Randomized trial evaluates interdisciplinary interventions for chronic migraines, suggesting a comprehensive care model.
Background: Migraine (MIG) management guidelines support a comprehensive approach combining medication, therapeutic patient education (TPE), behavioral strategies, lifestyle changes, diet, and physical activity (PA). Objective: To present an innovative interdisciplinary outpatient model for individuals with MIG, focusing on PA, sedentary behavior, eating habits (EH), metabolic health, temporomandibular disorders, and postural dysfunctions. Design: A randomized controlled trial will enroll 200 adults with MIG over two years. Inclusion criteria are chronic MIG (≥15 attacks/month for ≥3 months) or high-frequency episodic MIG (8–14 attacks/month), physical inactivity, and independent walking ability. Exclusion criteria include contraindications to PA and lack of informed consent. Participants will be randomized to standard care (SC) or an intervention group receiving TPE plus three months of supervised exercise (EXE). All participants will receive an informational brochure with nutritional tips (included in SC) and undergo: (1) neurological examination, (2) validated questionnaires, (3) kinesiological and postural assessment, and (4) gnathological evaluation. The primary outcome is change in monthly MIG frequency at 6 and 12 months; additional outcomes include disability, quality of life, and intensity of MIG, PA levels, sedentary behavior, medication use, EH, functional capabilities, postural parameters, and temporomandibular disorder-related variables. Results: Hypothetically, the intervention may reduce monthly MIG frequency by approximately 15–20% relative to baseline. Improvements may also occur in disability, quality of life, medication use, lifestyle behaviors, and psychological and cardiometabolic parameters. Conclusions: This trial will evaluate whether adding supervised EXE and TPE to SC may improve MIG outcomes compared with SC alone, supporting a comprehensive management strategy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pippi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: