Pain medication beliefs in individuals with headache.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pain medication beliefs in a community sample of individuals with headache. BACKGROUND: Previous studies of medication adherence for individuals with headache have identified a high rate of prescription nonfulfillment, frequent medication discontinuation, and widely varying levels of medication-related satisfaction. Still, there is a limited understanding of how these individuals view their medications and their relationships with health-care providers. Insight into these perceptions could prove useful in explaining medication adherence behaviors. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of a cross-sectional study, data from N = 215 adults with headache were analyzed. Participants completed the Pain Medication Attitudes Questionnaire (PMAQ), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Form Y-2, Weekly Stress Inventory Short Form, and Migraine Disability Scale. These participants also provided a list of their current pain medications. RESULTS: Using the PMAQ, participants could be characterized as having medication beliefs that were "trusting and unconcerned" (n = 83/215 [38.6%]), "skeptical and somewhat worried" (n = 99/215 [46.0%]), or "skeptical and concerned" (n = 33/215 [15.3%]). Individuals with skeptical and concerned beliefs expressed elevated concerns (z > 1.15) about side effects, scrutiny, perceived need, tolerance, withdrawal, and addiction. Individuals who were trusting and unconcerned expressed low levels (z < -0.40) of these beliefs. Increasing levels of mistrust and medication concerns were correlated with higher depression scores on the CES-D, with values ranging from r = 0.23 to r = 0.38. CONCLUSIONS: Subgroups of pain medication beliefs were identified, including two groups of patients with at least some concerns about their medical providers. Beliefs ranged from a lack of concern about using pain medications to worries about scrutiny and harm. It is unclear if poor experiences with pain medications cause these beliefs or if they prevent individuals from effectively utilizing medications. Additionally, more negative beliefs about pain medications were associated with more depressive symptoms.

Information theory and headache triggers.

OBJECTIVES: This secondary analysis evaluated the information content exhibited by various measurement strategies of commonly perceived causes, or "triggers," of headache attacks. BACKGROUND: When evaluating triggers of primary headache attacks, the variation observed in trigger candidates must be measured to compare against the covariation in headache activity. Given the numerous strategies that could be used to measure and record headache trigger variables, it is useful to consider the information contained in these measurements. METHODS: Using previously collected data from cohort and cross-sectional studies, online data sources, and simulations, the Shannon information entropy exhibited by many common triggers was evaluated by analyzing available time-series or theoretical distributions of headache triggers. The degree of information, reported in bits, was compared across trigger variables, measurement strategies, and settings. RESULTS: A wide range of information content was observed across headache triggers. Due to lack of variation, there was little information, near 0.00 bits, in triggers like red wine and air conditioning. Most headache triggers exhibited more information when measured using an ordinal scale of presence/degree (e.g., absent, mild, moderate, severe) versus a present/absent binary coding. For example, the trigger "joy" exhibited 0.03 bits when assessed using binary coding but 1.81 bits when coded using an ordinal scale. More information was observed with the use of count data (0.86 to 1.75 bits), Likert rating scales (1.50 to 2.76 bits), validated questionnaires (3.57 to 6.04 bits), weather variables (0.10 to 8.00 bits), and ambulatory monitoring devices (9.19 to 12.61 bits). CONCLUSIONS: Although commonly used, all binary-coded measurements contain ≤1.00 bit of information. Low levels of information in trigger variables make associations with headache activity more difficult to detect. Assessments that balance information-rich measurements with reasonable participant burden using efficient formats (e.g., Likert scales) are recommended to enhance the evaluation of the association with headache activity.

Learning headache triggers through experience: A laboratory study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine how individuals may learn headache trigger beliefs through sequential symbolic pairings of trigger candidates and headache attacks. BACKGROUND: Learning from experience may be a major source of information about headache triggers. Little is known about learning-based influences on the establishment of trigger beliefs. METHODS: This cross-sectional, observational study included N = 300 adults with headache who participated in a laboratory computer task. First, participants rated the chances (0%-100%) that encountering specific triggers would lead to experiencing a headache. Then, 30 sequential images with the presence or absence of a common headache trigger were presented alongside images representing the presence or absence of a headache attack. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative association strength rating (0 = no relationship to 10 = perfect relationship) between the trigger and headache using all previous trials. RESULTS: A total of N = 296 individuals completed 30 trials for each of three triggers, yielding 26,640 total trials for analysis. The median [25th, 75th] association strength ratings for each of the randomly presented headache triggers were 2.2 [0, 3] for the Color Green, 2.7 [0, 5] for Nuts, and 3.9 [0, 8] for Weather Changes. There was a strong association between the "true" cumulative association strength and corresponding ratings. A 1-point increase on the phi scale (i.e., no relationship to perfect relationship) was associated with a 1.20 (95% CI: 0.81 to 1.49, p < 0.0001) point increase in association strength rating. A participant's prior belief about the potency of a trigger affected their perceived rating of the accumulating evidence, accounting for 17% of the total variation. CONCLUSION: In this laboratory task, individuals appeared to learn trigger-headache associations through repeated exposures to accumulating symbolic evidence. Prior beliefs about the triggers appeared to influence ratings of the strength of relationships between triggers and headache attacks.

Clinical features of new daily persistent headache: A retrospective chart review of 328 cases.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical features of new daily persistent headache (NDPH) at an outpatient neurology clinic with a subspecialty interest in headache in Houston, Texas. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed by a neurologist subspecialty certified in headache medicine of all patients seen from September 1, 2011 through February 28, 2020 (8.5 years) with a provisional diagnosis of NDPH and abstracted charts meeting criteria for primary NDPH. RESULTS: A total of 328 patients met the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition criteria including 215 (65.5%) female patients. The mean age of onset was 40.3 years (range 12-87 years) with a mean age at first consultation in the study clinic of 42.6 years (range 12-87 years). The median [25th, 75th] duration of NDPH at initial consultation was 0.7 [0.3, 2.0] years, and at last visit, it was 1.9 [0.7, 4.8] years. The headaches were side-locked unilateral in 28/328 (8.5%). 12/328 cases (3.6%) with a thunderclap onset are reported. There was no obvious seasonal or other cyclical variation. The pain was usually moderate to severe and more often severe for the migraine phenotype (MP; 260/328 [79.3%] of cases) than for the tension-type phenotype (TTP). Precipitating factors were the following: stressful life events, 67/328 (20.4%); upper respiratory infection or flu-like illness, 33/328 (10.1%); and extracranial surgery, 5/328 (1.5%). Exacerbating or aggravating factors similar to migraine triggers were more often reported with the MP than with the TTP in this sample. For the MP, vertigo or dizziness was reported by 19/260 (7.3%) and a visual aura by 21/260 (8.1%) with descriptions provided. The prognostic types were the following for all patients: persisting (refractory), 305/328 (93.0%); relapsing-remitting, 9/328 (2.7%); and remitting (self-limited), 14/328 (4.3%). CONCLUSION: NDPH is typically of moderate to severe intensity often with migraine features without obvious seasonal or other cyclical variation. Most cases are refractory. 3.6% have a thunderclap onset often with a good response to treatment.

Continuous updating of individual headache forecasting models using Bayesian methods.

OBJECTIVE: To illustrate the benefits of deploying individual headache forecasting models using continuous updating with Bayesian methods. BACKGROUND: The ability to reliably forecast headache attacks within an individual over time would enhance the study of attacks and allow preemptive treatment. However, deploying a suitable forecasting model in a clinical setting will likely involve several unique challenges related to heterogeneity in the predictor weights, limited or sparse data, and the need for a quick "warm-up." The use of Bayesian methods offers solutions to each of these specific challenges. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of a cohort study of individuals with episodic migraine attacks. Individuals completed daily diaries that allowed the estimation of several forecasting models, each using different types of ancillary information incorporated into formal prior probability distributions. An in silico analysis was conducted that mimicked the deployment of these models in a clinical-like setting where the parameters of the models were continuously updated and evaluated each day using root mean square error (RMSE). RESULTS: Individuals (N = 95) were followed for 50 days and contributed 3359 days of nonmissing diary data. During the observation period, there were 1293/3359 (38.5%) days with a headache attack. Self-reported baseline headache frequency was associated with the corresponding predicted probability of future attacks, r = 0.15-0.39. At Day 25, the correlation between baseline information and predicted attack likelihood was r = 0.29 (95% CI: 0.09-0.47). Additionally, the use of prior probability distributions for model parameters improved the model fit, especially early in the deployment of the models (e.g., Day 5 RMSE 0.45 vs. 0.43). Models using informative prior probability distributions outperformed the models estimated without this information during the first 42 days of observation, although performance became more similar as more data were collected. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates the value of Bayesian methods in using additional available information to improve forecasting model performance, especially early in the deployment of a forecasting model. To obtain the full value of such models or to apply any model in clinical settings, a model with adequate discrimination and calibration will be needed.

The Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology Coronavirus Disease 2019 Registry: An Analysis of Outcomes Among Pregnant Women Delivering During the Initial Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Outbreak in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Early reports associating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with adverse pregnancy outcomes were biased by including only women with severe disease without controls. The Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology (SOAP) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) registry was created to compare peripartum outcomes and anesthetic utilization in women with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection delivering at institutions with widespread testing. METHODS: Deliveries from 14 US medical centers, from March 19 to May 31, 2020, were included. Peripartum infection was defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test within 14 days of delivery. Consecutive SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with randomly selected control patients were sampled (1:2 ratio) with controls delivering during the same day without a positive test. Outcomes were obstetric (eg, delivery mode, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and delivery <37 weeks), an adverse neonatal outcome composite measure (primary), and anesthetic utilization (eg, neuraxial labor analgesia and anesthesia). Outcomes were analyzed using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within centers. Sensitivity analyses compared symptomatic and asymptomatic patients to controls. RESULTS: One thousand four hundred fifty four peripartum women were included: 490 with SARS-CoV-2 infection (176 [35.9%] symptomatic) and 964 were controls. SARS-CoV-2 patients were slightly younger, more likely nonnulliparous, nonwhite, and Hispanic than controls. They were more likely to have diabetes, obesity, or cardiac disease and less likely to have autoimmune disease. After adjustment for confounders, individuals experiencing SARS-CoV-2 infection exhibited an increased risk for delivery <37 weeks of gestation compared to controls, 73 (14.8%) vs 98 (10.2%) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-2.09). Effect estimates for other obstetric outcomes and the neonatal composite outcome measure were not meaningfully different between SARS-CoV-2 patients versus controls. In sensitivity analyses, compared to controls, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 patients exhibited increases in cesarean delivery (aOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.09-2.27), postpartum length of stay (aOR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.18-2.60), and delivery <37 weeks of gestation (aOR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.29-3.36). These adverse outcomes were not found in asymptomatic women versus controls. SARS-CoV-2 patients (asymptomatic and symptomatic) were less likely to receive neuraxial labor analgesia (aOR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35-0.75) and more likely to receive general anesthesia for cesarean delivery (aOR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.40-9.74) due to maternal respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, multicenter US cohort study of women with and without peripartum SARS-CoV-2 infection, differences in obstetric and neonatal outcomes seem to be mostly driven by symptomatic patients. Lower utilization of neuraxial analgesia in laboring patients with asymptomatic or symptomatic infection compared to patients without infection requires further investigation.

Neuroimaging for Migraine: The American Headache Society Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated evidence-based recommendations about when to obtain neuroimaging in patients with migraine. METHODS: Articles were included in the systematic review if they studied adults 18 and over who were seeking outpatient treatment for any type of migraine and who underwent neuroimaging (MRI or CT). Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Clinical Trials were searched from 1973 to August 31, 2018. Reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the evidence in duplicate. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 2269 publications. Twenty three articles met inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. The majority of studies were retrospective cohort or cross-sectional studies. There were 4 prospective observational studies. Ten studies evaluated the utility of CT only, 9 MRI only, and 4 evaluated both. Common abnormalities included chronic ischemia or atrophy with CT and MRI scanning, and non-specific white matter lesions with MRI. Clinically meaningful abnormalities requiring intervention were relatively rare. Clinically significant neuroimaging abnormalities in patients with headaches consistent with migraine without atypical features or red flags appeared no more common than in the general population. RECOMMENDATIONS: There is no necessity to do neuroimaging in patients with headaches consistent with migraine who have a normal neurologic examination, and there are no atypical features or red flags present. Grade A Neuroimaging may be considered for presumed migraine for the following reasons: unusual, prolonged, or persistent aura; increasing frequency, severity, or change in clinical features, first or worst migraine, migraine with brainstem aura, migraine with confusion, migraine with motor manifestations (hemiplegic migraine), late-life migraine accompaniments, aura without headache, side-locked headache, and posttraumatic headache. Most of these are consensus based with little or no literature support. Grade C.

Evidence Regarding Medication Overuse Headache in Children and Adolescents: Protocol for a Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: This proposed systematic review will identify the existing evidence on medication-overuse headache in children and adolescents. BACKGROUND: A number of medications have been shown to be effective for acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents. However, patients may find they need to use their acute medications more frequently when migraine frequency is high. This has led to concern about their potential to develop medication-overuse headache. METHODS: We will search PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases from their inception to present time. We will also search conference proceedings of the last 4 scientific meetings of relevant societies and scan the reference lists of studies identified through the search. Study designs will include case series, cross-sectional, cohort, case-control, and interventional studies. Participants will include children and adolescents under 18 years of age with primary headache disorders. We aim to determine whether frequency of acute medication use is associated with headache frequency in children and adolescents. Outcomes of interest include: (1) headache frequency; (2) change in headache frequency, with time and in relationship to use of acute medications; and (3) headache-related disability. We will also review data addressing treatment/management of medication overuse or medication-overuse headache in children and adolescents. Relevant comparators will be withdrawal vs reduction of acute medication, initiation of preventive therapy vs no initiation with or without withdrawal of acute medication, and initiation of preventive therapy early vs late. Outcomes of interest include (1) days of acute medication use; (2) headache frequency; (3) change in headache frequency; and (4) headache-related disability. After screening for inclusion, 2 team members will independently review and extract relevant data, and any discrepancies will be resolved through discussion and arbitration. We will assess risk of bias using appropriate tools (Cochrane Risk of Bias for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and Newcastle-Ottawa Score for observational studies). Data will be summarized descriptively in text and tables. RESULTS: This systematic review will provide an overview of the available evidence on medication-overuse headache in children and adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this review will aid clinicians by clarifying for them the current state of the evidence base, and will inform design of future research on this topic.