Sleep disturbances in tension-type headache and migraine

Background: A previous study by our team reported the prevalence of primary headache disorders and factors associated with headache among nurses in three hospitals in North China. The aim of this cross-sectional survey was to learn more about how medical nurses in South China were affected by headache. Additionally, we determined the prevalence of headache and measured the impact of headache among doctors in mainland China for the first time. Methods: Stratified random cluster sampling was used to select 280 physicians and 365 nurses from various departments in four hospitals in Sanya, which is one of southernmost cities in China. Information was collected on demographic data, occupational factors and headache characteristics by using a structured questionnaire. Results: Among 645 medical staff, 548 (85%) responded (doctors = 240, nurses = 308). Among the medical staff, the 1year prevalence of primary headache disorders was 50%, with 25.9% experiencing migraine and 24.1% experiencing tension-type headache (TTH). The prevalence of migraine in female doctors was higher than that in female nurses, although this difference was not significant (32.4% vs. 29.8%, P = 0.628). Multivariate analysis showed that being female and working in other specialties (Emergency Department & Radiology Department) remained independent risk factors for migraine in doctors (OR 2.314 and 3.223). In nurses, being married was a risk factor for migraine (OR 3.728), and job titles remained an independent risk factor for migraine and TTH (OR 2.294 and 4.695). Working more than 6 night-shifts per month was associated with an increased prevalence of migraine and TTH in doctors; the same was true in nurses for migraine, but not for TTH. Conclusion: The prevalence of primary headache disorders in both nurses and doctors is higher than that in the general population in South China. Our study shows that occupation, geography and sex may play an important role. Further, female doctors are more susceptible than female nurses to migraine. The risk factors relevant to headache that were found in this study should provide an important reference for promoting occupational health in medical staff, especially female doctors in China.

Introduction Despite 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 body Definitions 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. Conclusions We 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.

Headache is the clinical syndrome most commonly observed by neurologists in daily practice. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments are commonly used for the management of headaches; however, the clinical reasoning behind these interventions is not properly applied. We conducted a narrative literature review using as data sources for academic PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, EBSCO, PEDro, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Collaboration Trials Register, and SCOPUS. This narrative literature review mainly considered systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised clinical trials, and expert opinions published after the year 2000 discussing clinical reasoning for application of non-pharmacological interventions in individuals with tension-type, migraine, and cervicogenic headaches. After the data extraction, we organized the literature thematically as follows: (1) mapping of theoretical aspects of non-pharmacological interventions; (2) summarizing most updated literature about effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions grouped by targeted tissue and headache; (3) identifying research gaps in the existing literature and proposing hypotheses for better understanding of current clinical reasoning. We found that there are many non-pharmacological treatment strategies used for headaches, including beyond the tissue-based impairment treatments (bottom-up) and strategies targeting the central nervous system (top down). Bottom-up strategies include joint-biased, soft-tissue biased, or needling interventions, whereas top-down strategies include exercise and cognitive interventions. Evidence shows that the effectiveness of these interventions depends on the application of proper clinical reasoning, since not all strategies are effective for all headaches. For instance, evidence of non-pharmacological interventions is more controversial for migraines than for tension-type or cervicogenic headaches, since migraine pathogenesis involves activation of sub-cortical structures and the trigemino- vascular system, whereas pathogenesis of tension-type or cervicogenic headaches is most associated to musculoskeletal impairments of the cervical spine. We conclude that current literature suggests that not all non-pharmacological interventions are effective for all headaches, and that multimodal, not isolated, approaches seem to be more effective for patients with headaches. Most published studies have reported small clinical effects in the short term. This narrative literature review provides some hypotheses for discrepancies in the available literature and future research. Clinical reasoning should be applied to better understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions.