Background Primary headache disorders are common and burdensome conditions. They are associated to several comorbidities, such as cardiovascular or psychiatric ones, which, in turn, contribute to the global burden of headache. The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive description of the pooled prevalence of comorbidities of primary headache disorders using a meta-analytical approach based on studies published between 2000 and 2020. Methods Scopus was searched for primary research (clinical and population studies) in which medical comorbidities were described in adults with primary headache disorders. Comorbidities were extracted using a taxonomy derived from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. We compared prevalence of comorbidities among headache sufferers against general population using GBD-2019 estimates, and compared comorbidities’ proportions in clinical vs. population studies, and by age and gender. Results A total of 139 studies reporting information on 4.19 million subjects with primary headaches were included: in total 2.75 million comorbidities were reported (median per subject 0.64, interquartile range 0.32–1.07). The most frequently addressed comorbidities were: depressive disorders, addressed in 51 studies (pooled proportion 23 %, 95 % CI 20–26 %); hypertension, addressed in 48 studies (pooled proportion 24 %, 95 % CI 22–26 %); anxiety disorders addressed in 40 studies (pooled proportion 25 %, 95 % CI 22–28 %). For conditions such as anxiety, depression and back pain, prevalence among headache sufferers was higher than in GBD-2109 estimates. Associations with average age and female prevalence within studies showed that hypertension was more frequent in studies with higher age and less females, whereas fibromyalgia, restless leg syndrome, and depressive disorders were more frequent in studies with younger age and more female. Conclusions Some of the most relevant comorbidities of primary headache disorders – back pain, anxiety and depression, diabetes, ischemic heart disease and stroke – are among the most burdensome conditions, together with headache themselves, according to the GBD study. A joint treatment of headaches and of these comorbidities may positively impact on headache sufferers’ health status and contribute to reduce the impact of a group of highly burdensome diseases.
Context: Nonpharmacologic treatment, such as osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMTh; manipulative care provided by foreign-trained osteopaths) may be a beneficial complementary treatment for tension-type headache. However, to the authors' knowledge, the benefit of OMTh in the management of tension-type headache has not been explored, especially chronic tension-type headache (CTTH). Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of OMTh compared with traditional treatment in reducing pain intensity, frequency, and duration of CTTH, and to evaluate the objective postural measurement of the forward head posture (FHP) as an integral parameter in the assessment of the effects of OMTh and traditional management of CTTH. Methods: Patients with CTTH were registered at the Headache Centre of Trieste in Italy. At the time of the study, none of the patients had been taking any headache prophylaxis in the past 3 months. A 3-month baseline period was recorded by all patients with an ad hoc diary. Patients were randomly placed in the test or control group using a simple randomization program in Excel (Microsoft). Patients in the OMTh group underwent a 3-month period of OMTh, and patients in the control group were treated with amitriptyline. Pain intensity, frequency, and duration of headaches, as well as FHP were analyzed. Results: The study enrolled 10 patients (mean [SD] age, 42.6 [15.2] years) in the OMTh group and 10 patients (51.4 [17.3] years) in the control group. The final assessment of OMTh patients showed statistically significant changes in all headache parameters: pain intensity decreased from a mean (SD) score of 4.9 (1.4) to 3.1 (1.1) (P=.002); frequency decreased from 19.8 (6) to 8.3 (6.2) days per month (P=.002); and the duration of headaches decreased from 10 (4.2) to 6 (3) hours (P=.01). Significant improvement of all parameters was found in the control group as well: pain intensity decreased from a mean (SD) score of 5.9 (0.7) to 4.2 (1.75) (P=.03); frequency decreased from 23.4 (7.2) to 7.4 (8.7) days per month (P=.003); and duration decreased from 7.8 (2.9) to 3.6 (2.1) hours (P=.002). Forward head posture significantly improved in OMTh patients (P=.003). Conclusions: Our data suggested that OMTh may be an effective treatment to improve headaches in patients with CTTH. Our results also suggest that OMTh may reduce FHP.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate pain hypersensitivity in chronic migraine patients 3 months after undergoing onabotulinumtoxin-A therapy, physical therapy (PT), or the combination of the two. Pressure pain threshold (PPT) was assessed in accordance with Andersen's guidelines, focusing on five muscles in the trigeminocervical area (namely, trapezius, levator scapulae, temporalis, sub-occipitalis, and scalenus medius) and one muscle outside of the area, (i.e., tensor fasciae latae). Moreover, three headache parameters, namely, attack frequency, duration, and pain intensity, were recorded in an ad hoc diary kept by the patients. A total of 30 patients were included in three treatment groups: 1. onabotulinumtoxin-A therapy, 2. PT, and 3. a combination of onabotulinumtoxin-A and PT. The results show that, at the final assessment, the PPT was significantly reduced in the combined treatment group compared to the two single-therapy groups. As regards headache parameters, frequency and duration of the attacks were decreased significantly in all three treatment groups, whereas in pain intensity, the reduction was statistically significant in the combined treatment group and the onabotulinumtoxin-A therapy. Results suggest that a better pain modulation in patients with chronic migraine can be achieved with a combined treatment of onabotulinumtoxin-A and physical therapy. Indeed, the combination of both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments results in the reduction of both headache-related parameters and widespread pressure hyperalgesia.
Introduction The purpose of the present study is to compare the effect of the physiotherapy to onabolulinumtoxin-A, and their combination, in relation to cervical and headache parameters in patients with chronic migraine. Methods This is an observational cohort study conducted by a headache center and a physiotherapy degree course on 30 patients with chronic migraine. The patients were distributed in three groups of treatments for three months: onabolulinumtoxin-A only, physiotherapy only, and onabolulinumtoxin-A plus physiotherapy. The patients were evaluated, before and after each treatment, using the following: the postural assessment software SAPO for the forward head posture; the CROM goniometer for the cervical range of motion; the Migraine Disability Assessment Score for headache parameters. Results After 3 months of each treatment, the scores obtained for the headache-related disability and the frequency of migraine decreased significantly for all groups, but the pain intensity scores changed significantly only in the onabolulinumtoxin-A (p = 0.01) and in the onabolulinumtoxin-A plus physiotherapy groups (p = 0.007). On the other hand, the forward head posture was reduced significantly in the physiotherapy (p = 0.002) and in the onabolulinumtoxin-A plus physiotherapy groups (p = 0.003). The cervical range of motion increased significantly in certain directions in the physiotherapy group and in the onabolulinumtoxin-A plus physiotherapy groups. Conclusions The physiotherapy improved the cervical parameters. The onabolulinumtoxin-A decreased pain intensity. As a consequence, it can be said that the combined treatment was more useful than a mono-therapy alone. From our results, it can be concluded that onabolulinumtoxin-A plus physiotherapy could be a good option in the management of chronic migraine.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.