			Home About us Contact

Primary Headaches (primary + headaches)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Nitroglycerin Headache and Nitroglycerin-Induced Primary Headaches From 1846 and Onwards: A Historical Overview and an Update

HEADACHE, Issue 3 2009
Peer C. Tfelt-Hansen MD
Nitroglycerin (NTG) (glyceryl trinitrate) was synthesized by the Italian chemist Ascanio Sobrero in Paris in 1846. A very unstable explosive, Alfred Nobel while working on explosives, combined it with Kiselguhr and patented it as dynamite in 1867. NTG was introduced in 1879 in medicine in the treatment of angina pectoris by the English doctor William Murrell. NTG-induced headache was quickly recognized as an important adverse event both in the industrial use of NTG, where it was used to produce dynamite, as well as in the use of NTG as drug. This review traces the evolution of our understanding of NTG headache. [source]

The Hypothalamus, Pain, and Primary Headaches

HEADACHE, Issue 6 2007
Manjit S. Matharu MBChB
First page of article [source]

Lifetime Prevalence and Characteristics of Recurrent Primary Headaches in a Population-Based Sample of Swedish Twins

HEADACHE, Issue 8 2002
Dan A. Svensson MSc
Objective.,To examine the lifetime prevalence and other characteristics of recurrent primary headaches in twins. Background.,The twin model may provide insights into the role of genetic and environmental influences in headache disorders. However, assumptions as to whether twins are representative of the general population, and whether monozygotic and dizygotic twins are similar have rarely been addressed. Methods.,The study population consisted of a random sample of 17- to 82-year-old twins from the Swedish Twin Registry (n = 1329). Structured interviews on the telephone by lay personnel and the International Headache Society criteria were used for assessment and diagnosis of recurrent primary headaches. Prevalence data of the general population for migraine and tension-type headache was obtained from various published reports. Results.,A total of 372 subjects (29%) had ever had recurrent headaches. In total, 241 recurrent headache sufferers fulfilled the criteria for migraine or tension-type headache, and the lifetime prevalence was 7.1% for migraine without aura, 1.4% for migraine always with aura, 1.9% for migraine occasionally with aura, 9.4% for episodic tension-type headache, and 1.3% for chronic tension-type headache. The lifetime prevalence of all migraine and all tension-type headache, including another 84 subjects fulfilling all but one of the criteria for migraine or tension-type headache, was 13.8% and 13.5%, respectively. The corresponding prevalence risk for women was 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7, 3.4) and 1.5 (95% CI 1.1, 2.1), respectively. Zygosity was not a significant predictor for migraine. In tension-type headache, the prevalence risk for dizygotic twins and unlike-sexed twins as compared with monozygotic twins was 1.9 (95% CI: 1.2, 3.1) and 1.8 (95% CI: 1.1, 2.9), respectively. Conclusion.,There is no twin-singleton or monozygotic-dizygotic difference for the risk of migraine. In tension-type headache, twins seem to have a lower risk than singletons, and this is especially true for monozygotic twins. [source]

Migraine and Other Primary Headaches

ANAESTHESIA, Issue 10 2009
S. Chinniah
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

Hypertension-associated hypalgesia: a clue to the comorbidity of headache and other pain disorders

ACTA NEUROLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, Issue 2009
L. J. Stovner
Background ,, Primary headaches and chronic musculoskeletal pain are prevalent disorders with incompletely known causes. Aims ,, To review the data from the HUNT studies on the comorbidity of these pain disorders, and their relation to blood pressure levels Materials & Methods ,, Cross-sectional and prospective data from more than 50 000 persons participating in the HUNT studies, a large Norwegian population-based health survey Results ,, Headache and chronic musculoskeletal complaints in all parts of the body were comorbid, and the prevalence of pain in all locations was inversely related to blood pressure levels. Discussion ,, A likely cause for this is hypertension-associated hypalgesia, described in both animal and human experimental models, involving interactions between cardiovascular and pain modulating centres at the brainstem level, and probably also peripheral baroreceptor mechanisms. Conclusion ,, Better understanding of these mechanisms may be crucial for enabling better prevention and treatment of these very prevalent, costly and disabling disorders. [source]

Implementation and evaluation of existing guidelines on the use of neurophysiological tests in non-acute migraine patients: a questionnaire survey of neurologists and primary care physicians

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, Issue 8 2009
P. Rossi
Background and purpose:, The main aims of this study were to evaluate: the diffusion, use and perception of the usefulness of the 2004 EFNS guidelines on neurophysiological testing in non-acute headache patients; the frequency with which the different neurophysiological tests were recommended in non-acute migraine patients by physicians aware or unaware of the guidelines; and the appropriateness of the reasons given for recommending neurophysiological tests. Methods:, One hundred and fifty physicians selected amongst the members of the Italian societies of general practitioner (GPs), neurologists and headache specialists were contacted via e-mail and invited to fill in a questionnaire specially created for the study. Results:, Ninety-two percent of the headache specialists, 8.6% of the neurologists and 0% of the GPs were already aware of the EFNS guidelines. A significantly higher proportion of headache specialists had not recommended any neurophysiological tests to the migraine patients they had seen in the previous 3 months, whereas these tests had frequently been prescribed by the GPs and neurologists. Overall, 80%, 42% and 42.6% of the reasons given by headache specialists, neurologists and GPs, respectively, for recommending neurophysiological testing in their migraine patients were appropriate (P < 0.01). Conclusions:, The diffusion of the EFNS guidelines on neurophysiological tests and neuroimaging procedures was found to be very limited amongst neurologists and GPs. The physicians aware of the EFNS guidelines recommended neurophysiological tests to migraine patients less frequently and more appropriately than physicians who were not aware of them. The most frequent misconceptions regarding neurophysiological tests concerned their perceived capacity to discriminate between migraine and secondary headaches or between migraine and other primary headaches. [source]

Adapted Finnish Migraine-Specific Questionnaire for family studies (FMSQFS): a validation study in two languages

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, Issue 10 2008
M. F. Facheris
Background and purpose:, The hypothesis of a genetic component in the etiology of migraine is getting a foothold. However, to explore genetic associations, precision in clinical phenotypization is crucial. For this reason, migraine-specific questionnaires, well discriminating between primary headaches, are required when large numbers of individuals need to be assessed. Methods:, We adapted and translated in two languages, German and Italian, the Finnish Migraine-Specific Questionnaire for use in family studies. Results and conclusions:, This adaptation proved to be reliable when differentiating from primary headaches, and to be in very good agreement with the standard for comparison. However, discriminating between migraine with and without aura still relays on a specialist evaluation. This article describes the validation of this questionnaire. [source]

Electrical Stimulation of Sphenopalatine Ganglion for Acute Treatment of Cluster Headaches

HEADACHE, Issue 7 2010
Mehdi Ansarinia MD
(Headache 2010;50:1164-1174) Introduction., Cluster headaches (CH) are primary headaches marked by repeated short-lasting attacks of severe, unilateral head pain and associated autonomic symptoms. Despite aggressive management with medications, oxygen therapy, nerve blocks, as well as various lesioning and neurostimulation therapies, a number of patients are incapacitated and suffering. The sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) has been implicated in the pathophysiology of CH and has been a target for blocks, lesioning, and other surgical approaches. For this reason, it was selected as a target for an acute neurostimulation study. Methods., Six patients with refractory chronic CH were treated with short-term (up to 1 hour) electrical stimulation of the SPG during an acute CH. Headaches were spontaneously present at the time of stimulation or were triggered with agents known to trigger clusters headache in each patient. A standard percutaneous infrazygomatic approach was used to place a needle at the ipsilateral SPG in the pterygopalatine fossa under fluoroscopic guidance. Electrical stimulation was performed using a temporary stimulating electrode. Stimulation was performed at various settings during maximal headache intensity. Results., Five patients had CH during the initial evaluation. Three returned 3 months later for a second evaluation. There were 18 acute and distinct CH attacks with clinically maximal visual analog scale (VAS) intensity of 8 (out of 10) and above. SPG stimulation resulted in complete resolution of the headache in 11 attacks, partial resolution (>50% VAS reduction) in 3, and minimal to no relief in 4 attacks. Associated autonomic features of CH were resolved in each responder. Pain relief was noted within several minutes of stimulation. Conclusion., Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation can be effective in relieving acute severe CH pain and associated autonomic features. Chronic long-term outcome studies are needed to determine the utility of SPG stimulation for management and prevention of CH. [source]

Application of the ICHD-II Criteria to the Diagnosis of Primary Chronic Headaches Via a Computerized Structured Record

HEADACHE, Issue 1 2007
Paola Sarchielli MD
Background.,The authors recently developed a software program designed to analyze clinical data from patients affected by primary headache. The program is based exclusively on the International Classification of Headache Disorders 2nd edition (ICHD-II) criteria. This software examines all the diagnoses of primary headaches on the basis of the variables needed to fulfill these mandatory criteria. Methods.,We tested the software, Primary Headaches Analyser 1.0 INT (PHA), by entering and analyzing clinical data from 200 consecutive patients affected by primary chronic headaches and evaluating the corresponding output diagnoses. Results.,The diagnosis of chronic migraine (1.5.1) was obtained in 68 cases (34 %) and that of probable chronic migraine (1.6.5) plus probable medication-overuse headache (8.2.8) in 46 (23%). Chronic tension-type headache (2.3) and probable chronic tension-type headache (2.4.3) plus probable medication-overuse headache (8.2.8) were diagnosed in 24 (12%) and 2 (1%) patients, respectively. Moreover, 4 and 12 patients, respectively, received both the diagnosis of chronic migraine (1.5.1) plus chronic tension-type headache (2.3) and of probable migraine (1.6.1) without aura plus chronic tension-type headache (2.3). In the remaining 44 cases (22%), none of the chronic primary headaches disorders defined by ICHD-II received an output diagnosis from the program. This was due mainly to the fact that the criteria fulfilled were insufficient for the diagnoses of migraine without (1.1) aura plus chronic migraine or, more infrequently, chronic tension-type headache. Conclusions.,Our software program permitted diagnoses of chronic migraine, chronic tension-type or their probable forms (with or without MOH) in 78% of 200 patients with headache 15 or more days per month. In the remaining cases the inability to provide a specific diagnosis may be explained in part by the fact that the criteria for both diagnoses are too stringent and do not accurately reflect variations of the headache pattern in these chronic forms. [source]

Not Tonight, I Have a Headache?

HEADACHE, Issue 6 2006
Timothy T. Houle PhD
Objective.,The present study examined the relationship between the diagnosis of migraine and self-reported sexual desire. Background.,There is evidence for a complex relationship between sexual activity and headache, particularly migraine. The current headache diagnostic criteria even distinguish between several types of primary headaches associated with sexual activity. Methods.,Members of the community or students at the Illinois Institute of Technology (N = 68) were administered the Brief Headache Diagnostic Interview and the Sexual Desire Inventory (SDI). Based on the revised diagnostic criteria established by the International Headache Society (ICHD-II), participants were placed in 1 of the 2 headache diagnostic groups: migraine (n = 23) or tension-type (n = 36). Results.,Migraine subjects reported higher SDI scores, and rated their own perceived level of desire higher than those suffering from tension-type headache. The presence of the symptom "headache aggravated by routine physical activity" significantly predicted an elevated SDI score. Conclusions.,Migraine headaches and sexual desire both appear to be at least partially modulated by serotonin (5-HT). The metabolism of 5-HT has been shown to covary with the onset of a migraine attack, and migraineurs appear to have chronically low systemic 5-HT. As sexual desire also has been linked to serotonin levels, the results are consistent with the hypothesis that migraine and sexual desire both may be modulated by similar serotonergic phenomena. [source]

Use of the Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire in Children and Adolescents With Headache: An Italian Pilot Study

HEADACHE, Issue 7 2003
D. D'Amico MD
Objectives.,To determine the suitability of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire for assessing disability in children and adolescents with headache and to obtain preliminary information about disability in different primary headaches. Background.,During the last decade, researchers have begun to employ standardized methodologies to investigate the global impact of primary headaches. Disease-specific instruments have been developed to measure headache-related disability. The MIDAS Questionnaire, which is the most extensively studied of these instruments, was designed to assess the overall impact of headaches over the 3 months before compilation. The MIDAS Questionnaire is an optimal tool to assess headache-related disability in adults. Methods.,Ninety-five patients aged 7 to 17 years with tension-type headache, migraine, or both completed the validated Italian form of the MIDAS questionnaire on 2 occasions. Test-retest reliability was assessed by the Spearman rank correlation test. The Cronbach , assessed internal consistency. The patients answered questions about the adequacy of the questionnaire. Results.,The Cronbach , was .8. Correlation coefficients were generally high for the overall MIDAS score and for the items investigating disability in school and in family/leisure activities; they were lower for the items about housework. Most patients thought that the MIDAS Questionnaire was useful (98.9%) and that it captured the impact of their headaches (58.9%); 41% thought that questions about disability in housework were useless, 44.2% suggested adding questions regarding inability to do homework. All primary headaches had a considerable impact on daily activities, but patients with migraine tended to have lower headache frequencies and lower total disability time; those with tension-type headache suffered more days in which activities, although performed, were substantially impaired. Conclusions.,The MIDAS Questionnaire is useful for assessing disability in children and adolescents with different primary headaches. Minimal changes in the phrasing and content of the items would be sufficient to render the MIDAS specific for the younger population with headache. [source]

Lifetime Prevalence and Characteristics of Recurrent Primary Headaches in a Population-Based Sample of Swedish Twins

Determinants of disability in everyday activities differ in primary and cervicogenic headaches and in low back pain

PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCES, Issue 3 2006
GYÖNGYI GESZTELYI md
Abstract The aim of this study was to test whether the association between disability and depressive symptoms in patients with cervicogenic headache is similar to that found in primary headaches or to the pattern found in low back pain. During a 2-year period, 716 consecutive patients with the clinical diagnosis of cervicogenic headache (n = 182), low back pain (n = 116), migraine (n = 231), tension-type headache (n = 176), and cluster headache (n = 11) filled in the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Disability was scored by the migraine disability score questionnaire reflecting the number of days with lost or decreased work, household and social activities. Non-parametric tests and multiple general regression were used for statistical analysis. In multivariate testing, significant independent determinants of disability were pain frequency, pain intensity and the severity of depressive symptoms in migraine and tension-type headache; pain frequency and the BDI score in cervicogenic headache, and pain frequency alone in low back pain. Disability is related to pain frequency in all pain syndromes evaluated in the present study. The level of disability is associated with the severity of pain only in primary headaches, but not in pain syndromes of vertebral origin (cervicogenic headache and low back pain). Disability is associated with the severity of depressive symptoms in all headache types but not in low back pain. Both the location and the etiology of pain have importance in determining the interrelationship between pain characteristics, depression and disability. [source]

Olanzapine versus Droperidol for the Treatment of Primary Headache in the Emergency Department

ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 9 2008
Chandler H. Hill MD
Abstract Objectives:, The objective was to determine if there is a difference in pain relief or frequency and severity of side effects in emergency department (ED) patients with primary headache treated with either intramuscular (IM) olanzapine or IM droperidol. Methods:, This was a prospective, randomized nonblinded clinical trial of adult ED patients undergoing treatment for suspected primary headache. Consenting patients were randomized to receive either droperidol 5 mg IM or olanzapine 10 mg IM. Prior to receiving treatment, patients were asked to complete a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) describing their pain and a 4-point verbal rating scale (VRS) describing their pain as none, mild, moderate, or severe. Patients also completed a 100-mm VAS describing their level of nausea. Pain and nausea measurements were repeated 30 and 60 minutes after medication administration. Patients also completed the Barnes Akathisia Scale (BAS) 30 and 60 minutes after medication administration. Descriptive statistics were used as appropriate. Pain relief was compared both in terms of the decrease in VAS scores and in the proportion of patients who reported moderate or severe pain whose report later changed to mild or no pain. Results:, One-hundred patients were enrolled; 13 were withdrawn before administration of the study medication, 8 in the droperidol group and 5 in the olanzapine group, leaving 87 patients for analysis. Forty-two patients received droperidol and 45 received olanzapine. In the droperidol group, 35/40 (87.5%) patients who had reported moderate or severe pain at baseline reported mild or no pain at 60 minutes. In the olanzapine group, 38/44 (86.4%) reported this change (p = 0.89). The mean percent change from baseline VAS pain score at 60 minutes was ,37% (95% CI = ,84% to 11%) for droperidol and ,37% (95% CI = ,64% to 10%) for olanzapine (p = 0.30). The mean percent change from baseline for the VAS nausea score was ,59% (95% CI = ,70% to ,47%) for droperidol and ,64% (95% CI = ,77% to ,51%) for olanzapine (p = 0.83). There was no difference in any report of akathisia by the BAS between the groups (p = 0.63). Conclusions:, Both olanzapine and droperidol are effective treatments for primary headaches in the ED. No significant differences were found between the medications in terms of pain relief, antiemetic effect, or akathisia. Olanzapine may be used to treat primary headache and it is an effective alternative to droperidol. [source]