Targeted alteration of dietary n-3 and n-6 fatty acids for the treatment of chronic headaches: a randomized trial.

Omega-3 and n-6 fatty acids are biosynthetic precursors to lipid mediators with antinociceptive and pronociceptive properties. We conducted a randomized, single-blinded, parallel-group clinical trial to assess clinical and biochemical effects of targeted alteration in dietary n-3 and n-6 fatty acids for treatment of chronic headaches. After a 4-week preintervention phase, ambulatory patients with chronic daily headache undergoing usual care were randomized to 1 of 2 intensive, food-based 12-week dietary interventions: a high n-3 plus low n-6 (H3-L6) intervention, or a low n-6 (L6) intervention. Clinical outcomes included the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6, primary clinical outcome), Headache Days per month, and Headache Hours per day. Biochemical outcomes included the erythrocyte n-6 in highly unsaturated fatty acids (HUFA) score (primary biochemical outcome) and bioactive n-3 and n-6 derivatives. Fifty-six of 67 patients completed the intervention. Both groups achieved targeted intakes of n-3 and n-6 fatty acids. In intention-to-treat analysis, the H3-L6 intervention produced significantly greater improvement in the HIT-6 score (-7.5 vs -2.1; P<0.001) and the number of Headache Days per month (-8.8 vs -4.0; P=0.02), compared to the L6 group. The H3-L6 intervention also produced significantly greater reductions in Headache Hours per day (-4.6 vs -1.2; P=0.01) and the n-6 in HUFA score (-21.0 vs -4.0%; P<0.001), and greater increases in antinociceptive n-3 pathway markers 18-hydroxy-eicosapentaenoic acid (+118.4 vs +61.1%; P<0.001) and 17-hydroxy-docosahexaenoic acid (+170.2 vs +27.2; P<0.001). A dietary intervention increasing n-3 and reducing n-6 fatty acids reduced headache pain, altered antinociceptive lipid mediators, and improved quality-of-life in this population.

Credibility of low-strength static magnet therapy as an attention control intervention for a randomized controlled study of CranioSacral therapy for migraine headaches.

BACKGROUND: Developing valid control groups that generate similar perceptions and expectations to experimental complementary and alternative (CAM) treatments can be challenging. The perceived credibility of treatment and outcome expectancy often contributes to positive clinical responses to CAM therapies, thereby confounding efficacy data. As part of a clinical feasibility study, credibility and expectancy data were obtained from subjects suffering from migraine who received either CranioSacral therapy (CST) or an attention-control, sham, and low-strength magnet (LSSM) intervention. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the LSSM intervention generated similar levels of subject credibility and expectancy compared to CST. DESIGN: This was a two-arm randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS: Sixty-five (65) adults with moderate to severe migraine were the subjects of this study. INTERVENTIONS: After an 8-week baseline, subjects were randomized to eight weekly treatments of either CST (n=36) or LSSM (n=29). The latter involved the use of a magnet-treatment protocol using inactive and low-strength static magnets designed to mimic the CST protocol in terms of setting, visit timing, body positioning, and therapist-subject interaction. OUTCOME MEASURES: A four-item, self-administered credibility/expectancy questionnaire, based on a validated instrument, was completed after the first visit. RESULTS: Using a 0-9 rating scale, the mean score for perceived logicality of treatment was significantly less for LSSM (5.03, standard deviation [SD] 2.34) compared to CST (6.64, SD 2.19). Subject confidence that migraine would improve was greater for CST (5.94, SD 2.01) than for LSSM (4.9, SD 2.21), a difference that was not statistically significant. Significantly more subjects receiving CST (6.08, SD 2.27) would confidently recommend treatment to a friend than those receiving LSSM (4.69, SD 2.49). CONCLUSIONS: Although LSSM did not achieve a comparable level of credibility and expectancy to the CST, several design and implementation factors may have contributed to the disparity. Based on analysis of these factors, the design and implementation of a future study may be improved.

Mindfulness training reduces the severity of irritable bowel syndrome in women: results of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective, randomized controlled trial explored the feasibility and efficacy of a group program of mindfulness training, a cognitive-behavioral technique, for women with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The technique involves training in intentionally attending to present-moment experience and non-judgmental awareness of body sensations and emotions. METHODS: Seventy-five female IBS patients were randomly assigned to eight weekly and one half-day intensive sessions of either mindfulness group (MG) training or a support group (SG). Participants completed the IBS severity scale (primary outcome), IBS-quality of life, brief symptom inventory-18, visceral sensitivity index, treatment credibility scale, and five-facet mindfulness questionnaire before and after treatment and at 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Women in the MG showed greater reductions in IBS symptom severity immediately after training (26.4% vs. 6.2% reduction; P=0.006) and at 3-month follow-up (38.2% vs. 11.8%; P=0.001) relative to SG. Changes in quality of life, psychological distress, and visceral anxiety were not significantly different between groups immediately after treatment, but evidenced significantly greater improvements in the MG than in the SG at the 3-month follow-up. Mindfulness scores increased significantly more in the MG after treatment, confirming effective learning of mindfulness skills. Participants' ratings of the credibility of their assigned interventions, measured after the first group session, were not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial demonstrated that mindfulness training has a substantial therapeutic effect on bowel symptom severity, improves health-related quality of life, and reduces distress. The beneficial effects persist for at least 3 months after group training.

Low omega-6 vs. low omega-6 plus high omega-3 dietary intervention for chronic daily headache: protocol for a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Targeted analgesic dietary interventions are a promising strategy for alleviating pain and improving quality of life in patients with persistent pain syndromes, such as chronic daily headache (CDH). High intakes of the omega-6 (n-6) polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), linoleic acid (LA) and arachidonic acid (AA) may promote physical pain by increasing the abundance, and subsequent metabolism, of LA and AA in immune and nervous system tissues. Here we describe methodology for an ongoing randomized clinical trial comparing the metabolic and clinical effects of a low n-6, average n-3 PUFA diet, to the effects of a low n-6 plus high n-3 PUFA diet, in patients with CDH. Our primary aim is to determine if: A) both diets reduce n-6 PUFAs in plasma and erythrocyte lipid pools, compared to baseline; and B) the low n-6 plus high n-3 diet produces a greater decline in n-6 PUFAs, compared to the low n-6 diet alone. Secondary clinical outcomes include headache-specific quality-of-life, and headache frequency and intensity. METHODS: Adults meeting the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for CDH are included. After a 6-week baseline phase, participants are randomized to a low n-6 diet, or a low n-6 plus high n-3 diet, for 12 weeks. Foods meeting nutrient intake targets are provided for 2 meals and 2 snacks per day. A research dietitian provides intensive dietary counseling at 2-week intervals. Web-based intervention materials complement dietitian advice. Blood and clinical outcome data are collected every 4 weeks. RESULTS: Subject recruitment and retention has been excellent; 35 of 40 randomized participants completed the 12-week intervention. Preliminary blinded analysis of composite data from the first 20 participants found significant reductions in erythrocyte n-6 LA, AA and %n-6 in HUFA, and increases in n-3 EPA, DHA and the omega-3 index, indicating adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01157208).

Mindfulness for irritable bowel syndrome: protocol development for a controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a functional bowel disorder with symptoms of abdominal pain and disturbed defecation experienced by 10% of U.S. adults, results in significant disability, impaired quality of life, and health-care burden. Conventional medical care focusing on pharmacological approaches, diet, and lifestyle management has been partially effective in controlling symptoms. Behavioral treatments, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy and hypnosis, are promising. This paper describes an on-going feasibility study to assess the efficacy of mindfulness training, a behavioral treatment involving directing and sustaining attention to present-moment experience, for the treatment of IBS. METHODS/DESIGN: The study design involves randomization of adult women with IBS according to Rome II criteria, to either an eight-week mindfulness training group (based on a Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction [MBSR] format) or a previously validated IBS social-support group as an attention-control condition. The primary hypothesis is that, compared to Support Group participants, those in the Mindfulness Program will demonstrate significant improvement in IBS symptoms as measured by the IBS Symptom Severity Scale [1]. DISCUSSION: 214 individuals have been screened for eligibility, of whom 148 were eligible for the study. Of those, 87 were enrolled, with 21 withdrawing after having given consent. 66 have completed or are in the process of completing the interventions. It is feasible to undertake a rigorous randomized clinical trial of mindfulness training for people with IBS, using a standardized MBSR protocol adapted for those experiencing IBS, compared to a control social-support group previously utilized in IBS studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00680693.