Case-control study examines the impact of smartphone use on pain and quality of life in individuals with cervicogenic headache, indicating potential for intervention.
ObjectiveTo examine whether problematic smartphone use is associated with pain intensity, functional disability, emotional distress, sleep quality, and health-related quality of life in individuals with cervicogenic headache compared with healthy adults.DesignCase-control study.SettingOutpatient clinics of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and Neurology at a university hospital.ParticipantsA total of 158 adults, including 78 individuals diagnosed with cervicogenic headache and 80 age- and sex-matched healthy controls.Main measuresSmartphone Addiction Scale-Short Form, Headache Impact Test-6, Neck Disability Index, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Jenkins Sleep Scale, and Short Form-12 Health Survey.ResultsIndividuals with cervicogenic headache reported significantly higher levels of smartphone-related behavioural problems, headache impact, neck-related disability, anxiety, depressive symptoms, and sleep disturbance than healthy controls (all p < 0.05). Physical and mental health-related quality of life scores were significantly lower in the cervicogenic headache group. Problematic smartphone use was positively associated with depressive symptoms (r = 0.224) and poor sleep quality (r = 0.369), and negatively associated with mental health-related quality of life (r = -0.277). Neck-related disability (β = 0.327) and mental health-related quality of life (β = 0.551) were independent predictors of problematic smartphone use, explaining 31% of the variance.ConclusionsProblematic smartphone use is associated with greater symptom burden, emotional distress, sleep problems, and reduced quality of life in individuals with cervicogenic headache. Smartphone-related behavioural patterns may represent a modifiable factor to be considered within comprehensive rehabilitation and lifestyle-based management strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karakılıç et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: