Effects of acupuncture and medical training therapy on depression, anxiety, and quality of life in patients with frequent tension-type headache: A randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of acupuncture and medical training therapy in combination or individually with usual care on quality of life, depression, and anxiety in patients with tension-type headache. METHODS: In this single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled, unblinded trial, 96 adults (38.7(+/-13.3) years of age; 75 females/20 males/one dropout) with frequent episodic or chronic tension-type headache were randomized to one of four treatment groups (n = 24). The treatment groups received six weeks of either acupuncture or medical training therapy as monotherapies or in combination (12 interventions each), or usual care. We assessed depressiveness (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), and health-related quality of life (SF-12) as secondary outcome parameters at baseline, six weeks, three months, and six months after initiation of treatment. Linear mixed models were calculated. RESULTS: Both, acupuncture (baseline to six-weeks change scores: mean: -2(standard deviation: 2.5 points), three months: -2.4(2.4), six-months -2.7(3.6)) and the combination of acupuncture and medical training therapy (-2.7(4.9), -2.2(4.0), -2.2(4.2)) (each within-group p < .05) significantly reduced depressiveness-scores (PHQ-9) to a greater extent than medical training therapy (-0.3(2.0), -0.5(1.6), -0.9(2.6)) or usual care alone (-0.8(2.9), 0.1(2.8), 0.2(3.6)). We found similar results with anxiety scores and the physical sum scores of the SF-12. No severe adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture and the combination of acupuncture and medical training therapy elicit positive effects on depression, anxiety, quality of life, and symptom intensity in patients with episodic and chronic tension-type headache. Acupuncture appears to play a central role in mediating the therapeutic effects, underscoring the clinical relevance of this treatment. An additive benefit of the combination of both therapies does not appear to be relevant.Trial registration: Registered on 11 February 2019. German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00016723.

Test of the Rehabilitation Goal Screening (ReGoS) Tool to Support Decision Making and Goal Setting in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Practice.

BACKGROUND: It has already been shown that it is feasible to use International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Sets as self-assessment instruments. We used this idea to design an ICF-based screening tool to assess patients of a broadly based rehabilitation department. It was developed for the purpose of having a screening tool before taking the anamnesis, as well as for rehabilitation planning and follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Rehabilitation Goal Screening (ReGoS) instrument is a self-report questionnaire which was developed based on the most relevant domains from the ICF Core Sets for chronic pain and rehabilitation. The ICF categories were translated into plain language and 0-10 Likert scales were used. A retrospective analysis of routine clinical data using the ReGoS tool, Work Ability Index (WAI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in paper- or tablet-based form was performed. RESULTS: The average age of the N = 1.008 respondents was 53.9 years (SD = 16.2). Of the respondents, 66% (n = 665) were female. At the time of the survey, 48.3% (n = 487) of the patients were employed. ReGoS results demonstrated that the highest restrictions on a scale from 0 to 10 were found in the areas of energy and drive (M = 5.79, SD = 2.575) and activities of daily living (M = 5.54, SD = 2.778). More than a third of the respondents rated their work ability as critical. CONCLUSION: The use of the ReGoS instrument as an ICF-based screening tool based on a self-report questionnaire provides relevant information for clinical diagnosis, participative goal setting and a detailed functional capacity profile.

Rasch validation and comparison of the German versions of the Locomotor Capabilities Index-5 and Prosthetic Mobility Questionnaire 2.0 in lower-limb prosthesis users.

This study aimed to compare, through Rasch analysis, the psychometric properties of the Locomotor Capabilities Index (LCI-5) and Prosthetic Mobility Questionnaire (PMQ 2.0) in German lower-limb prosthesis users. The questionnaires were concurrently administered to a convenience sample of 98 consecutively recruited individuals with lower limb amputation (LLA) (male/female = 61/37; mean age 57 ± 14 years). LCI-5 showed disordered rating scale thresholds (one response option in three items required collapsing); local dependence between two items (resolved by creating a testlet); underfit of one item ('Get up from the floor'); and presence of a second weak dimension. PMQ 2.0 showed a correctly functioning rating scale; good fit of the data to the model (apart from some overfit); local dependence between two items (absorbed by creating a testlet); and essential unidimensionality. At scale co-calibration onto a common interval-scaled metric, PMQ 2.0 was better targeted than LCI-5 (i.e. the extent of item difficulty was more appropriate for the sample) and its operational range allowed a more precise measurement of higher locomotor abilities. The correlation between LCI-5 and PMQ 2.0 scores was rho = 0.78. In conclusion, LCI-5 revealed some drawbacks, confirming a previous Rasch study; refinement of its rating scale and item selection seems therefore warranted. The PMQ 2.0 demonstrated good overall measurement quality, in line with previous Italian and Slovene studies. The operational range of the PMQ 2.0 makes it more suitable than LCI-5 for assessing people with high locomotor abilities.

Combination of acupuncture and medical training therapy on tension type headache: Results of a randomised controlled pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of acupuncture and medical training therapy alone and in combination with those of usual care on the pain sensation of patients with frequent episodic and chronic tension-type headache. DESIGN: This was a prospective single-centre randomised controlled trial with four balanced treatment arms. The allocation was carried out by pre-generated randomisation lists in the ratio 1:1:1:1 with different permutation block sizes. SETTING: The study was undertaken in the outpatient clinic of Rehabilitation Medicine of the Hannover Medical School.Participants and interventions: Ninety-six adult patients with tension-type headache were included and randomised into usual care (n = 24), acupuncture (n = 24), medical training (n = 24), and combination of acupuncture and medical training (n = 24). One patient was excluded from analysis because of withdrawing her/his consent, leaving 95 patients for intention to treat analysis. Each therapy arm consisted of 6 weeks of treatment with 12 interventions. Follow-up was at 3 and 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain intensity (average, maximum and minimum), frequency of headache, responder rate (50% frequency reduction), duration of headache and use of headache medication.Clinical results: The combination of acupuncture and medical training therapy significantly reduced mean pain intensity compared to usual care (mean = -38%, standard deviation = 25%, p = 0.012). Comparable reductions were observed for maximal pain intensity (-25%, standard deviation = 20%, 0.014) and for minimal pain intensity (-35%, standard deviation = 31%, 0.03). In contrast, neither acupuncture nor medical training therapy differed significantly from usual care. No between-group differences were found in headache frequency, mean duration of headache episodes, and pain medication intake. At 3 months, the majority of all patients showed a reduction of at least 50% in headache frequency. At 6 months, significantly higher responder rates were found in all intervention groups compared to usual care. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to monotherapy, only the combination of acupuncture and medical training therapy was significantly superior in reduction of pain intensity compared to usual care.Trial registration: Registered on 11 February 2019. German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00016723.