Premonitory symptoms in migraine: A REFORM Study.

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Cephalalgia Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1177/03331024231223979
Janu Thuraiaiyah, Håkan Ashina, Rune H Christensen, Haidar M Al-Khazali, Astrid Wiggers, Faisal Mohammad Amin, Timothy J Steiner, Messoud Ashina
{"title":"Premonitory symptoms in migraine: A REFORM Study.","authors":"Janu Thuraiaiyah, Håkan Ashina, Rune H Christensen, Haidar M Al-Khazali, Astrid Wiggers, Faisal Mohammad Amin, Timothy J Steiner, Messoud Ashina","doi":"10.1177/03331024231223979","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Estimates of proportions of people with migraine who report premonitory symptoms vary greatly among previous studies. Our aims were to establish the proportion of patients reporting premonitory symptoms and its dependency on the enquiry method. Additionally, we investigated the impact of premonitory symptoms on disease burden using Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and World Health Organization Disability Assessment 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), whilst investigating how various clinical factors influenced the likelihood of reporting premonitory symptoms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a cross-sectional study, premonitory symptoms were assessed among 632 patients with migraine. Unprompted enquiry was used first, followed by a list of 17 items (prompted). Additionally, we obtained clinical characteristics through a semi-structured interview.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Prompted enquiry resulted in a greater proportion reporting premonitory symptoms than unprompted (69.9% vs. 43.0%; <i>p</i> < 0.001) and with higher symptom counts (medians 2, interquartile range = 0-6 vs. 1, interquartile range = 0-1; <i>p</i> < 0.001). The number of symptoms correlated weakly with HIT-6 (<i>ρ</i> = 0.14; <i>p</i> < 0.001) and WHODAS scores (<i>ρ</i> = 0.09; <i>p = </i>0.041). Reporting postdromal symptoms or triggers increased the probability of reporting premonitory symptoms, whereas monthly migraine days decreased it.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of a standardized and optimized method for assessing premonitory symptoms is necessary to estimate their prevalence and to understand whether and how they contribute to disease burden.</p>","PeriodicalId":10075,"journal":{"name":"Cephalalgia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cephalalgia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03331024231223979","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Estimates of proportions of people with migraine who report premonitory symptoms vary greatly among previous studies. Our aims were to establish the proportion of patients reporting premonitory symptoms and its dependency on the enquiry method. Additionally, we investigated the impact of premonitory symptoms on disease burden using Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and World Health Organization Disability Assessment 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), whilst investigating how various clinical factors influenced the likelihood of reporting premonitory symptoms.

Methods: In a cross-sectional study, premonitory symptoms were assessed among 632 patients with migraine. Unprompted enquiry was used first, followed by a list of 17 items (prompted). Additionally, we obtained clinical characteristics through a semi-structured interview.

Results: Prompted enquiry resulted in a greater proportion reporting premonitory symptoms than unprompted (69.9% vs. 43.0%; p < 0.001) and with higher symptom counts (medians 2, interquartile range = 0-6 vs. 1, interquartile range = 0-1; p < 0.001). The number of symptoms correlated weakly with HIT-6 (ρ = 0.14; p < 0.001) and WHODAS scores (ρ = 0.09; p = 0.041). Reporting postdromal symptoms or triggers increased the probability of reporting premonitory symptoms, whereas monthly migraine days decreased it.

Conclusions: The use of a standardized and optimized method for assessing premonitory symptoms is necessary to estimate their prevalence and to understand whether and how they contribute to disease burden.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
偏头痛的前驱症状:REFORM 研究。
背景:以往研究对偏头痛患者报告前驱症状比例的估计差异很大。我们的目的是确定报告前驱症状的患者比例及其与调查方法的关系。此外,我们还使用头痛影响测试(HIT-6)、偏头痛残疾评估(MIDAS)和世界卫生组织残疾评估 2.0(WHODAS 2.0)调查了前驱症状对疾病负担的影响,同时调查了各种临床因素如何影响报告前驱症状的可能性:在一项横断面研究中,对632名偏头痛患者的前驱症状进行了评估。首先是无提示询问,然后是一份包含 17 个项目的清单(提示)。此外,我们还通过半结构化访谈了解了患者的临床特征:结果:与非提示询问相比,提示询问导致报告前驱症状的比例更高(69.9% 对 43.0%;p p ρ = 0.14;p ρ = 0.09;p = 0.041)。报告偏头痛后症状或诱发因素会增加报告偏头痛前症状的概率,而报告每月偏头痛天数则会降低概率:结论:有必要使用标准化和优化的方法来评估前驱症状,以估算其流行率,并了解它们是否以及如何造成疾病负担。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cephalalgia
Cephalalgia 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
10.10
自引率
6.10%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Cephalalgia contains original peer reviewed papers on all aspects of headache. The journal provides an international forum for original research papers, review articles and short communications. Published monthly on behalf of the International Headache Society, Cephalalgia''s rapid review averages 5 ½ weeks from author submission to first decision.
期刊最新文献
Abnormal electromyographical trigeminal activation through stimulation of the offending artery (Z-L response): An intraoperative tool during microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia. A call for academic pragmatic clinical trials to address open questions in migraine prevention. Outcomes, unmet needs, and challenges in the management of patients who withdraw from anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: A prospective cohort study. Internal jugular vein valve incompetence: A key consideration in patients with exercise-induced headache. Headache trajectories in children and adolescents with new onset continuous headache.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1