053.

Post-traumatic headache: the use of the sport concussion assessment tool (SCAT-3) as a predictor of post-concussion recovery.

BACKGROUND: Given that post-traumatic headache is one of the most prevalent and long-lasting post-concussion sequelae, causes significant morbidity, and might be associated with slower neurocognitive recovery, we sought to evaluate the use of concussion screening scores in a concussion clinic population to assess for post-traumatic headache. METHODS: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of 254 concussion patients from the New York University (NYU) Concussion Registry. Data on the headache characteristics, concussion mechanism, concussion screening scores were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: 72% of the patients had post-traumatic headache. About half (56.3%) were women. The mean age was 35 (SD 16.2). 90 (35%) patients suffered from sport-related concussions (SRC). Daily post-traumatic headache patients had higher Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT)-3 symptom severity scores than the non-daily post-traumatic headache and the headache-free patients (50.2 [SD 28.2] vs. 33.1 [SD 27.5] vs. 21.6 SD23], p < 0.001). Patients with SRC had lower headache intensity (4.47 [SD 2.5] vs. 6.24 [SD 2.28], p < 0.001) and SCAT symptom severity scores (33.9 [SD 27.4] vs. 51.4 [SD 27.7], p < 0.001) than the other patients, but there were no differences in post-traumatic headache prevalence, frequency, and Standardized Assessment of Concussion (SAC) scores. CONCLUSION: The presence and frequency of post-traumatic headache are associated with the SCAT-3 symptom severity score, which is the most important predictor for post-concussion recovery. The SCAT-3 symptom severity score might be a useful tool to help characterize patients' post-traumatic headache.

Utility of a brief assessment tool developed from the Dizziness Handicap Inventory to screen for Cervicogenic dizziness: A case control study.

BACKGROUND: Cervicogenic dizziness (CGD) is hard to diagnose as there is no objective test. OBJECTIVE: Can a brief assessment tool be derived from the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) to assist in screening for CGD? DESIGN: Case-control study with split-sample analysis. METHOD: 86 people with CGD and 86 people with general dizziness completed the DHI as part of the assessment of their dizziness. Descriptive statistics were used to assess how frequently each question on the DHI was answered 'yes' or 'sometimes' by participants with CGD and by participants with general dizziness. The questions that best discriminated between GCD and general dizziness were compiled into a brief assessment tool for CGD. Data from 80 participants (40 from each group) were used to generate a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to establish a cut-off score for that brief assessment tool. Then, data from the remaining 92 participants were used to try to validate the diagnostic ability of the brief assessment tool using that cut-off score. RESULTS: Questions 1, 9 and 11 were the most discriminatory and were combined to form the brief assessment tool. The ROC curve indicated an optimal threshold of 9. The diagnostic ability of the brief assessment tool among the remaining 46 participants from each group was: sensitivity 77% (95% CI: 67 to 84), specificity 66% (56-75), positive likelihood ratio 2.28 (1.66-3.13), and negative likelihood ratio 0.35 (0.23-0.53). CONCLUSION: A brief assessment tool of three questions appears to be helpful in screening for CGD.

Cervicogenic headache: an assessment of the evidence on clinical diagnosis, invasive tests, and treatment.

Cervicogenic headache is characterised by pain referred to the head from the cervical spine. Although the International Headache Society recognises this type of headache as a distinct disorder, some clinicians remain sceptical. Laboratory and clinical studies have shown that pain from upper cervical joints and muscles can be referred to the head. Clinical diagnostic criteria have not proved valid, but a cervical source of pain can be established by use of fluoroscopically guided, controlled, diagnostic nerve blocks. In this Review, we outline the basic science and clinical evidence for cervicogenic headache and indicate how opposing approaches to its definition and diagnosis affect the evidence for its clinical management. We provide recommendations that enable a pragmatic approach to the diagnosis and management of probable cervicogenic headache, as well as a rigorous approach to the diagnosis and management of definite cervical headache.