Related Articles

The management of patients with headaches is a major component of every paediatric practice. In a nationally representative sample of Canadian adolescents, it was found that 26.6% of those 12 to 13 years of age and 31.2% of those 14 to 15 years of age reported that they experienced headaches at least once per week.

The diagnosis of headaches in children and adolescents is established through a headache history in the vast majority of patients. Specific questions can identify those at most risk for headaches secondary to underlying pathology. Similarly, the examination should be tailored to identify those who require further investigation. Investigations are not routinely indicated for paediatric headache, but neuroimaging should be considered in children whose headaches do not meet the criteria for one of the primary headache syndromes and in those with an abnormal neurological examination.

The optimal treatment of primary headaches should begin with nonpharmacological methods. Preventive pharmacological therapy should be considered when headaches significantly impair the patient’s quality of life. Flunarizine may be valuable in paediatric headache prevention, and ibuprofen, acetaminophen and nasal sumatriptan may be effective in the acute management of headaches.

Objective

The purpose of this case study is to describe the treatment using acupuncture and spinal manipulation for a patient with a chronic tension-type headache and episodic migraines.

Clinical Features

A 32-year-old woman presented with headaches of 5 months' duration. She had a history of episodic migraine that began in her teens and had been controlled with medication. She had stopped taking the prescription medications because of gastrointestinal symptoms. A neurologist diagnosed her with mixed headaches, some migrainous and some tension type. Her headaches were chronic, were daily, and fit the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria of a chronic tension-type headache superimposed with migraine.

Intervention and Outcome

After 5 treatments over a 2-week period (the first using acupuncture only, the next 3 using acupuncture and chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy), her headaches resolved. The patient had no recurrences of headaches in her 1-year follow-up.

Conclusion

The combination of acupuncture with chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy was a reasonable alternative in treating this patient's chronic tension-type headaches superimposed with migraine.

The aim of this study was to investigate the validity of the ID Migraine™ test in neurology outpatient clinics (NOCs), regardless of their presenting complaints. Patients admitted to 41 NOCs were screened. Eligible subjects (n=3682) were evaluated by a neurologist for headache diagnosis according to the International Headache Society criteria and asked the 3-item screening questions of the ID Migraine™ test. Of 3682 patients, 917 (24.9%) were diagnosed as migraine, whereas 1171 (31.8%) were ID Migraine™ test positive. The sensitivity of the ID Migraine™ test for neurologist’s diagnosis of migraine was 91.8%, specificity was 63.4%, positive predictive value was 71.9% and negative predictive value was 88.4%. The ID Migraine™ test is easy to use and a practical test that could alert the neurologist to diagnose patients having other complaints. This test would help to increase the diagnosis and treatment rate of undiagnosed migraine patients in NOCs.

Background

Outpatient integrated headache care was established in 2005 at the Essen Headache Centre in Germany. This paper reports outcome data for this approach.

Methods

Patients were seen by a neurologist for headache diagnosis and recommendation for drug treatment. Depending on clinical needs, patients were seen by a psychologist and/or physical therapist. A 5-day headache-specific multidisciplinary treatment programme (MTP) was provided for patients with frequent or chronic migraine, tension type headache (TTH) and medication overuse headache (MOH). Subsequent outpatient treatment was provided by neurologists in private practice.

Results

Follow-up data on headache frequency and burden of disease were prospectively obtained in 841 patients (mean age 41.5 years) after 3, 6 and 12 months. At baseline mean headache frequency was 18.1 (SD = 1.6) days per month, compared to measurement at 1 year follow-up a mean reduction of 5.8 (SD = 11.9) headache days per month was observed in 486 patients (57.8%) after one year (TTH patients mean: -8.5 days per month; migraine mean: -3.2 days per month, patients with migraine and TTH mean: -5.9 days per month). A reduction in headache days ≥ 50% was observed in 306 patients (36.4%) independent of diagnosis, while headache frequency remains unchanged in 20.9% and increase in 21.3% of the patient.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary outpatient headache centres offer an effective way to establish a three-tier treatment offer for difficult headache patients depending on clinical needs.

Background

Cluster headache is a primary headache by definition not caused by any known underlying structural pathology. However, symptomatic cases have been described, e.g. tumours, particularly pituitary adenomas, malformations, and infections/inflammations. The evaluation of cluster headache is an issue unresolved.

Case description

We present a case of a 43-year-old patient who presented with a 2-month history of side-locked attacks of pain located in the left orbit. He satisfied the revised International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for cluster headache. His medical and family histories were unremarkable. There was no history of headache. A diagnosis of cluster headache was made. The patient responded to symptomatic treatment. Computer tomography and enhanced magnetic resonance imaging after 1 month displayed a supra- and intrasellar arachnoid cyst with mass effect on adjacent structures. After operation, the headache attacks resolved completely.

Discussion and evaluation

Although we cannot exclude an unintentional comorbidity, in our opinion, the co-occurrence of an arachnoid cyst with mass effect with unilateral headache, in a hitherto headache-free man, points toward the fact that in this case the CH was caused or triggered by the AC. The headache attacks resolved completely after the operation and the patient also remained headache free at the follow-up. The response of the headache to sumatriptan and other typical CH medications does not exclude a secondary form. Symptomatic CHs responsive to this therapy have been described. Associated cranial lesions such as tumours have been reported in CH patients and the attacks may be clinically indistinguishable from the primary form.

Conclusions

Neuroimaging, preferably contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging should always be considered in patients with cluster headache despite normal neurological examination. Late-onset cluster headache represents a condition that requires careful evaluation. Supra- and intrasellar arachnoid cyst can present as cluster headache.

The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of misdiagnosis of sinus headache in migraine and other primary headache types in the children and adolescents with chronic or recurrent headaches. Children with chronic or recurrent headaches (n = 310) were prospectively evaluated. Data collection for each patient included history of previously diagnosed sinusitis due to headache, and additional sinusitis complaints (such as fever, cough, nasal discharge, postnasal discharge) at the time of sinusitis diagnosis, and improvement of the headache following treatment of sinusitis. If sinus radiographs existed they were recorded. The study included 214 patients with complete data. One hundred and sixteen (54.2%) patients have been diagnosed as sinusitis previously and 25% of them had at least one additional complaint, while 75% of them had none. Sinusitis treatment had no effect on the headaches in 60.3% of the patients. Sinus graphy had been performed in 52.8%, and 50.4% of them were normal. The prevalence of sinus headache concomitant with primary headache, and only sinus headache was detected in 7 and 1%, respectively, in our study. Approximately 40% of the patients with migraine and 60% of the patients with tension-type headache had been misdiagnosed as “sinus headache”. Children with chronic or recurrent headaches are frequently misdiagnosed as sinus headache and receive unnecessary sinusitis treatment and sinus graphy.

Headache is the most common somatic complaint in children and adolescents. The evaluation should include detailed history of children and adolescents completed by detailed general and neurological examinations. Moreover, the possible role of psychological factors, life events and excessively stressful lifestyle in influencing recurrent headache need to be checked. The choice of laboratory tests rests on the differential diagnosis suggested by the history, the character and temporal pattern of the headache, and the physical and neurological examinations. Subjects who have any signs or symptoms of focal/progressive neurological disturbances should be investigated by neuroimaging techniques. The electroencephalogram and other neurophysiological examinations are of limited value in the routine evaluation of headaches. In a primary headache disorder, headache itself is the illness and headache is not attributed to any other disorder (e.g. migraine, tension-type headache, cluster headache and other trigeminal autonomic cephalgias). In secondary headache disorders, headache is the symptom of identifiable structural, metabolic or other abnormality. Red flags include the first or worst headache ever in the life, recent headache onset, increasing severity or frequency, occipital location, awakening from sleep because of headache, headache occurring exclusively in the morning associated with severe vomiting and headache associated with straining. Thus, the differential diagnosis between primary and secondary headaches rests mainly on clinical criteria. A thorough evaluation of headache in children and adolescents is necessary to make the correct diagnosis and initiate treatment, bearing in mind that children with headache are more likely to experience psychosocial adversity and to grow up with an excess of both headache and other physical and psychiatric symptoms and this creates an important healthcare problem for their future life.

Headache is the most common somatic complaint in children and adolescents. The evaluation should include detailed history of children and adolescents completed by detailed general and neurological examinations. Moreover, the possible role of psychological factors, life events and excessively stressful lifestyle in influencing recurrent headache need to be checked. The choice of laboratory tests rests on the differential diagnosis suggested by the history, the character and temporal pattern of the headache, and the physical and neurological examinations. Subjects who have any signs or symptoms of focal/progressive neurological disturbances should be investigated by neuroimaging techniques. The electroencephalogram and other neurophysiological examinations are of limited value in the routine evaluation of headaches. In a primary headache disorder, headache itself is the illness and headache is not attributed to any other disorder (e.g. migraine, tension-type headache, cluster headache and other trigeminal autonomic cephalgias). In secondary headache disorders, headache is the symptom of identifiable structural, metabolic or other abnormality. Red flags include the first or worst headache ever in the life, recent headache onset, increasing severity or frequency, occipital location, awakening from sleep because of headache, headache occurring exclusively in the morning associated with severe vomiting and headache associated with straining. Thus, the differential diagnosis between primary and secondary headaches rests mainly on clinical criteria. A thorough evaluation of headache in children and adolescents is necessary to make the correct diagnosis and initiate treatment, bearing in mind that children with headache are more likely to experience psychosocial adversity and to grow up with an excess of both headache and other physical and psychiatric symptoms and this creates an important healthcare problem for their future life.

Methods: All children presenting to a specialist headache clinic over seven years with headache as their main complaint were assessed by clinical history, physical and neurological examination, neuroimaging where indicated, and by follow up using prospective headache diaries. Results: A total of 815 children and adolescents (1.25–18.75 years of age, mean 10.8 years (SD 2.9); 432 male) were assessed. Mean duration of headache was 21.2 months (SD 21.2). Neuroimaging (brain CT or MRI) was carried out on 142 (17.5%) children. The vast majority of patients had idiopathic headache (migraine, tension, or unclassified headaches). Fifty one children (6.3%) had other chronic neurological disorders that were unrelated to the headache. The headache in three children (0.37%, 95% CI 0.08% to 1.1%) was related to active intracranial pathology which was predictable on clinical findings in two children but was unexpected until a later stage in one child (0.12%, 95% CI 0.006% to 0.68%).

Conclusions: Chronic headache in childhood is rarely due to serious intracranial pathology. Careful history and thorough clinical examination will identify most patients with serious underlying brain abnormalities. Change in headache symptomatology or personality change should lower the threshold for imaging.

The study of CNS painmodulating pathways has led to important discoveries about the role of central nociceptive structures such as PAG and hypothalamus in the pathophysiology of episodic and chronic primary headaches. Functional neuroimaging studies have revealed that primary headaches are characterised by different patterns of activation of central pain modulatory structures. A future model of headache pathophysiology investigating the contribution of CNS pain–modulating pathways will probably increase our understanding of pain processing in primary headaches. Herein we review the neurophysiological approaches to assess central pain modulation in primary headaches with emphasis on the diffuse noxious inhibitory control, a form of endogenous pain inhibition. In addition, patients’ data will be presented that highlights the utility of such methods for primary headache’s pathophysiology and clinical monitoring.

This study was planned to investigate the economic impact of headache on Turkish headache sufferers attending a tertiary care outpatient headache clinic.

A total of 937 headache patients were included in this study and questioned using a questionnaire for the profile of patients and headache, quality of life of patients and economic impact of headache. The median total direct cost was found to be 88.0 USD and the median total cost was 160.7 USD. The drug treatment cost was the highest item followed by the specialist outpatient care cost. The average lost and inefficient work/school days was 1.5 (0–45) and 8.4 (0–100) days for one year.

It was shown that loss of productivity was higher for migraine without aura group when compared with the episodic and chronic tension–type headache groups. The results of this nationwide university hospital based study methshowed that headache, especially migraine, has considerable economic impact on patients.

Thunderclap headache attributed to reversible cerebral vasoconstriction (THARCV) is a syndrome observed in a number of reported cases. In this article we reviewed this new headache entity (idiopathic form) using the clinical-radiological findings of 25 reported patients. In this series of patients 72% were women, the mean age at the onset of first headache episode was 39.4 ± 2.3 years. In addition to the sine qua non condition of being abrupt and severe (thunderclap) at the onset, the headache was usually described as being explosive, excruciating, or crushing. The feature of pulsatility, accompanied or not by nausea was described by 80% of the patients. Forty percent of the cases manifested vomiting and 24% photophobia. Usually the headache was generalized, and in three cases it was unilateral at least at the onset. In 21 of 25 patients (84%) there was at least one recurrence or a sudden increase in the intensity of the headache. A past history of migraine was present in 52% of the patients. Precipitating factors were identified in 56% of the patients. Sexual intercourse was described by six patients. Of the 25 patients with THARCV syndrome studied, 12 (48%) developed focal neurological signs, transitory ischemic attack (n = 1), or ischemic stroke (n = 11, 44%), and two (8%) of them manifested seizures. The THARCV syndrome is a neurological disturbance perhaps more frequent than expected, preferentially affecting middle aged female migraineurs, and having an unpredictable prognosis, either showing a benign course or leading to stroke.

BACKGROUND:

Despite advances in treatment, patients with migraine have been underdiagnosed and undertreated, specifically in emergency departments. In addition, great variability exists with respect to the diagnosis, management and treatment of migraine patients in emergency departments. In particular, migraine-specific treatments, including serotonin receptor agonists, appear to be rarely used.

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the diagnosis and management of migraine patients within Ontario emergency departments.

METHODS:

A prospective survey was designed to inquire how emergency physicians diagnose and manage patients with migraine. Questions focused on the use of serotonin receptor agonists, the rationale behind their use or nonuse, and acute headache protocols. The survey also inquired about the use of International Classification Of Headache Disorders-2 criteria in diagnosing migraine by emergency physicians, medication prescribed on discharge, and referrals made to outpatient specialists. These surveys were distributed to and anonymously completed by emergency physicians in several departments in Ontario.

RESULTS:

Migraine-specific treatments were underused in emergency departments. Furthermore, many departments lacked headache protocols and, often, migraine-specific treatment was not included in the few departments with protocols.

CONCLUSIONS:

Diagnosis and management of migraines can be improved within emergency departments, and patients can be more effectively channelled toward appropriate outpatient care.

Background

Although headache is a common emergency department (ED) chief complaint, the role of the ED in the management of primary headache disorders has rarely been assessed from a population perspective. We determined frequency of ED use and risk factors for use among patients suffering severe headache.

Methods

As part of the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study, a validated self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 24,000 severe headache sufferers, who were randomly drawn from a larger sample constructed to be socio-demographically representative of the US population. Participants were asked a series of questions on headache management, healthcare system use, socio-demographic features, and number of ED visits for management of headache in the previous 12 months. In keeping with the work of others, “frequent” ED use was defined as a particpants report of four or more visits to the ED for treatment of a headache in the previous 12 months. Headaches were categorized into specific diagnoses using a validated methodology.

Results

Of 24,000 surveys, 18,514 were returned, and 13,451 (56%) provided complete data on ED use. Socio-demographic characteristics did not differ substantially between responders and non-responders. Among the 13,451 responders, over the course of the previous year, 12,592 (94%) did not visit the ED at all, 415 (3%) visited the ED once, and 444 (3%) visited the ED more than once. Patients with severe episodic tension-type headache were less likely to use the ED than patients with severe episodic migraine (OR 0.4 [95%CI 0.3, 0.6]). Frequent ED use was reported by 1% of the total sample or 19% (95%CI: 17, 22%) of subjects who used the ED in the previous year, though frequent users accounted for 51% (95%CI: 49, 53) of all ED visits. Predictors of ED use included markers of disease severity, elevated depression scores, low socio-economic status, and a predilection for ED use for conditions other than headache.

Conclusions

Most individuals suffering severe headaches do not use the ED over the course of a single year. The majority of ED visits for severe headache are accounted for by a small subset of all ED users. Increasing disease severity and depression are the most readily addressable factors associated with ED use.

Executive Summary

Objective

The objectives of this evidence based review are:

i) To determine the effectiveness of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in the evaluation of persons with a chronic headache and a normal neurological examination.

ii) To determine the comparative effectiveness of CT and MRI scans for detecting significant intracranial abnormalities in persons with chronic headache and a normal neurological exam.

iii) To determine the budget impact of CT and MRI scans for persons with a chronic headache and a normal neurological exam.

Clinical Need: Condition and Target Population

Headaches disorders are generally classified as either primary or secondary with further sub-classifications into specific headache types. Primary headaches are those not caused by a disease or medical condition and include i) tension-type headache, ii) migraine, iii) cluster headache and, iv) other primary headaches, such as hemicrania continua and new daily persistent headache. Secondary headaches include those headaches caused by an underlying medical condition. While primary headaches disorders are far more frequent than secondary headache disorders, there is an urge to carry out neuroimaging studies (CT and/or MRI scans) out of fear of missing uncommon secondary causes and often to relieve patient anxiety.

Tension type headaches are the most common primary headache disorder and migraines are the most common severe primary headache disorder. Cluster headaches are a type of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia and are less common than migraines and tension type headaches. Chronic headaches are defined as headaches present for at least 3 months and lasting greater than or equal to 15 days per month. The International Classification of Headache Disorders states that for most secondary headaches the characteristics of the headache are poorly described in the literature and for those headache disorders where it is well described there are few diagnostically important features.

The global prevalence of headache in general in the adult population is estimated at 46%, for tension-type headache it is 42% and 11% for migraine headache. The estimated prevalence of cluster headaches is 0.1% or 1 in 1000 persons. The prevalence of chronic daily headache is estimated at 3%.

Neuroimaging

Computed Tomography

Computed tomography (CT) is a medical imaging technique used to aid diagnosis and to guide interventional and therapeutic procedures. It allows rapid acquisition of high-resolution three-dimensional images, providing radiologists and other physicians with cross-sectional views of a person’s anatomy. CT scanning poses risk of radiation exposure. The radiation exposure from a conventional CT scanner may emit effective doses of 2-4mSv for a typical head CT.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a medical imaging technique used to aid diagnosis but unlike CT it does not use ionizing radiation. Instead, it uses a strong magnetic field to image a person’s anatomy. Compared to CT, MRI can provide increased contrast between the soft tissues of the body. Because of the persistent magnetic field, extra care is required in the magnetic resonance environment to ensure that injury or harm does not come to any personnel while in the environment.

Research Questions

What is the effectiveness of CT and MRI scanning in the evaluation of persons with a chronic headache and a normal neurological examination?

What is the comparative effectiveness of CT and MRI scanning for detecting significant intracranial abnormality in persons with chronic headache and a normal neurological exam?

What is the budget impact of CT and MRI scans for persons with a chronic headache and a normal neurological exam.

Research Methods

Literature Search

Search Strategy

A literature search was performed on February 18, 2010 using OVID MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library, and the International Agency for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) for studies published from January, 2005 to February, 2010. Abstracts were reviewed by a single reviewer and, for those studies meeting the eligibility criteria full-text articles were obtained. Reference lists were also examined for any additional relevant studies not identified through the search. Articles with an unknown eligibility were reviewed with a second clinical epidemiologist and then a group of epidemiologists until consensus was established.

Inclusion Criteria

Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, observational studies

Outpatient adult population with chronic headache and normal neurological exam

Studies reporting likelihood ratio of clinical variables for a significant intracranial abnormality

English language studies

2005-present

Exclusion Criteria

Studies which report outcomes for persons with seizures, focal symptoms, recent/new onset headache, change in presentation, thunderclap headache, and headache due to trauma

Persons with abnormal neurological examination

Case reports

Outcomes of Interest

Primary Outcome

Probability for intracranial abnormality

Secondary Outcome

Patient relief from anxiety

System service use

System costs

Detection rates for significant abnormalities in MRI and CT scans

Summary of Findings

Effectiveness

One systematic review, 1 small RCT, and 1 observational study met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The systematic review completed by Detsky, et al. reported the likelihood ratios of specific clinical variables to predict significant intracranial abnormalities. The RCT completed by Howard et al., evaluated whether neuroimaging persons with chronic headache increased or reduced patient anxiety. The prospective observational study by Sempere et al., provided evidence for the pre-test probability of intracranial abnormalities in persons with chronic headache as well as minimal data on the comparative effectiveness of CT and MRI to detect intracranial abnormalities.

Outcome 1: Pre-test Probability.

The pre-test probability is usually related to the prevalence of the disease and can be adjusted depending on the characteristics of the population. The study by Sempere et al. determined the pre-test probability (prevalence) of significant intracranial abnormalities in persons with chronic headaches defined as headache experienced for at least a 4 week duration with a normal neurological exam. There is a pre-test probability of 0.9% (95% CI 0.5, 1.4) in persons with chronic headache and normal neurological exam. The highest pre-test probability of 5 found in persons with cluster headaches. The second highest, that of 3.7, was reported in persons with indeterminate type headache. There was a 0.75% rate of incidental findings.

Likelihood ratios for detecting a significant abnormality

Clinical findings from the history and physical may be used as screening test to predict abnormalities on neuroimaging. The extent to which the clinical variable may be a good predictive variable can be captured by reporting its likelihood ratio. The likelihood ratio provides an estimate of how much a test result will change the odds of having a disease or condition. The positive likelihood ratio (LR+) tells you how much the odds of having the disease increases when a test is positive. The negative likelihood ratio (LR-) tells you how much the odds of having the disease decreases when the test is negative.

Detsky et al., determined the likelihood ratio for specific clinical variable from 11 studies. There were 4 clinical variables with both statistically significant positive and negative likelihood ratios. These included: abnormal neurological exam (LR+ 5.3, LR- 0.72), undefined headache (LR+ 3.8, LR- 0.66), headache aggravated by exertion or valsalva (LR+ 2.3, LR- 0.70), and headache with vomiting (LR+ 1.8, and LR- 0.47). There were two clinical variables with a statistically significant positive likelihood ratio and non significant negative likelihood ratio. These included: cluster-type headache (LR+ 11, LR- 0.95), and headache with aura (LR+ 12.9, LR- 0.52). Finally, there were 8 clinical variables with both statistically non significant positive and negative likelihood ratios. These included: headache with focal symptoms, new onset headache, quick onset headache, worsening headache, male gender, headache with nausea, increased headache severity, and migraine type headache.

Outcome 2: Relief from Anxiety

Howard et al. completed an RCT of 150 persons to determine if neuroimaging for headaches was anxiolytic or anxiogenic. Persons were randomized to receiving either an MRI scan or no scan for investigation of their headache. The study population was stratified into those persons with a Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS) > 11 (the high anxiety and depression group) and those < 11 (the low anxiety and depression) so that there were 4 groups:

Group 1: High anxiety and depression, no scan group

Group 2: High anxiety and depression, scan group

Group 3: Low anxiety and depression, no scan group

Group 4: Low anxiety and depression, scan group

Anxiety

There was no evidence for any overall reduction in anxiety at 1 year as measured by a visual analogue scale of ‘level of worry’ when analysed by whether the person received a scan or not. Similarly, there was no interaction between anxiety and depression status and whether a scan was offered or not on patient anxiety. Anxiety did not decrease at 1 year to any statistically significant degree in the high anxiety and depression group (HADS positive) compared with the low anxiety and depression group (HADS negative).

There are serious methodological limitations in this study design which may have contributed to these negative results. First, when considering the comparison of ‘scan’ vs. ‘no scan’ groups, 12 people (16%) in the ‘no scan group’ actually received a scan within the follow up year. If indeed scanning does reduce anxiety then this contamination of the ‘no scan’ group may have reduced the effect between the groups results resulting in a non significant difference in anxiety scores between the ‘scanned’ and the ‘no scan’ group. Second, there was an inadequate sample size at 1 year follow up in each of the 4 groups which may have contributed to a Type II statistical error (missing a difference when one may exist) when comparing scan vs. no scan by anxiety and depression status. Therefore, based on the results and study limitations it is inconclusive as to whether scanning reduces anxiety.

Outcome 3: System Services

Howard et al., considered services used and system costs a secondary outcome. These were determined by examining primary care case notes at 1 year for consultation rates, symptoms, further investigations, and contact with secondary and tertiary care.

System Services

The authors report that the use of neurologist and psychiatrist services was significantly higher for those persons not offered as scan, regardless of their anxiety and depression status (P<0.001 for neurologist, and P=0.033 for psychiatrist)

Outcome 4: System Costs

System Costs

There was evidence of statistically significantly lower system costs if persons with high levels of anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score >11) were provided with a scan (P=0.03 including inpatient costs, and 0.047 excluding inpatient costs).

Comparative Effectiveness of CT and MRI Scans

One study reported the detection rate for significant intracranial abnormalities using CT and MRI. In a cohort of 1876 persons with a non acute headache defined as any type of headache that had begun at least 4 weeks before enrolment Sempere et al. reported that the detection rate was 19/1432 (1.3%) using CT and 4/444 (0.9%) using MRI. Of 119 normal CT scans 2 (1.7%) had significant intracranial abnormality on MRI. The 2 cases were a small meningioma, and an acoustic neurinoma.

Summary

The evidence presented can be summarized as follows:

Pre-test Probability

Based on the results by Sempere et al., there is a low pre-test probability for intracranial abnormalities in persons with chronic headaches and a normal neurological exam (defined as headaches experiences for a minimum of 4 weeks). The Grade quality of evidence supporting this outcome is very low.

Likelihood Ratios

Based on the systematic review by Detsky et al., there is a statistically significant positive and negative likelihood ratio for the following clinical variables: abnormal neurological exam, undefined headache, headache aggravated by exertion or valsalva, headache with vomiting. Grade quality of evidence supporting this outcome is very low.

Based on the systematic review by Detsky et al. there is a statistically significant positive likelihood ratio but non statistically significant negative likelihood ratio for the following clinical variables: cluster headache and headache with aura. The Grade quality of evidence supporting this outcome is very low.

Based on the systematic review by Detsky et al., there is a non significant positive and negative likelihood ratio for the following clinical variables: headache with focal symptoms, new onset headache, quick onset headache, worsening headache, male gender, headache with nausea, increased headache severity, migraine type headache. The Grade quality of evidence supporting this outcome is very low.

Relief from Anxiety

Based on the RCT by Howard et al., it is inconclusive whether neuroimaging scans in persons with a chronic headache are anxiolytic. The Grade quality of evidence supporting this outcome is low.

System Services

Based on the RCT by Howard et al. scanning persons with chronic headache regardless of their anxiety and/or depression level reduces service use. The Grade quality of evidence is low.

System Costs

Based on the RCT by Howard et al., scanning persons with a score greater than 11 on the High Anxiety and Depression Scale reduces system costs. The Grade quality of evidence is moderate.

Comparative Effectiveness of CT and MRI Scans

There is sparse evidence to determine the relative effectiveness of CT compared with MRI scanning for the detection of intracranial abnormalities. The Grade quality of evidence supporting this is very low.

Economic Analysis

Ontario Perspective

Volumes for neuroimaging of the head i.e. CT and MRI scans, from the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) data set were used to investigate trends in the province for Fiscal Years (FY) 2004-2009.

Assumptions were made in order to investigate neuroimaging of the head for the indication of headache. From the literature, 27% of all CT and 13% of all MRI scans for the head were assumed to include an indication of headache. From that same retrospective chart review and personal communication with the author 16% of CT scans and 4% of MRI scans for the head were for the sole indication of headache. From the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) wait times data, 73% of all CT and 93% of all MRI scans in the province, irrespective of indication were outpatient procedures.

The expenditure for each FY reflects the volume for that year and since volumes have increased in the past 6 FYs, the expenditure has also increased with a pay-out reaching 3.0M and 2.8M for CT and MRI services of the head respectively for the indication of headache and a pay-out reaching 1.8M and 0.9M for CT and MRI services of the head respectively for the indication of headache only in FY 08/09.

Cost per Abnormal Finding

The yield of abnormal finding for a CT and MRI scan of the head for the indication of headache only is 2% and 5% respectively. Based on these yield a high-level estimate of the cost per abnormal finding with neuroimaging of the head for headache only can be calculated for each FY. In FY 08/09 there were 37,434 CT and 16,197 MRI scans of the head for headache only. These volumes would generate a yield of abnormal finding of 749 and 910 with a CT scan and MRI scan respectively. The expenditure for FY 08/09 was 1.8M and 0.9M for CT and MRI services respectively. Therefore the cost per abnormal finding would be $2,409 for CT and $957 for MRI. These cost per abnormal finding estimates were limited because they did not factor in comparators or the consequences associated with an abnormal reading or FNs. The estimates only consider the cost of the neuroimaging procedure and the yield of abnormal finding with the respective procedure.

Headache related to airplane flights is rare. We describe a 37-year-old female patient with multiple intense, jabbing headache episodes over the last 3 years that occur exclusively during airplane flights. The pain manifests during take-off and landing, and is located always in the left retro-orbital and frontotemporal area. It is occasionally accompanied by dizziness, but no additional symptoms occur. Pain intensity diminishes and disappears after 15–20 min. Apart from occasional dizziness, no other symptoms occur. The patient has a history of tension-type headache and polycystic ovaries. Blood tests and imaging revealed no abnormalities. Here, we present the first case in Greece. We review the current literature on this rare syndrome and discuss on possible pathophysiology and the investigation of possible co-factors such as anxiety and depression.

Headache related to airplane flights is rare. We describe a 37-year-old female patient with multiple intense, jabbing headache episodes over the last 3 years that occur exclusively during airplane flights. The pain manifests during take-off and landing, and is located always in the left retro-orbital and frontotemporal area. It is occasionally accompanied by dizziness, but no additional symptoms occur. Pain intensity diminishes and disappears after 15–20 min. Apart from occasional dizziness, no other symptoms occur. The patient has a history of tension-type headache and polycystic ovaries. Blood tests and imaging revealed no abnormalities. Here, we present the first case in Greece. We review the current literature on this rare syndrome and discuss on possible pathophysiology and the investigation of possible co-factors such as anxiety and depression.

Headache is very common. In the United Kingdom, it accounts for 4.4% of primary care consultations, 30% of referrals to neurology services and 0.5–0.8% of alert patients presenting to emergency departments. Primary headache disorders account for the majority of patients and most patients do not require investigation. Warning features (red flags) in the history and on examination help target those who need investigation and what investigations are required. This article summarizes the typical presentations of the common secondary headaches and what neuroimaging and other investigations are appropriate for each headache type.

During a survey of a defined community, 2,933 women aged 20 to 64 years were asked standard questions about headaches. Overall, 78·7% had headaches during the year immediately preceding the survey and this proportion decreased significantly with age. Random samples of subgroups with unilateral headaches, headaches preceded by a warning, and headaches accompanied by nausea were examined clinically. From these clinical diagnoses the prevalence of women with migraine during the previous year was estimated as 19%. Nearly half of those diagnosed as having migraine had never consulted a doctor because of headaches. Women with migraine and non-migrainous headaches kept diaries of all headaches and data are presented for the time and day of onset, severity, duration and relation of menstruation for both types of headache.

The differential diagnosis of headache is often difficult because the symptom of headache is overlapping. Superficial cervical plexus block is useful in diagnosis and treatment of headache. Headache arising from the neck and radiating to the frontotemporal regions and possibly to the supraorbital region has been defined as cervicogenic headache. A positive response to anesthetic blocks is one of the diagnostic criteria of cervicogenic headache. We experienced a case of headache arising from direct lymph node metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma adjacent to the superficial cervical plexus during treatment of cervicogenic headache under ultrasonographic guidance. Especially in patients with medical history of cancer, practitioners should consider the possibility of metastasis to cervical lymph nodes and using ultrasonography to evaluate the cervical area prior to the practice.

Background

Headache is the neurological symptom most frequently presented to GPs and referred to neurologists, but little is known about how referred patients differ from patients managed by GPs.

Aim

To describe and compare headache patients managed in primary care with those referred to neurologists.

Design of study

Prospective study.

Setting

Eighteen general practices in south-east England.

Method

This study examined 488 eligible patients consulting GPs with primary headache over 7 weeks and 81 patients referred to neurologists over 1 year. Headache disability was measured by the Migraine Disability Assessment Score, headache impact by the Headache Impact Test, emotional distress by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and illness perception was assessed using the Illness Perception Questionnaire.

Results

Participants were 303 patients who agreed to participate. Both groups reported severe disability and very severe impact on functioning. Referred patients consulted more frequently than those not referred in the 3 months before referral (P = 0.003). There was no significant difference between GP-managed and referred groups in mean headache disability, impact, anxiety, depression, or satisfaction with care. The referred group were more likely to link an increased number of symptoms to their headaches (P = 0.01), to have stronger emotional representations of their headaches (P = 0.006), to worry more (P = 0.001), and were made anxious by their headache symptoms (P = 0.044).

Conclusion

Patients who consult for headache experience severe disability and impact, and up to a third report anxiety and/or depression. Referral is not related to clinical severity of headaches, but is associated with higher consultation frequency and patients' anxiety and concern about their headache symptoms.

Twenty-one patients experienced headache related to sexual activity. Two varieties of headache could be distinguished from the clinical histories. The first, developing as sexual excitement mount, had the characteristics of muscle contraction headache. The second, severe, throbbing or 'explosive' in character, occurring at the time of orgasm, was presumably of vascular origin associated with a hyperdynamic circulatory state. Two of the patients with the latter type of headache had each experienced episodes of cerebral vascular insufficiency on one occasion which subsequently resolved. A third patient in this category had a past history of drop attacks. No evidence of any structural lesion was obtained on clinical examination or investigation, including cerebral angiography in seven patients. Eighteen patients have been followed up for periods of two to seven years without any serious intracranial disorder becoming apparent. While the possibility of intracranial vascular or other lesions must always be borne in mind, there appears to be a syndrome of headache associated with sexual excitement where no organic change can be demonstrated, analogous to benign cough headache and benign exertional headache.

The records of 21 patients admitted to hospital from January 1985 to December 1988 for acute headache associated with cocaine intoxication were reviewed. Fifteen patients were identified who experienced headaches with migrainous features in the absence of neurological or systemic complications. None of them had a history of cocaine-unrelated headaches or a family history of migraine, and all had a favourable outcome. Three possible mechanisms of cocaine-related vascular headaches are discussed which depend on the interval between cocaine ingestion and development of the headache. We postulate that acute headaches following cocaine use may relate to the sympathomimetic or vasoconstrictive effects of cocaine, while headaches following cocaine withdrawal or exacerbated during a cocaine "binge" may relate to cocaine-induced alteration of the serotoninergic system.

The following paper is a case study of a patient with a history of chronic headaches (originally diagnosed as migraine without aura) who was being treaded at the Macquarie University Chiropractic Outpatients Clinic for cervical spine dysfunction. The treatments successfully reduced the upper neck and thoracic pain that the patient was experiencing and for which they had initially presented at the clinic. During the treatments, the patient also showed a significant subjective reduction in prevalence and intensity of headaches over a four month period. Analysis of the outcome is complicated by the fact that it is not clear whether the patient’s headaches were initially misdiagnosed as common migraine when in fact, they were cervicogenic. There may be some overlap between the two conditions, and a possible causative relationship between cervical spine dysfunction and common migraine. Furthermore, this case study discusses the validity of chiropractic treatment of organic disorders such as chronic headache or migraine.

Stabbing headache can be encountered in both primary and secondary forms, but has been infrequently reported among patients with stroke, and is not known to be associated with a small well-circumscribed brain lesion. A 95-year-old woman taking warfarin presented with the sudden onset of stabbing headache strictly in the right frontal and supraorbital regions, along with gait imbalance and dysarthria. Neuroimaging revealed a small left thalamic hematoma. This association of an acute thalamic lesion with stabbing headache in the contralateral trigeminal distribution is discussed, along with a brief review of stabbing headache occurring in cerebrovascular disease.