BackgroundThe HEAD-WINd® study was designed to examine the burden, characteristics and lived experiences of headache disorders in the Danish adult population. By integrating data from surveys, a smartphone application, and national health and social registries, the study addresses limitations of prior epidemiological research.MethodsA random sample of Danish residents aged 18-75years were invited to participate ("base population"). Two nested cohorts were recruited using a population-based approach: (i) a survey cohort consisting of individuals reporting active headache disorders ("headache population") and (ii) a smartphone application cohort, derived from the headache population, which was followed longitudinally for 12weeks. Data from these cohorts were enriched with data from national health and social registries, including information on medication use, hospital records, socioeconomic status and healthcare utilization. An adapted version of the Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap and Impaired Participation (HARDSHIP) questionnaire was used to classify multiple headache disorders and assess headache-attributed burden.ResultsOf the 100,030 invited individuals, 28,617 (28.6%) completed the general survey. Among them, 15,571 (54.4%) reported experiencing headache in the preceding year; 14,074 (90.4%) completed the headache-specific survey. In total, 663 individuals (4.7%) participated in the app-based longitudinal study. The mean±SD participant age was 53.2±15.5years, 57.4% were women and the mean±SD body mass index was 26.8±7.4 kg/m².ConclusionsHEAD-WINd® has established a comprehensive, population-based cohort of Danish residents, including individuals both with and without headache disorders. This resource provides a framework for generating population-level insights into the burden and management of headache disorders.

Craniosacral Therapy for Headache Management: A Systematic Review of Therapeutic Efficacy and Mechanisms

Background: Headache disorders, particularly migraine, are a leading cause of disability among active-duty military personnel, significantly affecting operational readiness and fitness for duty. Despite their high prevalence, limited data exist on how headache disorders are managed within military primary care systems. This study aimed to evaluate diagnostic confidence, treatment strategies, and structural challenges in the management of headache disorders from the perspective of military primary care physicians. Methods: A prospective, nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted between May and July 2023 among all active-duty military physicians in primary care roles. An anonymous 15-item questionnaire assessed diagnostic practices, therapeutic approaches, referral pathways, perceived knowledge gaps, and suggestions for system improvements. The survey was distributed across military medical centers and outpatient clinics in Germany. Results: Ninety military physicians participated. Migraine and tension-type headache were commonly encountered, with 70% having treated at least one headache patient in the week prior to the survey. Diagnostic confidence was high for migraine (83.4%) and tension-type headache (77.8%) but lower for medication-overuse headache (65.5%) and cluster headache (47.8%). Acute treatment was widely implemented, but only 27.8% of respondents regularly initiated preventive therapies. Awareness of clinical guidelines was limited: only 23.3% were familiar with the ICHD-3, and just 58.9% with national headache treatment guidelines. Respondents expressed strong demand for targeted education, practical diagnostic tools, and improved interdisciplinary coordination. Conclusions: Headache disorders are a prevalent and clinically significant issue in military primary care. While military physicians show high engagement, important gaps exist in preventive treatment, guideline familiarity, and access to specialist care. Structured training, standardized treatment protocols, and system-level improvements are essential to optimize headache care and maintain operational readiness.

This review provides an overview of the current and future role of artificial intelligence (AI) and virtual reality (VR) in addressing the complexities inherent to the diagnosis, classification, and management of headache disorders. Through machine learning and natural language processing approaches, AI offers unprecedented opportunities to identify patterns within complex and voluminous datasets, including brain imaging data. This technology has demonstrated promise in optimizing diagnostic approaches to headache disorders and automating their classification, an attribute particularly beneficial for non-specialist providers. Furthermore, AI can enhance headache disorder management by enabling the forecasting of acute events of interest, such as migraine headaches or medication overuse, and by guiding treatment selection based on insights from predictive modeling. Additionally, AI may facilitate the streamlining of treatment efficacy monitoring and enable the automation of real-time treatment parameter adjustments. VR technology, on the other hand, offers controllable and immersive experiences, thus providing a unique avenue for the investigation of the sensory-perceptual symptomatology associated with certain headache disorders. Moreover, recent studies suggest that VR, combined with biofeedback, may serve as a viable adjunct to conventional treatment. Addressing challenges to the widespread adoption of AI and VR in headache medicine, including reimbursement policies and data privacy concerns, mandates collaborative efforts from stakeholders to enable the equitable, safe, and effective utilization of these technologies in advancing headache disorder care. This review highlights the potential of AI and VR to support precise diagnostics, automate classification, and enhance management strategies for headache disorders.

Introduction Tension-type headaches (TTH) are a significant health concern that demands precise diagnostic approaches and effective management strategies. A nuanced understanding of their pathophysiology and diagnostic challenges is not just pivotal, but a responsibility we share, for enhancing patient care. Aim This article aims to explore the complex realm of TTH diagnosis and management, underlining the need for precision in diagnostics and the intricate balance of cost-effectiveness. It also delves into the diverse therapeutic options available for treating TTH, presenting a stimulating challenge for healthcare professionals, researchers, and medical students. State of Knowledge Initial diagnosis involves excluding secondary headaches by identifying red flags indicative of serious underlying conditions. A detailed medical history, complemented by patient-recorded pain diaries, enhances diagnostic accuracy. Ancillary procedures like neuroimaging, despite cost-effectiveness debates, are often preferred by clinicians to mitigate diagnostic risks. Validated tools such as the MIDAS and HIT-6 questionnaires provide valuable insights into headache-related disability. Differential diagnosis among headache types relies on recognizing distinctive clinical features. Summary (Conclusions) Effectively managing TTH necessitates a multifaceted approach, incorporating pharmacological, non-pharmacological, and lifestyle interventions tailored to individual patient needs. Collaborative efforts spanning legal, technological, and research domains are crucial for advancing headache diagnostics and therapeutics. While technological advancements offer promise, interdisciplinary collaboration remains fundamental in optimizing patient care outcomes.

ABSTRACT Background Neck pain is a common complaint among migraineurs possibly due to the anatomic connections between cervical and trigeminal afferents in the trigeminocervical complex (TCC). Manual therapy (MT) is used in the management of headache disorders, with demonstrable neurophysiological effects. The blink reflex (BR) is one method of analyzing neurophysiological effects in headache patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of upper cervical spine MT on BR in subjects with migraine and neck pain. Methods & Materials Twenty subjects were assigned to a medication plus MT (MedMT) group (n = 10) and medication plus sham MT (sham MT) group (n = 10). After random assignment, all patients underwent testing for the BR (R1, R2, R2c responses). Then, subjects in group MedMT and group sham MT received either 4 sessions of MT or sham MT to the upper cervical spine. After completion of the intervention, BR testing was repeated. Results There were no significant differences in both side R1 latency between group MT and group sham MT (P > 0.050). For both sides, R2 latencies were significantly prolonged in MedMT group compared with sham MT group (P < 0.050). Subjects in MedMT group showed significant prolongation in right and left R2c latency compared with sham MT group (P < 0.050). Discussion The present study demonstrated that upper cervical MT affected trigeminal nociceptive neurotransmission in subjects with migraine and neck pain as reflected by changes in the BR. The increase in BR late response latencies of BR indicates an inhibitory effect of upper cervical spine MT on the TCC in these subjects. Trial Registration: The trial design was registered at the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT ID: IRCT20160621028567N2, url: https://www.irct.ir/) before the first patient was enrolled.

Role of community pharmacists in the management of headache disorders

Diagnosis and management of headache disorders in osteopathic practice: A qualitative study

Background and Objective: Headaches, facial pain, and related entities form a significant source of pain, morbidity, and reduced quality of life for the general population worldwide. Medications form a large component of medical management of many headaches. However, various systemic and other factors may preclude the use of medications. Some patients may be refractory to the conventional methods of management. In a selected group of these headache cases, various peripheral nerve blocks and nerve stimulation can significantly positively affect the diagnosis, prognosis, and quality of life of the patient. In this article, we reviewed the evidence, indications, clinical anatomy, landmarks, techniques, risks and adverse effects of nerve and ganglion block procedures that have been employed for a selected group of patients. Methods: The search for this narrative review was performed between November 1st, 2021, and January 20th, 2022. The databases searched included PubMed, Ovid, Science Direct, and textbooks on pain management. The search terms included nerve blocks, headaches, pain management, migraine, individual pain entities, individual nerve blocks, and ganglion blocks. The complete articles written in the English language were retrieved. Only articles published in English between 1992 and 2022 were included. Exclusion criteria included articles other than in English; articles published prior to 1992 and articles whose complete published form were not available. Key Content and Findings: This literature contains nerve anatomy specific to the orofacial region, it’s distribution, innervation, nerve block technique, pharmacology and adverse effects of specific nerve blocks used to manage headache disorders. Conclusions: Nerve blocks appear in the literature as an accepted technique aiding in the diagnosis, prognosis determination, pain relief and management of headache disorders. The nerve blocks provide considerable improvement in the quality of life of patients affected by headaches. These blocks can greatly enhance accurate diagnosis, thereby potentially preventing difficulties in diagnosis and enabling the clinician in succinct pain management. There is a need for further retrospective and prospective studies exploring the efficacies of various types of nerve blocks as compared to other conventional modalities in the management of headache disorders.

BackgroundOverall, 55% of the German population suffers from primary episodic headaches according to recent studies. Inadequate management of headache disorders is a significant medical problem. The prevalence of medication overuse headache (MOH) is about 1% with an estimated number of 800,000 people in Germany. Medication overuse (MO) and MOH are usually managed through a complex process of medication withdrawal and initiating of prophylaxis. However, patients who were successfully treated for MO or MOH have a high relapse rate in the following 2 years. Previously, continued monitoring of self-reported medication intake demonstrated lower relapse rates. The prevalence and burden of MO and MOH are high, and effective strategies to prevent the development of a relapse into MOH or de novo MOH are still missing. Therefore, the MOH trial was designed to assess the effects of combining self-reported medication intake with daily monitoring of the entered data and a personalized patient-specific medication intake feedback system in an easy-accessible app-based platform in order to prevent the development and relapse of MO(H).MethodsThe MOH trial is a randomized, controlled, parallel, multicenter, prospective trial. A total of 624 migraine patients with frequent migraine attacks and 336 patients who underwent treatment for MO(H) will be randomly allocated to use either a customized app with or without individual feedback regarding their self-reported medication intake for 12 months. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients developing MO or MOH for at least 3 consecutive months between baseline and end of study visits.DiscussionThis trial will assess the effects of providing patients with feedback regarding their self-reported use of migraine medications and migraine days using a mobile software on the development or prevention of MO(H). We hypothesize that the development of MO(H) in patients with frequent episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) and relapse after treatment of MO(H) can be reduced by a feedback system. If this trial proves that using an app with specific and unspecific messaging to the patient is successful, this method, which is now investigated mainly in specialized headache centers, could later be extended to primary care, thus providing benefits for a broader patient group.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00025961. Registered on 04 August 2021.

BackgroundAbout 26 million people are living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. The DREAMprogramme in sub-Saharan Africa provides free healthcare for HIV/AIDS and arange of chronic non-communicable diseases. HIV is a risk factor forneurological non-communicable diseases including stroke and epilepsy, whichthemselves are associated with headache, and HIV may be a direct risk factorfor headache. We investigated the prevalence and burden of headache in aHIV+ population in sub-Saharan Africa.MethodsAt the DREAM Centre in Blantyre, Malawi, a low-income country with apopulation of 19 million and 9.2% HIV prevalence, a structured questionnairewas administered by a trained lay interviewer to consecutively attendingHIV+ patients aged 6–65 years. All were monitored with regular viral loaddetection.ResultsOf 513 eligible patients invited, 498 were included (mean age 34.1 ± 12.8years; 72% females; 15 declined). All were on antiretroviral treatment, withviral load undetectable in 83.9%. The 1-year prevalence of headache was80.3% (females 83.6%, males 71.9%); 3.8% had ≥15 headache days/month, 1.4%had probable medication-overuse headache. Mean overall headache frequencywas 4.4 ± 5.4 days/month. Those reporting headache lost means of 2.3% ofpaid workdays and 3.3% of household workdays because of headache. Only onethird had sought advice for their headache.ConclusionsHeadache is very prevalent among HIV+ patients in Malawi, imposing additionalburden and costs on individuals and the community. Management of headachedisorders should be implemented in HIV centres, as it is for other chronicnon-communicable diseases.

We examined trends in management of headache disorders in United States (US) emergency department (ED) visits. We conducted a cross-sectional study using 2007–2018 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data. We included adult patient visits (≥18 years) with a primary ED discharge diagnosis of headache. We classified headache medications by pharmacological group: opioids, butalbital, ergot alkaloids/triptans, acetaminophen/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antiemetics, diphenhydramine, corticosteroids, and intravenous fluids. To obtain reliable estimates, we aggregated data into three time periods: 2007–2010, 2011–2014, and 2015–2018. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined medication, neuroimaging, and outpatient referral trends, separately. Among headache-related ED visits, opioid use decreased from 54.1% in 2007–2010 to 28.3% in 2015–2018 (Ptrend < 0.001). There were statistically significant increasing trends in acetaminophen/NSAIDs, diphenhydramine, and corticosteroids use (all Ptrend < 0.001). Changes in butalbital (6.4%), ergot alkaloid/triptan (4.7%), antiemetic (59.2% in 2015–2018), and neuroimaging (37.3%) use over time were insignificant. Headache-related ED visits with outpatient referral for follow-up increased slightly from 73.3% in 2007–2010 to 79.7% in 2015–2018 (Ptrend = 0.02). Reflecting evidence-based guideline recommendations for headache management, opioid use substantially decreased from 2007 to 2018 among US headache-related ED visits. Future studies are warranted to identify strategies to promote evidence-based treatment for headaches (e.g., sumatriptan, dexamethasone) and appropriate outpatient referral and reduce unnecessary neuroimaging orders in EDs.

We examined trends in management of headache disorders in United States (US) emergency department (ED) visits. We conducted a cross-sectional study using 2007–2018 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data. We included adult patient visits (≥18 years) with a primary ED discharge diagnosis of headache. We classified headache medications by pharmacological group: opioids, butalbital, ergot alkaloids/triptans, acetaminophen/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antiemetics, diphenhydramine, corticosteroids, and intravenous fluids. To obtain reliable estimates, we aggregated data into three time periods: 2007–2010, 2011–2014, and 2015–2018. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined medication, neuroimaging, and outpatient referral trends, separately. Among headache-related ED visits, opioid use decreased from 54.1% in 2007–2010 to 28.3% in 2015–2018 (Ptrend < 0.001). There were statistically significant increasing trends in acetaminophen/NSAIDs, diphenhydramine, and corticosteroids use (all Ptrend < 0.001). Changes in butalbital (6.4%), ergot alkaloid/triptan (4.7%), antiemetic (59.2% in 2015–2018), and neuroimaging (37.3%) use over time were insignificant. Headache-related ED visits with outpatient referral for follow-up increased slightly from 73.3% in 2007–2010 to 79.7% in 2015–2018 (Ptrend = 0.02). Reflecting evidence-based guideline recommendations for headache management, opioid use substantially decreased from 2007 to 2018 among US headache-related ED visits. Future studies are warranted to identify strategies to promote evidence-based treatment for headaches (e.g., sumatriptan, dexamethasone) and appropriate outpatient referral and reduce unnecessary neuroimaging orders in EDs.

The WHS classification of Head, Neck and Face pain, Edition 1 Version 1 (WHS-MCH1) is the official document of the World Headache Society. It was conceptualized and developed by the Society’s Classification Committee. The work began with a clean slate to create a comprehensive, updated and holistic classification of headache disorders; where ‘headache’ was defined as any pain above the shoulders, thus including head, neck and face pain. This new classification reflects a scientifically robust understanding of disease and also places patient experience in the qualia of pain. It is a training manual to be used at the bedside and office as an aid to the diagnosis and management of headache disorders. The dynamic nature of this first ever live classification of headaches also means that ultra-rapid updates, or versions, will be available electronically. It is not a disease criteria but a classification criteria (1) and is useful to pick extended spectra and ‘mimickers’ of diseases. Although increased sensitivity usually comes at the expense of reduced specificity, an expanded spectrum of diseases in this case also means increased specificity. WHS-MCH1 is a syndromic classification. A syndrome is a recognizable complex of symptoms and physical findings which may have more than one aetiology. Although disease is nominalist and culture-relativistic (2), a syndrome based approach reflects the discipline of first widening the view of possibilities before analysing each to formulate a diagnostic hypothesis. Such an approach provides a useful framework for organizing the complexity of clinical experience in order to derive inferences about outcome and guide decisions about treatment. WHS-MCH1 has a vertical grouping designed for use by clinicians of all levels of experience; this is linked to the horizontal groupings which are syndrome-based. The syndrome groups are also interlinked to one another. This design enables clinicians to efficiently create the ‘big picture’ so as not to miss any diagnosis. Axis 1 and 2 are the vertical and horizontal grouping categories, respectively. Axis 3 is the patient narrative of bothersome symptoms and level of impairment. Axis 4 are biomarkers that may be derived from investigations and this is the best example of the continuum of better understanding of disease-defining markers. Axis 5 is an objective impairment scale that clinicians may choose based on availability. The World Headache Society hopes that the use of such a robust and inclusive framework will lead to better patient outcomes and improved patient and clinician satisfaction with the investigative and diagnostic process. Keywords: Classification; Syndromes; Headache disorders; Neck pain; Facial pain; Aaxis classification; Head pain; Face pain; Headache; Multiaxis

To review contemporary issues of health care disparities in headache medicine with regard to race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and geography and propose solutions for addressing these disparities. An Internet and PubMed search was performed and literature was reviewed for key concepts underpinning disparities in headache medicine. Content was refined to areas most salient to our goal of informing the provision of equitable care in headache treatment through discussions with a group of 16 experts from a range of headache subspecialties. Taken together, a multitude of factors, including racism, SES, insurance status, and geographical disparities, contribute to the inequities that exist within the health care system when treating headache disorders. Interventions such as improving public education, advocacy, optimizing telemedicine, engaging in community outreach to educate primary care providers, training providers in cultural sensitivity and competence and implicit bias, addressing health literacy, and developing recruitment strategies to increase representation of underserved groups within headache research are proposed as solutions to ameliorate disparities. Neurologists have a responsibility to provide and deliver equitable care to all. It is important that disparities in the management of headache disorders are identified and addressed.

To explore the self-perceived preparedness and clinical proficiency in headache diagnosis and management of Australian chiropractic students in senior years of study. Australian chiropractic students in the 4th (n = 134) and 5th year (n = 122) of 2 chiropractic university programs were invited to participate in an online cross-sectional survey. Descriptive analyses were conducted for all variables. Post hoc analyses were performed using simple linear regression to evaluate the relationship between self-perceived preparedness and correctness of headache diagnosis and management scores. Australian chiropractic students in senior years demonstrated moderate overall levels of self-perceived preparedness and proficiency in their ability to diagnose and manage headache disorders. Final-year students had a slightly higher self-perceived preparedness and proficiency in headache diagnosis and management compared to those students in the 4th year of study. There was no relationship between self-perceived preparedness and correctness of headache diagnosis and management for either 4th- or 5th-year chiropractic students. Our findings suggest that there may be gaps in graduate chiropractic student confidence and proficiency in headache diagnosis and management. These findings call for further research to explore graduate chiropractic student preparedness and proficiency in the diagnosis and management of headache disorders.

IntroductionDespite advances in the management of headache disorders, some patients with migraine do not experience adequate pain relief with acute and preventive treatments. It is the aim of the present document to provide a definition of those migraines which are difficult-to-treat, to create awareness of existence of this group of patients, to help Healthcare Authorities in understanding the implications, and to create a basis to develop a better pathophysiological understanding and to support further therapeutic advances.Main bodyDefinitions were established with a consensus process using the Delphi method.Patients with migraine with or without aura or with chronic migraine can be defined as having resistant migraine and refractory migraine according to previous preventative failures. Resistant migraine is defined by having failed at least 3 classes of migraine preventatives and suffer from at least 8 debilitating headache days per month for at least 3 consecutive months without improvement; definition can be based on review of medical charts. Refractory migraine is defined by having failed all of the available preventatives and suffer from at least 8 debilitating headache days per month for at least 6 consecutive months. Drug failure may include lack of efficacy or lack of tolerability. Debilitating headache is defined as headache causing serious impairment to conduct activities of daily living despite the use of pain-relief drugs with established efficacy at the recommended dose and taken early during the attack; failure of at least two different triptans is required.ConclusionsWe hope, that the updated EHF definition will be able to solve the conflicts that have limited the use of definitions which have been put forward in the past. Only with a widely accepted definition, progresses in difficult-to-treat migraine can be achieved. This new definition has also the aim to increase the understanding of the impact of the migraine as a disease with all of its social, legal and healthcare implications. It is the hope of the EHF Expert Consensus Group that the proposed criteria will stimulate further clinical, scientific and social attention to patients who suffer from migraine which is difficult-to-treat.

Correction to: The Use of Botulinum Toxin in the Management of Headache Disorders.

Tremendous progress has been made in the past decades for the treatment of headache disorders. Chronic migraine is the most disabling type of headache and requires the use of acute and preventive medications, many of which are associated with adverse events that limit patient adherence. Botulinum toxin (BoNT) serotype A, a neurotoxin derived from certain strains of Clostridium, disrupts neuropeptide secretion and receptor translocation related to trigeminal nociception, thereby preventing pain sensitization through peripheral and possibly central mechanisms. Ever since the first randomized controlled trial on onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA) for migraine was published two decades ago, onabotA has been the only BoNT formulation approved for use in the prevention of chronic migraine. Superior tolerability and efficacy have been demonstrated on multiple migraine endpoints in many controlled trials and real-life studies. OnabotA is a safe and efficacious treatment for chronic migraine and possibly high-frequency episodic migraine. Further research is still needed to understand its mechanism of action to fully develop its therapeutic potential.

Ultrasound-guided Greater Occipital Nerve Intervention: A Novel Technique for Diagnosis and Management of Headache Disorders