Headache disorders are third cause of disability worldwide

Commentar

The global prevalence of headache: an update, with analysis of the influences of methodological factors on prevalence estimates

Background According to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study, headache disorders are among the most prevalent and disabling conditions worldwide. GBD builds on epidemiological studies (published and unpublished) which are notable for wide variations in both their methodologies and their prevalence estimates. Our first aim was to update the documentation of headache epidemiological studies, summarizing global prevalence estimates for all headache, migraine, tension-type headache (TTH) and headache on ≥15 days/month (H15+), comparing these with GBD estimates and exploring time trends and geographical variations. Our second aim was to analyse how methodological factors influenced prevalence estimates. Methods In a narrative review, all prevalence studies published until 2020, excluding those of clinic populations, were identified through a literature search. Prevalence data were extracted, along with those related to methodology, world region and publication year. Bivariate analyses (correlations or comparisons of means) and multiple linear regression (MLR) analyses were performed. Results From 357 publications, the vast majority from high-income countries, the estimated global prevalence of active headache disorder was 52.0% (95%CI 48.9–55.4), of migraine 14.0% (12.9–15.2), of TTH 26.0% (22.7–29.5) and of H15+ 4.6% (3.9–5.5). These estimates were comparable with those of migraine and TTH in GBD2019, the most recent iteration, but higher for headache overall. Each day, 15.8% of the world’s population had headache. MLR analyses explained less than 30% of the variation. Methodological factors contributing to variation, were publication year, sample size, inclusion of probable diagnoses, sub-population sampling (e.g., of health-care personnel), sampling method (random or not), screening question (neutral, or qualified in severity or presumed cause) and scope of enquiry (headache disorders only or multiple other conditions). With these taken into account, migraine prevalence estimates increased over the years, while estimates for all headache types varied between world regions. Conclusion The review confirms GBD in finding that headache disorders remain highly prevalent worldwide, and it identifies methodological factors explaining some of the large variation between study findings. These variations render uncertain both the increase in migraine prevalence estimates over time, and the geographical differences. More and better studies are needed in low- and middle-income countries

Headache and musculoskeletal complaints among subjects with self reported whiplash injury. The HUNT-2 study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To evaluate the life-time prevalence of self reported whiplash injury and the relationship to chronic musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs) and headache in a large unselected adult population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Between 1995 and 1997, all inhabitants 20 years and older in Nord-Trondelag county in Norway were invited to a comprehensive health survey. Out of 92,936 eligible for participation, a total of 59,104 individuals (63.6%) answered the question about whiplash injury (whiplash). Among these, 46,895 (79.3%) responded to the questions of musculoskeletal complaints and headache.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The total life-time prevalence of self reported whiplash injury was 2.9%, for women 2.7% and for men 3.0%. There was a significant association between self reported whiplash injury and headache (OR = 2.1; 95% CI 1.8-2.4), and chronic MSCs (OR = 3.3; 95% CI 2.8-3.8), evident for all ten anatomical sites investigated. The association was most pronounced for those with a combination of headache and chronic MSC for both men (OR = 4.8; 95% CI 3.6-6.2) and women (OR = 5.2; 95% CI 3.7-7.1).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Subjects with self reported whiplash injury had significantly more headache and musculoskeletal complaints than those without, and may in part be due to selective reporting. The causal mechanism remains unclear and cannot be addressed in the present study design.</p

Headache, depression and anxiety: associations in the Eurolight project.

Headache disorders and psychiatric disorders are both common, while evidence, mostly pertaining to migraine, suggests they are comorbid more often than might be expected by chance. There are good reasons for establishing whether they are: symptoms of comorbid illnesses may summate synergistically; comorbidities hinder management, negatively influencing outcomes; high-level comorbidity indicates that, where one disease occurs, the other should be looked for. The Eurolight project gathered population-based data on these disorders from 6624 participants.Eurolight was a cross-sectional survey sampling from the adult populations (18-65 years) of 10 EU countries. We used data from six. The questionnaire included headache-diagnostic questions based on ICHD-II, the Headache-Attributed Lost Time (HALT) questionnaire, and HADS for depression and anxiety. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) to show associations between migraine, tension-type headache (TTH) or probable medication-overuse headache (pMOH) and depression or anxiety.pMOH was most strongly associated with both psychiatric disorders: for depression, ORs (vs no headache) were 5.5 [2.2-13.5] (p < 0.0001) in males, 5.5 [2.9-10.5] (p < 0.0001) in females; for anxiety, ORs were 10.4 [4.9-21.8] (p < 0.0001) and 7.1 [4.5-11.2] (p < 0.0001). Migraine was also associated with both: for depression, ORs were 2.1 [1.3-3.4] (p = 0.002) and 1.8 [1.1-3.1] (p = 0.030); for anxiety 4.2 [2.8-6.3] (p < 0.0001) and 2.4 [1.7-3.4] (p < 0.0001). TTH showed associations only with anxiety: ORs 2.5 [1.7-3.7] (p < 0.0001) for males, 1.5 [1.1-2.1] (p = 0.021) for females. Participants with migraine carried 19.1 % probability of comorbid anxiety, 6.9 % of depression and 5.1 % of both, higher than the representative general-population sample (14.3, 5.6 and 3.8 %). Probabilities in those with MOH were 38.8, 16.9 and 14.4 %; in TTH, they did not exceed those of the whole sample. Comorbid psychiatric disorder did not add to headache-attributed productive time losses, but weak associations existed (R (2)  = 0.020-0.082) for all headache types between lost productive time and probabilities of depression and, less so, anxiety.In this large study we confirmed that depression and especially anxiety are comorbid more than by chance with migraine, and showed the same is true, but more strongly, with MOH. Arguably, migraine patients and, more certainly, MOH patients should be screened with HADS in pursuit of best outcomes

Depicting the pterygopalatine ganglion on 3 Tesla magnetic resonance images

PURPOSE: The pterygopalatine ganglion has yet not been identified on medical images in living humans. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether the pterygopalatine ganglion could be identified on 3 T MR imaging. METHODS: This study was performed on medical images of 20 Caucasian subjects on both sides (n = 40 ganglia) with an exploratory design. 3 T MR images were assessed by two physicians for the presence and size of the pterygopalatine ganglion. The distance from the pterygopalatine ganglion to four bony landmarks was registered from fused MR and CT images. In an equivalence analysis, the distances were compared to those obtained in an anatomical cadaveric study serving as historical controls (n = 50). RESULTS: A structure assumed to be the pterygopalatine ganglion was identified on MR images in all patients on both sides by both physicians. The mean size was depth 2.1 ± 0.5 mm, width 4.2 ± 1.1 mm and height 5.1 ± 1.4 mm, which is in accordance with formerly published data. Equivalence of the measurements on MR images and the historical controls was established, suggesting that the structure identified on the MR images is the pterygopalatine ganglion. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the pterygopalatine ganglion can be detected on 3 T MR images. Identification of the pterygopalatine ganglion may be important for image-guided interventions targeting the pterygopalatine ganglion, and has the potential to increase the efficacy, safety and reliability for these treatments