Parenteral NSAIDs for acute treatment of migraine: Adherence to the IHS guidelines for controlled trials

Q3 Medicine Cephalalgia Reports Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/25158163221114465
J. G. Curran, J. Waters, Hsiangkuo Yuan
{"title":"Parenteral NSAIDs for acute treatment of migraine: Adherence to the IHS guidelines for controlled trials","authors":"J. G. Curran, J. Waters, Hsiangkuo Yuan","doi":"10.1177/25158163221114465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Parenteral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are important alternatives to oral NSAIDs, especially in patients with severe migraine who have emesis or gastroparesis. With increasing research on using parenteral NSAIDs for acute migraine, it is critical to examine the quality of these studies. Our goal was to assess the adherence of these trials to the International Headache Society (IHS) controlled trial guidelines for acute treatment of migraine. Methods: We queried PubMed for clinical trials investigating parenteral NSAIDs for acute treatment of migraine in adult patients. We developed a 14-point scoring system based on the essential components of the IHS guidelines. To date, four versions of the IHS’s Guidelines for controlled trials of acute treatment of migraine attacks have been published. Each trial was evaluated with the appropriate edition of the guidelines. Results: We identified 216 studies and assessed 27 eligible clinical trials. The mean score was 6.7 ± 2.1 (2–11). Most trials followed the IHS migraine diagnosis criteria (85.2%), but only six (22.2%) selected patients based on the recommended headache frequency. Most trials were randomized (88.8%), but fewer were double-blinded (74.1%) or placebo-controlled (11.1%). Almost every trial clearly explained the pain scale (96.3%), and three-quarters (77.8%) assessed headache-associated symptoms. However, no trial utilized the recommended primary endpoint: pain-freedom at 2-hours. Conclusions: Most clinical trials on parenteral NSAIDs for acute migraine did not fully adhere to the IHS recommendations. Future studies should pay special attention to the IHS guideline to improve the quality of clinical trials for the acute treatment of migraine.","PeriodicalId":9702,"journal":{"name":"Cephalalgia Reports","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cephalalgia Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/25158163221114465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Parenteral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are important alternatives to oral NSAIDs, especially in patients with severe migraine who have emesis or gastroparesis. With increasing research on using parenteral NSAIDs for acute migraine, it is critical to examine the quality of these studies. Our goal was to assess the adherence of these trials to the International Headache Society (IHS) controlled trial guidelines for acute treatment of migraine. Methods: We queried PubMed for clinical trials investigating parenteral NSAIDs for acute treatment of migraine in adult patients. We developed a 14-point scoring system based on the essential components of the IHS guidelines. To date, four versions of the IHS’s Guidelines for controlled trials of acute treatment of migraine attacks have been published. Each trial was evaluated with the appropriate edition of the guidelines. Results: We identified 216 studies and assessed 27 eligible clinical trials. The mean score was 6.7 ± 2.1 (2–11). Most trials followed the IHS migraine diagnosis criteria (85.2%), but only six (22.2%) selected patients based on the recommended headache frequency. Most trials were randomized (88.8%), but fewer were double-blinded (74.1%) or placebo-controlled (11.1%). Almost every trial clearly explained the pain scale (96.3%), and three-quarters (77.8%) assessed headache-associated symptoms. However, no trial utilized the recommended primary endpoint: pain-freedom at 2-hours. Conclusions: Most clinical trials on parenteral NSAIDs for acute migraine did not fully adhere to the IHS recommendations. Future studies should pay special attention to the IHS guideline to improve the quality of clinical trials for the acute treatment of migraine.
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
急性偏头痛的非甾体抗炎药注射治疗:遵守对照试验的IHS指南
背景:肠外非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)是口服NSAIDs的重要替代品,尤其是在有呕吐或胃轻瘫的严重偏头痛患者中。随着越来越多的研究使用非甾体抗炎药治疗急性偏头痛,检查这些研究的质量至关重要。我们的目标是评估这些试验对国际头痛协会(IHS)偏头痛急性治疗对照试验指南的遵守情况。方法:我们向PubMed查询了研究非甾体抗炎药用于成人偏头痛急性治疗的临床试验。我们根据IHS指南的基本组成部分制定了一个14分的评分系统。迄今为止,IHS关于偏头痛发作急性治疗对照试验的指导方针已经发布了四个版本。每项试验都使用适当版本的指南进行评估。结果:我们确定了216项研究,并评估了27项符合条件的临床试验。平均得分为6.7±2.1(2-11)。大多数试验遵循IHS偏头痛诊断标准(85.2%),但只有6例(22.2%)根据推荐的头痛频率选择患者。大多数试验是随机的(88.8%),但很少有双盲试验(74.1%)或安慰剂对照试验(11.1%)。几乎每项试验都清楚地解释了疼痛程度(96.3%),四分之三(77.8%)的试验评估了头痛相关症状。然而,没有试验使用推荐的主要终点:2小时的疼痛自由度。结论:大多数非甾体抗炎药治疗急性偏头痛的临床试验并不完全符合IHS的建议。未来的研究应特别关注IHS指南,以提高偏头痛急性治疗临床试验的质量。
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 Reports
Cephalalgia Reports Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
Protocol of a cross-sectional, multicentre and multidisciplinary study describing phenotype and burden of a midfacial segment pain Paranoid psychosis after a single parenteral dose of indomethacin administered for headache diagnosis: A case and review of the literature Extended regular use of kinetic oscillation stimulation (KOS) in refractory chronic migraine: case report of a first, single-subject experience Corrigendum to “Eptinezumab administered intravenously, subcutaneously, or intramuscularly in healthy subjects and/or patients with migraine: Early development studies” A century of bruxism research in top-ranking medical journals
×
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