Impact of Headache on Quality of Life in a General Population Survey in France (GRIM2000 Study) (original) (raw)
Disability and quality of life in headache: where we are now and where we are heading
Neurological Sciences, 2013
Headache disorders determine relevant personal and societal burden, and thus the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) investigating the level of disability and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) have been increasingly used in headache research. The aim of this review was to address the status of research on disability and HRQoL, by addressing results from recently published clinical trials as well as in longitudinal observational studies on headache patients. PubMed has been searched for papers in which measures of HRQoL and/or disability were used as primary or secondary outcome on adult subjects with primary headache, and published in 2010-2012. Among the 70 records retrieved, 12 papers were selected for narrative synthesis. They included data on 2,621 patients with episodic migraine with and without aura, chronic daily headache, and/or chronic migraine with and without medication overuse. The selected trials investigated the efficacy of different pharmacological prophylaxis, of some surgical approaches, of education programmes and osteopathic manipulative treatment; two studies reported longitudinal observations of patients currently under treatment. Overall, the results of our review showed that headache frequency as well as HRQoL and disability were positively impacted by treatment interventions; positive outcomes were less evident in two studies, and similar results were found in the two observational studies. Our findings confirmed that the most commonly used PROMs, including disease-specific tools to assess disability and HRQoL and SF-36, are sensitive to the beneficial effects occurring over time in functioning and quality of life domains in headache patients. They also suggest that the personal and societal costs of headache disorders are likely to be reduced when headache patients receive appropriate treatments and when continuity of care is offered. In terms of future directions, we note that the systematic use of appropriate PROMs should be encouraged both in the clinical practice and in the research field, as they offer a valid option to assess the global effect of treatments on patient-perceived sense of well-being and quality of performance.
Health-related quality of life in tension-type headache: a population-based study
Scandinavian Journal of Pain, 2021
Objectives Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most prevalent primary headache disorder. We assessed the cross-sectional impact of TTH on health related quality of life (HRQoL) in a general population. We also examined the association of HRQoL scores with headache frequency, disability, medication overuse, poor self-rated health, psychiatric comorbidity, and pain sensitivity in individuals with TTH. Methods A sample of 547 subjects completed a headache diagnostic interview, the SF-12 to calculate physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) health component scores, depression (major depression inventory [MDI]) and neuroticism (Eysenck Personality Questionnaire) measures. We defined the following headache diagnosis categories: pure TTH, pure migraine, and coexistent headache (TTH + migraine). Cases were further classified into chronic (≥15) or episodic (<15 headache days/month). Results Using generalized linear models (GLM) adjusted for age, sex and education, both PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores vari...
The Eurolight project: the impact of primary headache disorders in Europe. Description of methods
The journal of headache and pain, 2011
The Eurolight project is the first at European Union level to assess the impact of headache disorders, and also the first of its scale performed by collaboration between professional and lay organizations and individuals. Here are reported the methods developed for it. The project took the form of surveys, by structured questionnaire, conducted in ten countries of Europe which together represented 60% of the adult population of the European Union. In Lithuania, the survey was population-based. Elsewhere, truly population-based studies were impractical for reasons of cost, and various compromises were developed. Closest to being population-based were the surveys in Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Italy and Spain. In Austria, France and UK, samples were taken from health-care settings. In addition in the Netherlands, Spain and Ireland, samples were drawn from members of national headache patient organizations and their relatives. Independent double data-entry was performed prior...
Cephalalgia, 2005
The 2004 International Headache Society (IHS) classification of headache disorders introduced the new category of probable migraine defined by the existence of all but one of typical migraine criteria. FRAMIG 3, the first nationwide population-based survey performed in France using the 2004 IHS classification, assessed the prevalence of probable migraine and compared its features and management with those of strict migraine. Of a representative sample of 10 532 adult subjects interviewed, 1179 subjects (11.2%) were diagnosed as having strict migraine and 1066 (10.1%) as having probable migraine. The criterion most frequently missing was typical headache duration (4-72 h) and most subjects with probable headache had shorter average headache duration. Migraine severity and disability, although lower than those noted in subjects with strict migraine, were significant in subjects with probable migraine and quality of life impairment was identical among the two groups of migraine sufferers. Strict and probable migraine, which have similar prevalence and impact on migraine subjects, deserve similar medical and therapeutic management. ᮀ Epidemiology, probable migraine, psychiatric comorbidity, quality of life, therapeutic management
Quality of life differs among headache diagnoses: analysis of SF36 survey in 901 headache patients
Pain, 2001
This paper presents the results of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in 901 patients consecutively visiting a headache clinic of a national medical center in Taipei, Taiwan. HRQoL was evaluated with the Medical Outcome Study-Short Form (SF-36) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). According to the classi®cation criteria for chronic daily headache (CDH) proposed by Silberstein et al. (Neurology 47 (1996) 871) ®ve hundred and ninety-three (66%) patients had CDH, of whom transformed migraine (TM) was diagnosed in 310, and chronic tension-type headache (CTTH) in 231. One hundred and ninety-three patients had episodic migraine. All SF-36 scale scores signi®cantly correlated with the HADS scores and the intensity and frequency of pain. Compared with the normative data, a pervasive multidimensional decline of the SF-36 scores was noted among the headache patients except for the physical functioning scale. The decline was most remarkable in the role limitations of physical and emotional dimensions and in the bodily pain. An increasing impairment of the SF-36 scores was noted from migraine to CTTH to TM. After controlling for the HADS, age, gender, education, and chronic illness by multiple linear regression analyses, the patients with TM had the worst SF-36 pro®le; whereas, the patients with CTTH and migraine had compatible results. This study is the ®rst to demonstrate that the SF-36 scores differ among headache diagnoses. Psychological distress, as well as the percentages of the types of patients, greatly in¯uenced the SF-36 scores in hospital-based headache samples. Our ®ndings also suggest that improvement in the pain pro®le as well as psychological well-being can predict a generalized improvement in the SF-36 scales in headache patients.
The journal of headache and pain, 2005
This overview of the published epidemiological evidence of migraine helps to identify the size of the public-health problem that migraine represents. It also highlights the need for further epidemiological studies in many parts of the world to gain full understanding of the scale of clinical, economic and humanistic burdens attributable to it. This paper presents some of the work on migraine undertaken by the World Health Organization (WHO) in the Global Burden of Disease study conducted in 2000 and reported in the World Health Report 2001. Migraine was not included in the first Global Burden of Disease 1990. The paper also discussed the measurement of disability attributable to headache disorders using WHO ICF Classification. Using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as a summary measure of population health (which adds disability to mortality), WHO have shown that mental and neurological disorders collectively account for 30.8% of all years of healthy life lost to disability (Y...
The burden of headache in a patient population from a specialized headache centre
Cephalalgia, 2007
The aim was to characterize the individual and socio-economic impact of headache in a patient population from The Danish Headache Centre. This was a cross-sectional study using a structured interview, prospective headache diaries and standardized self-administered questionnaires using the ICHD-II criteria. Fifty-five subjects (12 male and 43 female) with a median age of 41 years and a median headache frequency of 15 days/month participated. Very high utilization of the healthcare system and a high absence rate due to headache of 12 days/ year were reported. Eighty-one percent experienced a marked decrease in work effectiveness. Overall, 91% felt hampered by their headache on a daily basis and 98% had had expenses for headache medication. Frequent headache disorders are highly costly, especially due to indirect costs. Prevention, early intervention or effective treatment strategies for headache disorders may therefore be highly cost effective, not only for the individual but also for society. ᮀ Burden of headache, individual and socio-economic impact, specialized headache centre Gabrielle R. Vinding, Medical Student,
Validity of an illness severity measure for headache in a population sample of migraine sufferers
Pain, 1999
The headache impact questionnaire (HImQ) is used to measure pain and activity limitations from headache over a 3-month recall period. In a prior study, the test-retest reliability of the eight-item HImQ score was found to be relatively high (0.86). In the current study, we examined the validity of the eight-item HImQ by comparing the overall score and individual items to equivalent measures from a 90-day diary. Pain and activity limitations due to headache were assessed in a population-based sample of 132 migraine headache sufferers enrolled in a 90-day daily diary study who completed the HImQ at the end of the study. The HImQ score was derived from four frequencybased questions (i.e. number of headaches, missed days of work, missed days of chores, or missed days of non-work activity) and four summary measures of average experience across headaches (i.e. average pain intensity, and average reduced effectiveness when having a headache at work, during household chores, and in non-work activity). Diary based measures were used as the gold standard in evaluating the HImQ score. Mean and median values of frequency-based HImQ items (e.g. number of headaches) were similar to equivalent diary measures, indicating no systematic bias. In contrast, HImQ measures of average experience across attacks (e.g. average pain intensity) overestimated equivalent diary measures and, in general, better approximated diary measures for migraine headaches, rather than all headaches. The highest correlations between HImQ and diary items were observed for headache frequency and average pain intensity, the two general headache measures, followed by measures of reduced effectiveness. Among frequency-based measures, the strength of the correlation was directly related to the magnitude of the mean. The higher the mean value, the higher the correlation. The correlation between the HImQ score and diary based score was 0.49. The HImQ score is moderately valid. Frequency-based items (e.g. number of missed work days) were found to be unbiased and the highest correlation coefficients were observed for frequency-based items with relatively high mean counts (number of headaches, number of missed non-work days). These findings have implications for measuring severity of chronic episodic conditions like headache, asthma, back pain, arthritis, epilepsy, and panic disorder, which can cause limitations to activities. The validity of illness severity measures may be improved by using frequency-based questions to assess both missed activity days and days with significantly reduced effectiveness or productivity (e.g. by 50% or more). By combining the count for both missed days and days where productivity is substantially reduced, the mean of the frequency-based measure will be increased, a factor which may improve the overall validity of the item. A severity measure can be derived from such items by simple addition and provides a scale with intuitively meaningful units.
Development of a self-reporting questionnaire, BURMIG, to evaluate the burden of migraine
Journal of Headache and Pain, 2008
We developed a 77-item self-reporting questionnaire to assess the burden of migraine (BURMIG), including headache characteristics, migraine associated disability, comorbidities, management, and the consequences on the patients’ lives. We translated BURMIG into four languages (French, Portuguese, German and English) and tested it in 130 headache patients (20 pain clinic, 17 primary care and 93 general public) in Luxembourg. We performed a linguistic and a face-content validation and tested the questionnaire for its comprehensiveness, internal consistency and for its retest-reliability at an interval of 1 month (completion rates were 79.6 and 76.4%, for test and retest, respectively). Retest-reliability for the different parts of the questionnaire varied between 0.6 and 1.0 (Kappa coefficient), with an intracorrelation coefficient of 0.7–1.0. The internal consistency was between 0.74 and 0.91 (Cronbach’s alpha). The questionnaire BURMIG is suitable to evaluate the burden of migraine and can be used in English, German, French and Portuguese.