Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Neurol Sci ; 43(11): 6565-6567, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35792970

ABSTRACT

Nutraceuticals might be defined as food or dietary supplements that provide medicinal or health benefits. Current preventive treatment of migraine includes nutraceuticals as well as conventional drugs. These non-pharmacological therapies, such as magnesium, coenzyme Q10, feverfew, riboflavin, and phycocyanins, are particularly useful in certain categories of patients (adolescents, pregnant or breastfeeding women, the elderly with complex drug therapy, the patient with contraindication to the usual pharmacological therapies) when a conventional drug therapy cannot be prescribed or may be not well tolerated. The evidence currently available confirms a modest efficacy but a very good safety and tolerability profile.


Subject(s)
Migraine Disorders , Adolescent , Humans , Female , Aged , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Migraine Disorders/prevention & control , Dietary Supplements/adverse effects , Tanacetum parthenium , Magnesium , Riboflavin/therapeutic use
2.
Front Neurol ; 11: 570335, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33519664

ABSTRACT

Introduction: A large corpus of evidence has reported encouraging results for acupuncture as a prophylaxis therapy for migraine. However, trials that investigated the efficacy of acupuncture in comparison with pharmacological treatment in episodic migraine showed conflicting results. The study aimed to evaluate if acupuncture is as effective as evidence-based pharmacological drugs in episodic migraine prophylaxis. Methods: This is a randomized controlled clinical study. Patients suffering from migraine without preventive treatment in the past 3 months were recruited. After the run-in period, episodic migraineurs were assigned randomly to two groups: the acupuncture group (A) was treated with 12 sessions of acupuncture, and the pharmacological group (B) was treated with the most appropriate medication for each patient. Headache frequency was compared at baseline and at the end of treatment. Both groups were evaluated 3 and 6 months after treatment. Results: A total of 148 patients (24 males and 124 females) were enrolled in the study. Out of these, 69 were randomized to A and 66 to B. At baseline, no significant differences were found between the two groups. Of the patients, 15.5% (21/135) interrupted the treatment, especially those randomized to B. After 4 months, migraine frequency decreased from 8.58 ± 3.21 to 6.43 ± 3.45 in A and from 8.29 ± 2.72 to 6.27 ± 4.01 in B. Headache frequency decreased significantly after treatment without differences between the two groups (time-effect: p < 0.001; group effect: p = 0.332; interaction time-group effects: p = 0.556). Approximately 34% of patients showed a reduction of headache days by at least 50% after the treatment. The improvements observed at the end of treatment persisted in 57.3% (59/103) after 3 months and 38.8% (40/103) after 6 months, especially in patients randomized to A. Conclusions: Our trial is the first one comparing acupuncture with the more appropriate pharmacological treatment for migraine prophylaxis. Data suggested that acupuncture could be adopted as migraine prophylaxis and seem to be slightly superior to pharmacological treatment in compliance and rate of adverse events.

3.
Cephalalgia ; 30(12): 1502-8, 2010 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20974612

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Our study objective was to investigate the mode of occurrence of traumatic head injury in episodic cluster headache and migraine patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on 400 male patients, 200 with cluster headache (cases) and 200 with migraine (controls). We investigated the frequency and mode of occurrence of traumatic head injury and some lifestyle habits. RESULTS: The number of traumatic head injuries was significantly higher in cases than in controls (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5-2.8). Cases were more often responsible for the head traumas (adjusted OR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.3-4.9) and reported a significantly higher proportion of injuries during scuffles or brawls (OR = 6.5; 95% CI = 2.9-14.8). Compared with other cluster headache patients, cases responsible for traumatic head injuries were more frequently heavy alcohol (p = .000), heavy tobacco (p = .03) and heavy coffee consumers (p = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Cluster headache patients (a) had traumatic head injuries more frequently than migraineurs; and (b) were more often responsible for them, perhaps due to particular behaviours related to their lifestyles.


Subject(s)
Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Head Injuries, Closed/epidemiology , Life Style , Migraine Disorders/epidemiology , Personality , Adult , Alcohol Drinking/epidemiology , Behavior , Case-Control Studies , Cluster Headache/psychology , Coffee , Head Injuries, Closed/psychology , Humans , Male , Migraine Disorders/psychology , Retrospective Studies , Smoking/epidemiology
4.
Complement Ther Med ; 16(4): 220-7, 2008 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18638713

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Cluster Headache/therapy , Complementary Therapies/statistics & numerical data , Patient Satisfaction , Adult , Cluster Headache/classification , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Complementary Therapies/economics , Complementary Therapies/psychology , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Severity of Illness Index , Social Class , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL