Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Evidence on the medium-term clinical course of recurrent headaches is scarce. This study explored the six-month course and factors associated with non-improvement in migraine compared with tension-type headache and cervicogenic headache. Methods In this longitudinal cohort study, the six-month course of headaches was prospectively examined in participants (n = 37 with migraine; n = 42 with tension-type or cervicogenic headache). Participants underwent physical examination for cervical musculoskeletal impairments at baseline. Participants also completed questionnaires on pain, disability and other self-report measures at baseline and follow-up, and kept an electronic diary for 6 months. Course of headaches was examined using mixed within-between analyses of variance and Markov chain modeling. Multiple factors were evaluated as possible factors associated with non-improvement using regression analysis. Results Headache frequency, intensity, and activity interference in migraine and non-migraine headaches were generally stable over 6 months but showed month-to-month variations. Day-to-day variations were more volatile in the migraine than the non-migraine group, with the highest probability of transitioning from any headache state to no headache (probability = 0.82-0.85). The odds of non-improvement in disability was nearly six times higher with cervical joint dysfunction (odds ratio [95% CI] = 5.58 [1.14-27.42]). Conclusions Headache frequency, intensity, and activity interference change over 6 months, with day-to-day variation being more volatile in migraine than non-migraine headaches. Cervical joint dysfunction appears to be associated with non-improvement for disability in 6 months. These results may contribute to strategies for educating patients to help align their expectations with the nature of their headaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aguila et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: