The Global Campaign (GC) to Reduce the Burden of Headache Worldwide. The International Team for Specialist Education (ITSE).

The social perception of headache, everywhere at low levels in industrialised countries, becomes totally absent in developing ones. Headache disorders came into the World Health Organization\u27s strategic priorities after publication of the 2001 World Health Report. Among the leading causes of disability, migraine was ranked 19th for adults of both sexes together and 12th for females. The Global Campaign (GC) to Reduce the Burden of Headache Worldwide was planned by the major international headache organizations together with WHO in order to identify and remove those cultural, social and educational barriers recognised as responsible factors for the inadequate treatment of headache disorders worldwide. Within the GC activities, the education of the medical body will represents a central pillar. An International Team for Specialist Education (ITSE) has been created to train physicians from all over the world through the acquisition of a university level Master Degree in Headache Medicine. Once trained as headache specialists, physicians will become trainers, offering education in this field to other health care providers in their own countries. In this way they will give life to a cultural chain raising awareness locally of headache, its burden and its medical control

Hospitalisation by tick-borne diseases in the last 10 years in two hospitals in South Spain: analysis of tick exposure data collected in the Emergency Department

Tick-borne diseases (TBDs) can sometimes cause severe symptoms and lead to hospitalisation, but they often go unnoticed in the Emergency Department (ED). The aim of this study was twofold: (i) to describe the profile of patients hospitalised by TBDs; and (ii) to evaluate the data collected in the medical records from the ED in order to analyse their potential clinical consequences. A total of 84 cases that included all TBD diagnoses registered in the ED records were identified and analysed. These corresponded to all the hospitalisations by TBDs in the last 10 years (2009–2019) in two tertiary hospitals in Granada, Spain. Statistical analyses were made using RStudio. Coinciding with the absence of patient’s report of exposure to ticks, 64.3% of TBDs were not suspected in the ED. Intensive care unit admission was required in 8.3% of cases, and the mortality rate was 2.4%. Non-suspected cases showed longer hospital stay (P < 0.001), treatment duration (P = 0.02) and delay in the initiation of antibiotic treatment (P < 0.001). Our findings indicate that symptoms associated with TBDs are highly non-specific. In the absence of explicit information related to potential tick exposure, TBDs are not initially suspected. As a consequence, elective treatment administration is delayed and hospitalisation time is prolonged. In conclusion, our results highlight the importance of addressing potential exposure to ticks during the ED contact with patients presenting with febrile syndrome

Prevalence of Multi-Resistant Microorganisms and Antibiotic Stewardship among Hospitalized Patients Living in Residential Care Homes in Spain: A Cross-Sectional Study

Antimicrobial resistance is a growing global health problem. Patients living in care homes are a vulnerable high-risk population colonized by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO). We identified a case series of 116 residents of care homes from a cohort of 540 consecutive patients admitted to the internal medicine service of our hospital. We performed early diagnostic tests of MDRO through anal exudates in our sample. The prevalence of MDRO colonization was 34.5% of residents and 70% of them had not been previously identified in the clinical records. Previous hospitalizations and in-hospital antibiotic administration were significantly associated with the presence of MDRO. Our results emphasize the need to consider care homes in the planning of regional and national infection control measures and for implementing surveillance systems that monitor the spread of antimicrobial resistance in Spain. Systematic early testing upon admission to hospital services with a high prevalence of patients with MDRO colonization (e.g., internal medicine) could contribute to the adoption of adequate prevention measures. Specific educational programs for care home staff should also be implemented to address this increasing problem.Catedra de Docencia e Investigacion SEMERGEN-Medicina de Familia, University of Granada, Spai

Preventive effects of galcanezumab in adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine are persistent: data from the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, and REGAIN studies

Abstract Background Maintenance of effect following treatment with galcanezumab compared to placebo in adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine was evaluated. Methods In 2 similarly designed studies of patients with episodic migraine (6 months) and 1 study of patients with chronic migraine (3 months), patients randomized in a 1:1:2 ratio received a subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab 120 mg/month (after an initial loading dose of 240 mg) or 240 mg/month or placebo. Maintenance of effect during the double-blind phase was evaluated based on a comparison of the percentages of galcanezumab- and placebo-treated patients with maintenance of 30, 50, 75, and 100% response (defined as ≥30, ≥50, ≥75, and 100% reduction from baseline in monthly migraine headache days [MHD]) at an individual patient level. Logistic regression analyses were used for between treatment comparisons. Results A total of 1773 adult patients with episodic migraine (n = 444 for galcanezumab 120 mg; n = 435 for galcanezumab 240 mg; n = 894 for placebo for 2 studies pooled) and 1113 patients with chronic migraine (n = 278 for galcanezumab 120 mg; n = 277 for galcanezumab 240 mg; n = 558 for placebo) were evaluated. In patients with episodic migraine, ≥50% response was maintained in 41.5 and 41.1% of galcanezumab-treated patients (120 mg and 240 mg, respectively) for ≥3 consecutive months (until patient’s endpoint) and 19.0 and 20.5%, respectively, for 6 consecutive months and was significantly greater than the 21.4 and 8.0% of placebo-treated patients at ≥3 and 6 months consecutively (P < 0.001). Approximately 6% of galcanezumab-treated patients maintained ≥75% response all 6 months versus 2% of placebo-treated patients. Few galcanezumab-treated patients maintained 100% response. In patients with chronic migraine, 29% of galcanezumab-treated patients maintained ≥30% response all 3 months compared to 16% of placebo patients while ≥50% response was maintained in 16.8 and 14.6% of galcanezumab-treated patients (120 mg and 240 mg) and was greater than placebo (6.3%; p < 0.001). Few patients maintained ≥75% response. Conclusions Treatment with galcanezumab 120 mg or 240 mg demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful persistence of effect in patients with episodic migraine (≥3 and 6 consecutive months) and in patients with chronic migraine (for 3 months). Study identification and trial registration Study Identification: EVOLVE-1 (I5Q-MC-CGAG); EVOLVE-2 (I5Q-MC-CGAH); REGAIN (I5Q-MC-CGAI) Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02614183 (EVOLVE-1); NCT02614196 (EVOLVE-2); NCT02614261 (REGAIN

The headache under-response to treatment (HURT) questionnaire, an outcome measure to guide follow-up in primary care: development, psychometric evaluation and assessment of utility

Background Headache disorders are both common and burdensome but, given the many people affected, provision of health care to all is challenging. Structured headache services based in primary care are the most efficient, equitable and cost-effective solution but place responsibility for managing most patients on health-care providers with limited training in headache care. The development of practical management aids for primary care is therefore a purpose of the Global Campaign against Headache. This manuscript presents an outcome measure, the Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) questionnaire, describing its purpose, development, psychometric evaluation and assessment for clinical utility. The objective was a simple-to-use instrument that would both assess outcome and provide guidance to improving outcome, having utility across the range of headache disorders, across clinical settings and across countries and cultures. Methods After literature review, an expert consensus group drawn from all six world regions formulated HURT through item development and item reduction using item-response theory. Using the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study’s general-population respondent panel, two mailed surveys assessed the psychometric properties of HURT, comparing it with other instruments as external validators. Reliability was assessed in patients in two culturally-contrasting clinical settings: headache specialist centres in Europe (n = 159) and primary-care centres in Saudi Arabia (n = 40). Clinical utility was assessed in similar settings (Europe n = 201; Saudi Arabia n = 342). Results The final instrument, an 8-item self-administered questionnaire, addressed headache frequency, disability, medication use and effect, patients’ perceptions of headache “control” and their understanding of their diagnoses. Psychometric evaluation revealed a two-factor model (headache frequency, disability and medication use; and medication efficacy and headache control), with scale properties apparently stable across disorders and correlating well and in the expected directions with external validators. The literature review found few instruments linking assessment to clinical advice or suggested actions: HURT appeared to fill this gap. In European specialist care, it showed utility as an outcome measure across headache disorders. In Saudi Arabian primary care, HURT (translated into Arabic) was reliable and responsive to clinical change. Conclusions With demonstrated validity and clinical utility across disorders, cultures and settings, HURT is available for clinical and research purposes