PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-25 (33)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Year of Publication
1.  Diagnosis, prevalence estimation and burden measurement in population surveys of headache: presenting the HARDSHIP questionnaire 
The global burden of headache is very large, but knowledge of it is far from complete and needs still to be gathered. Published population-based studies have used variable methodology, which has influenced findings and made comparisons difficult. The Global Campaign against Headache is undertaking initiatives to improve and standardize methods in use for cross-sectional studies. One requirement is for a survey instrument with proven cross-cultural validity. This report describes the development of such an instrument. Two of the authors developed the initial version, which was used with adaptations in population-based studies in China, Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Zambia and 10 countries in the European Union. The resultant evolution of this instrument was reviewed by an expert consensus group drawn from all world regions. The final output was the Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap and Impaired Participation (HARDSHIP) questionnaire, designed for application by trained lay interviewers. HARDSHIP is a modular instrument incorporating demographic enquiry, diagnostic questions based on ICHD-3 beta criteria, and enquiries into each of the following as components of headache-attributed burden: symptom burden; health-care utilization; disability and productive time losses; impact on education, career and earnings; perception of control; interictal burden; overall individual burden; effects on relationships and family dynamics; effects on others, including household partner and children; quality of life; wellbeing; obesity as a comorbidity. HARDSHIP already has demonstrated validity and acceptability in multiple languages and cultures. Modules may be included or not, and others (eg, on additional comorbidities) added, according to the purpose of the study and resources (especially time) available.
doi:10.1186/1129-2377-15-3
PMCID: PMC3906903  PMID: 24400999
Epidemiology; Burden of headache; Methodology; Diagnostic instrument; Global Campaign against Headache
2.  The methodology of population surveys of headache prevalence, burden and cost: Principles and recommendations from the Global Campaign against Headache 
The global burden of headache is very large, but knowledge of it is far from complete and needs still to be gathered. Published population-based studies have used variable methodology, which has influenced findings and made comparisons difficult. Among the initiatives of the Global Campaign against Headache to improve and standardize methods in use for cross-sectional studies, the most important is the production of consensus-based methodological guidelines. This report describes the development of detailed principles and recommendations. For this purpose we brought together an expert consensus group to include experience and competence in headache epidemiology and/or epidemiology in general and drawn from all six WHO world regions. The recommendations presented are for anyone, of whatever background, with interests in designing, performing, understanding or assessing studies that measure or describe the burden of headache in populations. While aimed principally at researchers whose main interests are in the field of headache, they should also be useful, at least in parts, to those who are expert in public health or epidemiology and wish to extend their interest into the field of headache disorders. Most of all, these recommendations seek to encourage collaborations between specialists in headache disorders and epidemiologists. The focus is on migraine, tension-type headache and medication-overuse headache, but they are not intended to be exclusive to these. The burdens arising from secondary headaches are, in the majority of cases, more correctly attributed to the underlying disorders. Nevertheless, the principles outlined here are relevant for epidemiological studies on secondary headaches, provided that adequate definitions can be not only given but also applied in questionnaires or other survey instruments.
doi:10.1186/1129-2377-15-5
PMCID: PMC3907133  PMID: 24467862
Burden of headache; Epidemiology; Guidelines; Methodology; Global Campaign against Headache
3.  Impaired small fiber conduction in patients with Fabry disease: a neurophysiological case–control study 
BMC Neurology  2013;13:47.
Background
Fabry disease is an inborn lysosomal storage disorder which is associated with small fiber neuropathy. We set out to investigate small fiber conduction in Fabry patients using pain-related evoked potentials (PREP).
Methods
In this case–control study we prospectively studied 76 consecutive Fabry patients for electrical small fiber conduction in correlation with small fiber function and morphology. Data were compared with healthy controls using non-parametric statistical tests. All patients underwent neurological examination and were investigated with pain and depression questionnaires. Small fiber function (quantitative sensory testing, QST), morphology (skin punch biopsy), and electrical conduction (PREP) were assessed and correlated. Patients were stratified for gender and disease severity as reflected by renal function.
Results
All Fabry patients (31 men, 45 women) had small fiber neuropathy. Men with Fabry disease showed impaired cold (p < 0.01) and warm perception (p < 0.05), while women did not differ from controls. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) was reduced at the lower leg (p < 0.001) and the back (p < 0.05) mainly of men with impaired renal function. When investigating A-delta fiber conduction with PREP, men but not women with Fabry disease had lower amplitudes upon stimulation at face (p < 0.01), hands (p < 0.05), and feet (p < 0.01) compared to controls. PREP amplitudes further decreased with advance in disease severity. PREP amplitudes and warm (p < 0.05) and cold detection thresholds (p < 0.01) at the feet correlated positively in male patients.
Conclusion
Small fiber conduction is impaired in men with Fabry disease and worsens with advanced disease severity. PREP are well-suited to measure A-delta fiber conduction.
doi:10.1186/1471-2377-13-47
PMCID: PMC3672069  PMID: 23705943
Fabry disease; Pain-related evoked potentials; Small fiber neuropathy; A-delta fibers
5.  Epidemiological profiles of patients with chronic migraine and chronic tension-type headache 
Background
We evaluated risk factors associated with chronic headache (CH) such as age, gender, smoking, frequent drinking of alcoholic beverages (drinking), obesity, education and frequent intake of acute pain drugs to test their usefulness in clinical differentiation between chronic migraine (CM) and chronic tension-type headache (CTTH).
Methods
We used baseline data from the population-based German Headache Consortium Study including 9,944 participants aged 18–65 years, screened 2003–2005, using validated questionnaires. CM and CTTH were defined according to IHS criteria. Multinominal logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the association of CM or CTTH with risk factors by estimating odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI).
Results
The prevalence of CH was 2.6% (N = 255, mean age 46 ± 14.1 years, 65.1% women), CM 1.1% (N = 108, 45 ± 12.9 years, 73.1%), CTTH 0.5% (N = 50, 49 ± 13.9 years, 48.0%). Participants with CM compared to CTTH were more likely to be female (OR: 2.34, 95%CI: 1.00-5.49) and less likely to drink alcohol (0.31, 0.09-1.04). By trend they seemed more likely to smoke (1.81, 0.76-4.34), to be obese (1.85, 0.54-6.27), to report frequent intake of acute pain drugs (1.68, 0.73-3.88) and less likely to be low educated (0.72, 0.27-1.97).
Conclusions
We concluded that the careful assessment of different risk factors might aid in the clinical differentiation between CM and CTTH.
doi:10.1186/1129-2377-14-40
PMCID: PMC3655106  PMID: 23651174
Chronic migraine; Chronic tension-type headache; Epidemiology; Risk factors
6.  Framing education on headache disorders into the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The European Headache Federation stands ready 
Framing education on headache disorders into the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The European Headache Federation stands ready.
doi:10.1186/1129-2377-14-41
PMCID: PMC3671171  PMID: 23663423
7.  No evidence of jugular venous valve insufficiency in patients with migraine – a controlled study 
Background
Migraine with aura is associated with patent foramen ovale and right-left-shunt. Jugular venous valve insufficiency is a further vascular anomaly. It is a frequent finding in transient global amnesia which is associated with migraine. Therefore, we investigated the prevalence of jugular venous valve insufficiency in migraine.
Methods
Subjects included in this study were participants of the population based German Headache Study on the prevalence of primary headaches. In 36 patients with migraine with aura, 50 patients with migraine without aura and 43 controls without headaches duration of backward venous flow, peak velocity flow and diameters of the jugular venous valves were assessed by color-coded duplex and Doppler sonography and compared between groups. In all migraine patients, examination was performed between and not during migraine attacks. Therefore, 9 additional patients with chronic daily headache were investigated during headache.
Results
We did not find statistically significant differences in duration of flow, peak velocity flow and diameter of the jugular venous valves in patients with migraine with aura (mean values 0.53 ± 0.43 sec; 35.47 ± 33.87 cm/sec; 8.84 ± 3.17 mm), migraine without aura (0.61 ± 0.63 sec; 33.39 ± 25.80 cm/sec; 8.15 ± 3.02 mm) or controls (0.64 ± 0.51 sec; 35.28 ± 31.76 cm/sec; 8.79 ± 2.97 mm) (group effects p-values >0.41). For all parameters results were the same for the left and the right side of jugular venae (side effects p-values >0.09). Also patients with chronic daily migraine with headache during the examination showed no differences to controls (0.52 ± 0.49 sec; 27.95 ± 21,75 cm/sec; 8.07 ± 2.71 mm) (all p-values > 0.23).
Conclusions
The prevalence of internal jugular venous valve insufficiency is not increased in persons with migraine.
doi:10.1186/1129-2377-14-52
PMCID: PMC3691823  PMID: 23782952
Migraine; Transient global amnesia; Jugular venous valve insufficiency; Ultrasound
8.  Quality in the provision of headache care. 1: systematic review of the literature and commentary 
The Journal of Headache and Pain  2012;13(6):437-447.
Widely accepted quality indicators for headache care would provide a basis not only for assessment of care but also, and more importantly, for its improvement. The objective of the study was to identify and summarize existing information on such indicators: specifically, did indicators exist, how had they been developed, what aspects of headache care did they relate to and how and with what utility were they being used? A systematic review of the medical literature was performed. A total of 32 articles met criteria for inclusion. We identified 55 existing headache quality indicators of which 37 evaluated processes of headache care. Most were relevant only to specific populations of patients and to care delivered in high-resource settings. Indicators had been used to describe overall quality of headache care at a national level, but not systematically applied to the evaluation and improvement of headache services in other settings. Some studies had evaluated the use of existing disability and quality of life instruments, but their findings had not been incorporated into quality indicators. Existing headache care quality indicators are incomplete and inadequate for purpose. They emphasize processes of care rather than structure or outcomes, and are not widely applicable to different levels and locations of headache care. Furthermore, they do not fully incorporate accepted evidence regarding optimal methods of care. There is a clear need for consensus-based indicators that fully reflect patients’ and public-health priorities. Ideally, these will be valid across cultures and health-care settings.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10194-012-0466-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
doi:10.1007/s10194-012-0466-1
PMCID: PMC3464474  PMID: 22736100
Headache; Quality of care; Quality indicators; Systematic review; Global Campaign against Headache
9.  Quality in the provision of headache care. 2: defining quality and its indicators 
The Journal of Headache and Pain  2012;13(6):449-457.
The objective of this study was to define “quality” of headache care, and develop indicators that are applicable in different settings and cultures and to all types of headache. No definition of quality of headache care has been formulated. Two sets of quality indicators, proposed in the US and UK, are limited to their localities and/or specific to migraine and their development received no input from people with headache. We first undertook a literature review. Then we conducted a series of focus-group consultations with key stakeholders (doctors, nurses and patients) in headache care. From the findings we proposed a large number of putative quality indicators, and refined these and reduced their number in consultations with larger international groups of stakeholder representatives. We formulated a definition of quality from the quality indicators. Five main themes were identified: (1) headache services; (2) health professionals; (3) patients; (4) financial resources; (5) political agenda and legislation. An initial list of 160 putative quality indicators in 14 domains was reduced to 30 indicators in 9 domains. These gave rise to the following multidimensional definition of quality of headache care: “Good-quality headache care achieves accurate diagnosis and individualized management, has appropriate referral pathways, educates patients about their headaches and their management, is convenient and comfortable, satisfies patients, is efficient and equitable, assesses outcomes and is safe.” Quality in headache care is multidimensional and resides in nine essential domains that are of equal importance. The indicators are currently being tested for feasibility of use in clinical settings.
doi:10.1007/s10194-012-0465-2
PMCID: PMC3464468  PMID: 22733141
Quality of care; Definition; Indicators; Headache disorders; Global Campaign against Headache
10.  Defining the Differences Between Episodic Migraine and Chronic Migraine 
Chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM) are part of the spectrum of migraine disorders, but they are distinct clinical entities. Population-based studies have shown that those with CM demonstrate higher individual and societal burden because they are significantly more disabled than those with EM and have greater impaired quality of life both inside and outside the home. Proper diagnosis of both conditions requires clearly defined clinical criteria. Diagnosis enables the initiation of appropriate treatments and risk-factor modification, which ultimately improve functional status and quality of life for persons with migraine. Recognizing that both disorders are on the spectrum of migraine, this review serves as a guide to define the disease state of CM as distinct from EM in terms of clinical, epidemiological, sociodemographic, and comorbidity profiles.
doi:10.1007/s11916-011-0233-z
PMCID: PMC3258393  PMID: 22083262
Chronic migraine; Episodic migraine; Epidemiological profiles; Sociodemographics; Risk factors; Treatment; Chronic daily headache; Chronification; Diagnosis
11.  Will (or can) people pay for headache care in a poor country? 
We asked whether attempts to introduce headache services in poor countries would be futile on grounds of cost and unsustainability. Using data from a population-based survey in the Republic of Georgia, an exemplary poor country with limited health care, and against the background of headache-attributed burden, we report on willingness to pay (WTP) for effective headache treatment. Consecutive households were visited in areas of Tbilisi (urban) and Kakheti (rural), together representative of Georgian habitation. Biologically unrelated adults were interviewed by medical residents using a structured ICHD-II-based diagnostic questionnaire, the MIDAS questionnaire and SF-36. The bidding-game method was employed to assess WTP. Of 1,145 respondents, 50.0% had episodic headache (migraine and/or tension-type headache) and 7.6% had headache on ≥15 days/month, which was not further diagnosed. MIDAS scores were higher in people with headache on ≥15 days/month (mean 11.2) than in those with episodic headache (mean 7.0; P = 0.004). People with headache had worse scores in all SF-36 sub-scales than those without, but no differences were found between headache types. Almost all (93%) respondents with headache reported WTP averaging USD 8 per month for effective headache treatment. WTP did not correlate with headache type or frequency, or with MIDAS or SF-36 scores. Headache is common and headache-attributed burden is high in Georgia, with a profound impact on HRQoL. Even those less affected indicated WTP for effective treatment, if it were available, that would on average cover costs, which locally are low. Headache services in a poor country are potentially sustainable.
doi:10.1007/s10194-011-0398-1
PMCID: PMC3253156  PMID: 22045235
Headache-related health care; Burden of disease; Quality of life; Health economics; Willingness to pay; Republic of Georgia
12.  Will (or can) people pay for headache care in a poor country? 
We asked whether attempts to introduce headache services in poor countries would be futile on grounds of cost and unsustainability. Using data from a population-based survey in the Republic of Georgia, an exemplary poor country with limited health care, and against the background of headache-attributed burden, we report on willingness to pay (WTP) for effective headache treatment. Consecutive households were visited in areas of Tbilisi (urban) and Kakheti (rural), together representative of Georgian habitation. Biologically unrelated adults were interviewed by medical residents using a structured ICHD-II-based diagnostic questionnaire, the MIDAS questionnaire and SF-36. The bidding-game method was employed to assess WTP. Of 1,145 respondents, 50.0% had episodic headache (migraine and/or tension-type headache) and 7.6% had headache on ≥15 days/month, which was not further diagnosed. MIDAS scores were higher in people with headache on ≥15 days/month (mean 11.2) than in those with episodic headache (mean 7.0; P = 0.004). People with headache had worse scores in all SF-36 sub-scales than those without, but no differences were found between headache types. Almost all (93%) respondents with headache reported WTP averaging USD 8 per month for effective headache treatment. WTP did not correlate with headache type or frequency, or with MIDAS or SF-36 scores. Headache is common and headache-attributed burden is high in Georgia, with a profound impact on HRQoL. Even those less affected indicated WTP for effective treatment, if it were available, that would on average cover costs, which locally are low. Headache services in a poor country are potentially sustainable.
doi:10.1007/s10194-011-0398-1
PMCID: PMC3253156  PMID: 22045235
Headache-related health care; Burden of disease; Quality of life; Health economics; Willingness to pay; Republic of Georgia
13.  Evaluating integrated headache care: a one-year follow-up observational study in patients treated at the Essen headache centre 
BMC Neurology  2011;11:124.
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.
doi:10.1186/1471-2377-11-124
PMCID: PMC3203041  PMID: 21985562
16.  Clinical outcome of a headache-specific multidisciplinary treatment program and adherence to treatment recommendations in a tertiary headache center: an observational study 
The Journal of Headache and Pain  2011;12(4):475-483.
This study investigated the outcome of a 5-day headache-specific multidisciplinary treatment program (MTP) and the adherence to treatment recommendations in 295 prospectively recruited consecutive headache patients [210 migraine, 17 tension-type headache (TTH), 68 combination headache, including 56 medication-overuse headache (MOH)]. Headache frequency decreased from 13.4 (±8.8) to 8.8 (±8.0) days per month after 12–18 months. Forty-three percent of the participants fulfilled the primary outcome (reduction of headache frequency of ≥50%), which was less likely in patients with combination of migraine and TTH compared to migraine (OR = 3.136, p = 0.002) or TTH (OR = 1.029, n.s.). Increasing number of headache days per month (OR = 1.092, p ≤ 0.0001) and adherence to lifestyle modifications (OR = 1.269, p = 0.004) predicted primary outcome. 51 of 56 MOH patients were treated successfully. Thirty-five percent of the patients were adherent to pharmacological prophylaxis, 61% to relaxation therapy, and 72% to aerobic endurance sports. MTP is effective in headache treatment. Adherence to therapy was associated with better outcome.
doi:10.1007/s10194-011-0348-y
PMCID: PMC3139052  PMID: 21544647
Migraine; Headache; Multidisciplinary treatment program; Adherence
17.  Clinical outcome of a headache-specific multidisciplinary treatment program and adherence to treatment recommendations in a tertiary headache center: an observational study 
The Journal of Headache and Pain  2011;12(4):475-483.
This study investigated the outcome of a 5-day headache-specific multidisciplinary treatment program (MTP) and the adherence to treatment recommendations in 295 prospectively recruited consecutive headache patients [210 migraine, 17 tension-type headache (TTH), 68 combination headache, including 56 medication-overuse headache (MOH)]. Headache frequency decreased from 13.4 (±8.8) to 8.8 (±8.0) days per month after 12–18 months. Forty-three percent of the participants fulfilled the primary outcome (reduction of headache frequency of ≥50%), which was less likely in patients with combination of migraine and TTH compared to migraine (OR = 3.136, p = 0.002) or TTH (OR = 1.029, n.s.). Increasing number of headache days per month (OR = 1.092, p ≤ 0.0001) and adherence to lifestyle modifications (OR = 1.269, p = 0.004) predicted primary outcome. 51 of 56 MOH patients were treated successfully. Thirty-five percent of the patients were adherent to pharmacological prophylaxis, 61% to relaxation therapy, and 72% to aerobic endurance sports. MTP is effective in headache treatment. Adherence to therapy was associated with better outcome.
doi:10.1007/s10194-011-0348-y
PMCID: PMC3139052  PMID: 21544647
Migraine; Headache; Multidisciplinary treatment program; Adherence
22.  Guidelines for telematic second opinion consultation on headaches in Europe: on behalf of the European Headache Federation (EHF) 
The Journal of Headache and Pain  2010;11(4):345-348.
The seeking of a second opinion is the long-established process whereby a physician or expert from the same or a similar specialty is invited to assess a clinical case in order to confirm or reject a diagnosis or treatment plan. Seeking a second opinion has become more common in recent years, and the trend is associated with significant changes in the patient-doctor relationship. Telemedicine is attractive because it is not only fast but also affordable and thus makes it possible to reach highly qualified centres and experts that would otherwise be inaccessible, being impossible, or too expensive, to reach by any surface transport. In Europe, the European Headache Federation (EHF), being able to draw on a group of headache experts covering all the European languages, is the organisation best placed to provide qualified second-opinion consultation on difficult headache cases and to develop a Headache Medical Opinion Service Centre. The provision of good quality clinical information is crucial to the formulation of a valid, expert second opinion. This preliminary step can be properly accomplished only by the primary health care provider through the furnishing of an appropriate clinical report, together with the results of all available tests, including original films of all imaging studies already performed. On receiving the EHF’s proposed standardised data collection form, properly filled in, we may be sure that we have all the relevant data necessary to formulate a valid expert second opinion. This form can be accessed electronically and downloaded from the EHF website. Once finalised, the EHF second opinion project should be treated as a pilot strategy that requires careful monitoring (for the first year at least), so that appropriate changes, as suggested by the retrospective analysis and its quality control, can be implemented.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10194-010-0211-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
doi:10.1007/s10194-010-0211-6
PMCID: PMC3476343  PMID: 20373124
Headaches; Guidelines; Telemedicine; Telematic; Second opinion; Consultation
23.  Assessing a Dysplastic Cerebellar Gangliocytoma (Lhermitte-Duclos Disease) with 7T MR Imaging 
Korean Journal of Radiology  2010;11(2):244-248.
Lhermitte-Duclos disease (LDD; dysplastic cerebellar gangliocytoma) is a rare hamartomatous lesion of the cerebellar cortex and this was first described in 1920. LDD is considered to be part of the autosomal-dominant phacomatosis and cancer syndrome Cowden disease (CS). We examined the brain of a 46-year-old man, who displayed the manifestations of CS, with 7 Tesla (T) and 1.5T MRI and 1.5T MR spectroscopy (1H-MRS). We discuss the possible benefits of employing ultrahigh-field MRI for making the diagnosis of this rare lesion.
doi:10.3348/kjr.2010.11.2.244
PMCID: PMC2827790  PMID: 20191074
Lhermitte-Duclos disease; 7 Tesla; Magnetic resonance (MR); Dysplastic cerebellar gangliocytoma; Susceptibility-weighted imaging
24.  Authors’ reply 
The Journal of Headache and Pain  2009;10(6):479-480.
doi:10.1007/s10194-009-0166-7
PMCID: PMC3476206
25.  Validation of a Georgian language headache questionnaire in a population-based sample 
The Journal of Headache and Pain  2007;8(6):321-324.
In a pilot phase of a survey of the prevalence of primary headache disorders in the Republic of Georgia, we validated a Georgian language questionnaire for migraine (MIG), tension-type headache (TTH), MIG+TTH and trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TAC). A population-based sample of 186 people with headache completed the questionnaire and were blindly examined by one of two headache experts. The questionnaire diagnoses were: MIG 49, TTH 76, MIG+TTH 45 and TAC 16. The physicians’diagnoses were: MIG 59, TTH 77, MIG+TTH 34, TAC 2 and “symptomatic headache” in 14 subjects. Sensitivity and specificity for MIG were 0.75 and 0.96, for TTH 0.79 and 0.86, and for MIG+TTH 0.61 and 0.84 respectively. Of 16 TAC diagnoses, the physicians confirmed cluster headache in two patients only. The questionnaire can be utilised to investigate the prevalence of MIG and of TTH. It offers preliminary screening only for TAC, which should be confirmed during a face to face examination.
doi:10.1007/s10194-007-0423-6
PMCID: PMC2779392  PMID: 18074104
Headache; Questionnaire; Migraine; Tensiontype headache; Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias; Validity

Results 1-25 (33)