Clinical Effectiveness of Craniosacral Therapy in Patients with Headache Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the effectiveness of craniosacral therapy in improving pain and disability among patients with headache disorders. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Osteopathic Medicine Digital Library databases were searched in March 2023. REVIEW METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched the databases and extracted data from randomized controlled trials comparing craniosacral therapy with control or sham interventions. The same reviewers assessed the methodological quality and the risk of bias using the PEDro scale and the Cochrane Collaboration tool, respectively. Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations was used to rate the certainty of the evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted using random effects models using RevMan 5.4 software. RESULTS: The searches retrieved 735 studies, and four studies were finally included. The craniosacral therapy provided statistically significant but clinically unimportant change on pain intensity (Mean difference = -1.10; 95% CI: -1.85, -0.35; I2: 44%), and no change on disability or headache effect (Standardized Mean Difference = -0.34; 95% CI -0.70, 0.01; I2: 26%). The certainty of the evidence was downgraded to very low. CONCLUSION: Very low certainty of evidence suggests that craniosacral therapy produces clinically unimportant effects on pain intensity, whereas no significant effects were observed in disability or headache effect.

The Role of Manual Therapies in the Treatment of Headache Disorders.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A comprehensive headache treatment plan typically requires both medication and non-medication treatment strategies. Manual therapies offer another therapeutic approach to headache treatment. This article reviews the evidence for manual therapies in the treatment of headache disorders. RECENT FINDINGS: Current evidence shows potential benefit from myofascial trigger point injections, myofascial release, and massage for the treatment of various headache types. There is also evidence for strain counterstrain technique, ischemic compression, and spinal manipulative therapies for cervicogenic headache. Although larger randomized clinical trials are necessary for many of these modalities, recent findings show that manual therapies could be an important tool for the treatment of some headache disorders.

Chronic headache patients' health behavior and health service use 12 months after interdisciplinary treatment - what do they keep in their daily routines?

BACKGROUND: We do not yet know whether or the extent to which multimodal therapy changes the health behaviors and health service use of chronic headache patients in the long term. Associations are expected between pain symptoms and pain management abilities for patients who are categorized as successfully treated and those who remain unchanged. METHODS: Routine longitudinal data of an enrolment period of five years from 101 headache patients treated with a two-week, full-day, semi-inpatient multimodal pain therapy at the Interdisciplinary Pain Center of the University Clinic Erlangen were available when therapy began and 12 months after treatment. To investigate long-term changes in health behavior and health service use as well as their associations with the outcome "reduction in pain days," we used descriptive and inferential statistics (i.e., binary logistic regression). RESULTS: Patients who underwent interdisciplinary treatment showed statistically significant changes in their health behavior in five areas. Twelve months after treatment, we found a significantly higher frequency of engagement in athletic sports (p < .001) as well as increases in the use of relaxation techniques (p < .001), TENS devices for relaxation purposes (p = .008), psychological coping strategies (p < .001), and mindfulness-based techniques for dealing with pain (p < .001). 52.8% of the sample reported a reduction in the number of pain days 12 months after treatment. Binary logistic regression (χ2 (12) = 21.419; p = .045; R2 = .255) revealed that a reduction in pain days 12 months after treatment was positively associated with regular physical activity in the form of muscle strengthening and stretching (athletic sports) (p = .012). CONCLUSION: Chronic headache patients acquired long-term skills from an interdisciplinary treatment concerning the use of relaxation techniques, the use of psychological coping strategies, and physical activity in the form of athletic exercise. Of those, regular athletic exercise was positively associated with a smaller number of pain days in the long term. Thus, a physical activity module should be an element of interdisciplinary treatment for chronic headache patients.

Complementary and integrative medicine perspectives among veteran patients and VHA healthcare providers for the treatment of headache disorders: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate veteran patient and provider perceptions and preferences on complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) for headache management. BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has spearheaded a Whole Health system of care focusing on CIM-based care for veteran patients. Less is known about patients' and providers' CIM perceptions and preferences for chronic headache management. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 veteran patients diagnosed with headache and 43 clinical providers, across 12 VHA Headache Centers of Excellence (HCoE), from January 2019 to March 2020. We conducted thematic and case comparative analyses. RESULTS: Veteran patients and VHA clinical providers viewed CIM favorably for the treatment of chronic headache. Specific barriers to CIM approaches included: (1) A lack of personnel specialized in specific CIM approaches for timely access, and (2) variation in patient perceptions and responses to CIM treatment efficacy for headache management. CONCLUSION: Veteran patients and VHA clinical providers in this study viewed CIM favorably as a safe addition to mainstream headache treatments. Advantages to CIM include favorable adverse effect profiles and patient autonomy over the treatment. By adding more CIM providers and resources throughout the VHA, CIM modalities may be recommended more routinely in the management of veterans with headache.

[Assessing occipital nerve stimulation efficacy for chronic refractory headaches]. / Efficacité de la stimulation du nerf occipital pour les céphalées chroniques réfractaires - Une étude prospective lausannoise.

We prospectively followed a cohort of 26 subjects for an average period of 41 months who benefited from occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) in the context of chronic refractory headaches. In 17 patients treated, the frequency of headache decreased, and quality of life scores improved significantly. Among these patients, the "very good" response rate was 34 %. In this cohort, treatment-related adverse events are relatively common (42 %) but not severe. While it is difficult to anticipate the risk factors for non-response to treatment, we estimate that the risk of failure may not be related to the duration of the disease, but rather to the number of different preventives attempted prior to ONS.

Nous avons suivi prospectivement durant une période d'en moyenne 41 mois une cohorte de 26 patients romands qui ont bénéficié d'une stimulation du nerf occipital (ONS) dans le cadre de céphalées chroniques réfractaires. Chez 17 patients non explantés, la fréquence des céphalées a diminué et les scores de qualité de vie se sont améliorés de façon significative. Parmi ces patients, le taux de « très bonne ¼ réponse est de 34 %. On constate dans cette cohorte que les effets indésirables liés au traitement sont relativement courants (42 %) mais non sévères. Même s'il est difficile d'anticiper les facteurs de risque de non-réponse au traitement, nous estimons que la probabilité d'échec ne serait pas corrélée à la durée de la maladie mais plutôt au nombre de traitements préventifs tentés avant l'ONS.

Updated management of occipital nerve stimulator lead migration: case report of a technical challenge.

Electrode migration is a challenge, even with adequate anchoring techniques, due to the high mechanical stress on components of occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) for headache disorders. When a lead displacement of an ONS implant is diagnosed, there are currently different approaches described for its management. Nevertheless current neuromodulation devices are designed like a continuum of components without any intermediate connector, and if a lead displacement is diagnosed, the solution is the complete removal of the electrode from its placement, and its repositioning through an ex-novo procedure. The described technique can allow ONS leads to be revised while minimizing the need to reopen incisions over the IPG, thus improving patients' intraoperative and postoperative discomfort, shortening surgical time and medical costs, reasonably reducing the incidence of infective postoperative complications.

Long-Term Experience with Occipital and Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation for the Various Headache Disorders-A Retrospective Institutional Case Series of 96 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: We have provided long-term data on clinically meaningful pain alleviation for drug-refractory headache disorders using occipital (ONS) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SONS). METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 96 patients with migraine, cervicogenic headache, cluster headache, neuropathic pain of the scalp, tension-type headache, and new daily persistent headache who had undergone ONS (61.5%), SONS (11.5%), or combined ONS plus SONS (27.1%) trial implantation and definitive implantation from 2007 to 2017. Changes in pain perception over time were monitored using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 60.4% women and 39.6% men, with a mean age of 46.9 ± 11.5 years and pain duration of 14 ± 14.1 years. Of the 96 patients, 65 (67.7%) were treatment responders to a trial (≥30% amelioration in the average or maximum VAS score for pain and/or number of headache days) that had lasted 22.5 ± 8.8 days. The reduction in their average VAS score for pain was to 37% ± 24.4% of baseline compared with 99.1% ± 24.1% of baseline for those without a response (P < 0.01). Of the 56 patients who had undergone implantation and had long-term follow-up data available for ≤10 years, 32 (57.1%) reported a ≥50% reduction in their average VAS score for pain. Four patients (6.5%) had requested hardware explantation. Stage II complications included 1 infection (1.6%) and 6 electrode dislocations (9.7%). The study limitations included the retrospective nature, lack of controls receiving placebo intervention, and randomization. CONCLUSIONS: After careful patient selection according to a positive response to a trial of ONS and/or SONS, clinically meaningful long-term benefit was achieved in 57.1% of our patients with various chronic headache conditions.

Treatment of headache disorders with acupuncture: a 6-year retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses indicate that acupuncture has similar clinical effectiveness in the prevention of headache disorders (HDs) as drug therapy, but with fewer side effects. As such, examining acupuncture's use in a pragmatic, real-world setting would be valuable. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of acupuncture and prophylactic drug treatment (PDT) on headache frequency in patients with HDs, under real-world clinical conditions. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients with HDs referred to a pain clinic, using electronic health record data. Patients continued with tertiary care (treatment of acute headache attacks and lifestyle, meditation, exercise and dietary instructions) with PDT, or received 12 sessions of acupuncture over 3 months, instead of PDT under conditions of tertiary care. The primary outcome data were the number of days with headache per month, and groups were compared at baseline and at the end of the third month of treatment. RESULTS: Data were analysed for 482 patients with HDs. The number of headache days per month decreased by 3.7 (standard deviation (SD) = 2.9) days in the acupuncture group versus 2.9 (SD = 2.3) in the PDT group (p = 0.007). The proportion of responders was 39.5% versus 16.3% (p < 0.001). The number needed to treat was 4 (95% confidence interval = 3-7). CONCLUSION: Our study has shown that patients with HDs in tertiary care who opted for treatment with acupuncture appeared to receive similar clinical benefits to those that chose PDT, suggesting these treatments may be similarly effective of the prevention of headache in a real-world clinical setting.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Occipital Neuralgia.

BACKGROUND: Chronic headaches are the second most prevalent disease and second most common cause for years lived with disability worldwide. Occipital neuralgia can cause headaches or be present in addition to other more prevalent causes of headache. If these headaches fail to respond to conservative and pharmacological therapy, physicians proceed to more invasive treatments, starting with infiltration of the greater occipital nerve with local anesthetic with or without corticosteroids, followed by nerve ablation or stimulation. Occipital nerve stimulation gained more popularity as the technology improved and more pain physicians received training on interventional procedures. METHODS: In this manuscript, we are presenting our experience with ultrasound-guided implant of occipital nerve stimulators using peripheral nerve stimulator systems. After confirming appropriateness of treatment by a successful occipital nerve block (i.e., resulting in >50% relief in patients' pain intensity), we implanted five stimulator systems in three patients (two bilateral). RESULTS: We followed these patients for an average of eight months, and the average pain reduction was ∼50%. We did not observe any adverse events during or immediately after surgery. One patient developed an adverse reaction to the adhesive of the battery transmitter, but it was not severe enough to stop her from using the stimulator. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the ease of implant and minimal side effects, implant of peripheral nerve stimulators to stimulate the occipital nerve is a promising treatment modality for patients with chronic headache who present with features of occipital neuralgia. However, wider use of this treatment modality is subject to further studies.

Efficacy of Occipital Nerve Stimulation to Treat Refractory Occipital Headaches: A Single-Institution Study of 60 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is shown to be effective in treating various forms of headache. Most studies describe the treatment of occipital neuralgia (ON), but in many patients, the clinical description could also correspond to cervicogenic headache (CGH) or occipital migraine (OM). These different entities (ON, CGH, and OM) may be grouped together under the term occipital headaches. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of ONS to treat occipital headaches in a large series of patients with a long-term follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of data on 60 patients with intractable occipital headaches treated with occipital nerve stimulation (ONS), who were referred to our center between October 2008 and October 2014. Details of pain evaluation, location, duration, cause and previous treatment were analyzed. Evaluations included the visual analog scale (VAS), the number of headache days per month (NHD), and the Medication Quantification Scale (MQS). Trials with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS-ONS) were performed and served as a guide for surgery indication (see Patients and Method section). RESULTS: After one year of ONS, mean VAS had decreased from 8.4/10 to 2.8/10 (72.2% reduction [p < 0.001]), and 76% of patients had at least a 50% decrease in mean VAS score. The mean MQS score decreased from 18 to 8.8, corresponding to a reduction of pain medication by an average of 50%. Adverse events concerned 12 patients (20%). Six patients presented with electrode displacement or fracture (10%) and six patients presented with cases of infection (10%) associated with the pulse generator. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this large series confirm that ONS is an effective treatment option for patients with intractable occipital headaches, but the frequency of complications remains quite high and must be taken into account in the surgical decision.

Fear, Avoidance, and Disability in Headache Disorders.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to summarize the role of avoidance behavior in headache-related disability and overview relevant clinical implications. RECENT FINDINGS: Avoidance occupies a central role in contemporary psychological perspectives on headache disorders and other chronic pain conditions. Several cognitive constructs of relevance to headache are influenced and maintained by avoidance behavior. A growing body of literature attests to the notion that avoidance of headache triggers, of stimuli that exacerbate headache, and of broader life domains can negatively affect headache progression, disability/quality of life, and comorbid psychiatric symptoms. Interventions targeting avoidance behavior, such as therapeutic exposure to headache triggers, mindfulness, and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), hold promise for headache disorders but need to be tested in larger trials. Researchers and clinicians are encouraged to attend to functional impairment as a critically important treatment outcome. Comprehensive understanding of headache disorders necessitates attention not merely to diagnostic symptoms and their reduction, but to patterns of avoidance behavior that inadvertently exacerbate headache and contribute to functional impairment.

Usual care and a self-management support programme versus usual care and a relaxation programme for people living with chronic headache disorders: a randomised controlled trial protocol (CHESS).

INTRODUCTION: Chronic headaches are poorly diagnosed and managed and can be exacerbated by medication overuse. There is insufficient evidence on the non-pharmacological approaches to helping people living with chronic headaches. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Chronic Headache Education and Self-management Study is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a self-management education support programme on top of usual care for patients with chronic headaches against a control of usual care and relaxation. The intervention is a 2-day group course based on education, personal reflection and a cognitive behavioural approach, plus a nurse-led one-to-one consultation and follow-up over 8 weeks. We aim to recruit 689 participants (356 to the intervention arm and 333 to the control) from primary care and self-referral in London and the Midlands. The trial is powered to show a difference of 2.0 points on the Headache Impact Test, a patient-reported outcome measure at 12 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes include health related quality of life, self-efficacy, social activation and engagement, anxiety and depression and healthcare utilisation. Outcomes are being measured at 4, 8 and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness will be expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial will provide data on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a self-management support programme for chronic headaches. The results will inform commissioning of services and clinical practice. North West - Greater Manchester East Research Ethics Committee have approved the trial. The current protocol version is 3.6 date 7 March 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN79708100.

Development and Implementation of the Integrative Toolbox for Headache Management.

Patients with migraine are interested in integrative therapies and overall wellness. They also suffer from social isolation as they try to manage a chronic medical condition. We implemented a three-part workshop structured as a group visit that teaches multiple integrative therapies from specialists and offers a chance for shared support and learning.

Safety and efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for chronic cluster headache: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic cluster headache is the most disabling form of cluster headache. The mainstay of treatment is attack prevention, but the available management options have little efficacy and are associated with substantial side-effects. In this study, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for treatment of chronic cluster headache. METHODS: We did a randomised, sham-controlled, parallel group, double-blind, safety and efficacy study at 21 headache centres in the USA. We recruited patients aged 22 years or older with chronic cluster headache, who reported a minimum of four cluster headache attacks per week that were unsuccessfully controlled by preventive treatments. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via an online adaptive randomisation procedure to either stimulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion or a sham control that delivered a cutaneous electrical stimulation. Patients and the clinical evaluator and surgeon were masked to group assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint, which was analysed with weighted generalised estimated equation logistic regression models, was the difference between groups in the proportion of stimulation-treated ipsilateral cluster attacks for which relief from pain was achieved 15 min after the start of stimulation without the use of acute drugs before that timepoint. Efficacy analyses were done in all patients who were implanted with a device and provided data for at least one treated attack during the 4-week experimental phase. Safety was assessed in all patients undergoing an implantation procedure up to the end of the open-label phase of the study, which followed the experimental phase. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02168764. FINDINGS: Between July 9, 2014, and Feb 14, 2017, 93 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 45 to the sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation group and 48 to the control group. 36 patients in the sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation group and 40 in the control group had at least one attack during the experimental phase and were included in efficacy analyses. The proportion of attacks for which pain relief was experienced at 15 min was 62·46% (95% CI 49·15-74·12) in the sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation group versus 38·87% (28·60-50·25) in the control group (odds ratio 2·62 [95% CI 1·28-5·34]; p=0·008). Nine serious adverse events were reported by the end of the open-label phase. Three of these serious adverse events were related to the implantation procedure (aspiration during intubation, nausea and vomiting, and venous injury or compromise). A fourth serious adverse event was an infection that was attributed to both the stimulation device and the implantation procedure. The other five serious adverse events were unrelated. There were no unanticipated serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation seems efficacious and is well tolerated, and potentially offers an alternative approach to the treatment of chronic cluster headache. Further research is need to clarify its place in clinical practice. FUNDING: Autonomic Technologies.

Behavioral therapies in headache: focus on mindfulness and cognitive behavioral therapy in children and adolescents.

Introduction: A wide proportion of children and adolescents with headache tends not to respond to various pharmacological treatments in use. The failure to respond to symptomatic treatment and prophylaxis is often due to the presence of a comorbid psychopathology undiagnosed or not properly treated. For these reasons and for the negative impact of headache on the quality of life of the patients and on the costs for the public health system, the adoption of an integrated multi-disciplinary perspective in the diagnosis and treatment of headache is needed.Areas covered: Several researchers have shown that behavioral treatment is effective as pharmacological treatment, not only for headache management but also to maintain a lifetime response to the headache treatment. In particular, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Mindfulness have proven to be very resolutive both in the management of pain and in the management of stressful situations that can trigger the headache in children and adolescents with headache.Expert opinion: Although studies on behavioral treatments on children and adolescents with primary headaches are still few but a combined approach seems to be very useful in improving the quality of life of these subjects, especially in those who have internalizing disorders in comorbidities.

Prevalence and factors associated with the use of primary headache diagnostic criteria by chiropractors.

Background: The diagnosis of primary headaches assists health care providers in their decision-making regarding patient treatment, co-management and further evaluation. Chiropractors are popular health care providers for those with primary headaches. The aim of this study is to examine the clinical management factors associated with chiropractors who report the use of primary headache diagnostic criteria. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was distributed between August and November 2016 to a random sample of Australian chiropractors who are members of a practice-based research network (n = 1050) who had reported 'often' providing treatment for patients with headache disorders to report on practitioner approaches to headache diagnosis, management, outcome measures and multidisciplinary collaboration. Multiple logistic regression was conducted to assess the factors that are associated with chiropractors who report using International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) primary headache diagnostic criteria. Results: With a response rate of 36% (n = 381), the majority of chiropractor's report utilising ICHD primary headache diagnostic criteria (84.6%). The factors associated with chiropractors who use ICHD primary headache diagnostic criteria resulting from the regression analysis include a belief that the use of ICHD primary headache criteria influences the management of patients with primary headaches (OR = 7.86; 95%CI: 3.15, 19.60); the use of soft tissue therapies to the neck/shoulders for tension headache management (OR = 4.33; 95%CI: 1.67, 11.19); a belief that primary headache diagnostic criteria are distinct for the diagnosis of primary headaches (OR = 3.64; 95%CI: 1.58, 8.39); the use of headache diaries (OR = 3.52; 95%CI: 1.41, 8.77); the use of ICHD criteria improves decision-making regarding primary headache patient referral/co-management (OR = 2.35; 95%CI: 1.01, 5.47); referral to investigate a headache red-flag (OR = 2.67; 95%CI: 1.02, 6.96) and not referring headache patients to assist headache prevention (OR = 0.16; 95%CI: 0.03, 0.80). Conclusion: Four out of five chiropractors managing headache are engaged in the use of primary headache diagnostic criteria. This practice is likely to influence practitioner clinical decision-making around headache patient management including their co-management with other health care providers. These findings call for a closer assessment of headache characteristics of chiropractic patient populations and for further enquiry to explore the role of chiropractors within interdisciplinary primary headache management.

Occipital nerve stimulation for non-migrainous chronic headaches: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Defined as a headache lasting at least 15 days per month, chronic headache is reported by 3% of the general population, and a substantial proportion of them are refractory to current therapies. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a treatment option, but is still considered as a last resort treatment especially because of its invasive nature and the cost associated. Some reviews reported a limited efficacy of ONS for the treatment of migraines, with a high risk of complications. However, results reporting its efficacy and safety on other headache disorders are unclear. The aim of this review is to assess the efficacy and safety of ONS in regards to non-migrainous chronic headaches. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating the use of ONS in comparison to sham stimulation or the best available treatment in patients with chronic headache. MEDLINE, CINHAL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ECRI Institute Library, WIKISTIM, the Cochrane Library databases, and clinical trial registries will be searched for eligible studies. The review will include adult patients diagnosed with chronic headache excluding migraine. Two independent reviewers will process to the screening of studies according to titles, abstracts, and then full texts. The primary outcome is the overall reduction of head pain severity. The secondary outcomes are rates of reduction in the severity of head pain, headache frequency, and duration, use of medication, impairment, quality of life, healthcare utilization, return to work, and adverse events. Extracted data will include patients' and procedure characteristics, details on comparative treatment or sham, and clinical outcomes. The risk of bias of the studies will be also independently assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will allow us to better evaluate the potential role of ONS for the treatment of patients with chronic headache that are refractory to less invasive therapies. It will help to determine the degree of safety of ONS. Moreover, it will help to design and conduct future randomized controlled trials focused on patients who may better respond to such treatment. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019121623.

Chronic Headache: a Review of Interventional Treatment Strategies in Headache Management.

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: To provide an overview of current interventional pain management techniques for primary headaches with a focus on peripheral nerve stimulation and nerve blocks. RECENT FINDINGS: Despite a plethora of treatment modalities, some forms of headaches remain intractable to conservative therapies. Interventional pain modalities have found a niche in treating headaches. Individuals resistant to common regimens, intolerant to pharmaceutical agents, or those with co-morbid factors that cause interactions with their therapies are some instances where interventions could be considered in the therapeutic algorithm. In this review, we will discuss these techniques including peripheral nerve stimulation, third occipital nerve block (TON), lesser occipital nerve block (LON), greater occipital nerve block (GON), sphenopalatine block (SPG), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and cervical epidural steroid injections (CESI). Physicians have used several interventional techniques to treat primary headaches. While many can be treated pharmacologically, those who continue to suffer from refractory or severe headaches may see tremendous benefit from a range of more invasive treatments which focus on directly inhibiting the painful nerves. While there is a plethora of evidence suggesting these methods are effective and possibly durable interventions, there is still a need for large, prospective, randomized trials to clearly demonstrate their efficacy.

Emerging evidence of occipital nerve compression in unremitting head and neck pain.

Unremitting head and neck pain (UHNP) is a commonly encountered phenomenon in Headache Medicine and may be seen in the setting of many well-defined headache types. The prevalence of UHNP is not clear, and establishing the presence of UHNP may require careful questioning at repeated patient visits. The cause of UHNP in some patients may be compression of the lesser and greater occipital nerves by the posterior cervical muscles and their fascial attachments at the occipital ridge with subsequent local perineural inflammation. The resulting pain is typically in the sub-occipital and occipital location, and, via anatomic connections between extracranial and intracranial nerves, may radiate frontally to trigeminal-innervated areas of the head. Migraine-like features of photophobia and nausea may occur with frontal radiation. Occipital allodynia is common, as is spasm of the cervical muscles. Patients with UHNP may comprise a subgroup of Chronic Migraine, as well as of Chronic Tension-Type Headache, New Daily Persistent Headache and Cervicogenic Headache. Centrally acting membrane-stabilizing agents, which are often ineffective for CM, are similarly generally ineffective for UHNP. Extracranially-directed treatments such as occipital nerve blocks, cervical trigger point injections, botulinum toxin and monoclonal antibodies directed at calcitonin gene related peptide, which act primarily in the periphery, may provide more substantial relief for UHNP; additionally, decompression of the occipital nerves from muscular and fascial compression is effective for some patients, and may result in enduring pain relief. Further study is needed to determine the prevalence of UHNP, and to understand the role of occipital nerve compression in UHNP and of occipital nerve decompression surgery in chronic head and neck pain.