Does primary-care use of the HURT questionnaire aid the reduction of headache burden? Lessons for study design from an evaluation in primary care of the Arabic version
A. Khathaami, Danah Abo AlSamh, M. Jumah, Nasser Alotaibi, S. Kojan, A. Khan, T. Steiner
{"title":"Does primary-care use of the HURT questionnaire aid the reduction of headache burden? Lessons for study design from an evaluation in primary care of the Arabic version","authors":"A. Khathaami, Danah Abo AlSamh, M. Jumah, Nasser Alotaibi, S. Kojan, A. Khan, T. Steiner","doi":"10.15761/hpc.1000177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) questionnaire is a self-administered outcome measure designed to assess and promote effectiveness of headache management in primary care. It links responses indicative of suboptimal treatment to specific clinical actions to improve outcomes. We aimed in this study to test whether integrating HURT into assessment and follow-up in primary care in Saudi Arabia improved headache management. Methods: With IRB approval, primary-care physicians (PCPs) were recruited from two health-care centres in Riyadh. After basic training in headache care, they were randomly assigned to either of two groups: one, with further instruction on its use, incorporating HURT into their management of patients with headache (intervention group), the other applying standard care without HURT (control group). Patients were randomised on presentation to a PCP in one or other group, thereby randomly receiving care directed by HURT or not. The primary outcome measures, estimated using the Headache-Attributed Lost Time (HALT) index, were reductions in lost productivity from paid work and household chores after 3 and 5 months’ follow-up. Results: A total of 28 PCPs participated. The study was stopped early, because of slow recruitment, after enrolment of 171 patients (84 control, 87 intervention) of 420 planned. Baseline characteristics were well matched between the groups. Patients in both groups benefited from the care they received, with no significant difference in the primary endpoint between groups after 5 months (5.2 versus 5.7 days lost; p=0.4). Patients’ understanding of their diagnosis reportedly improved in the intervention group during follow-up. Conclusion: The study failed in its purpose but delivered useful lessons for future study design in a difficult field of enquiry. First, the training we gave all PCPs, in order to balance the treatment groups, may have rendered HURT largely redundant as a management aid intended for non-experts. Second, the study demonstrates again the difficulty of conducting experiments of this sort in primary care, where interest in headache and motivation to conduct headache research are largely lacking. The second is the more intractable problem. *Correspondence to: TJ Steiner, Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, E-mail: t.steiner@imperial.ac.uk","PeriodicalId":48703,"journal":{"name":"Primary Health Care Research and Development","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary Health Care Research and Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15761/hpc.1000177","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Background: The Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) questionnaire is a self-administered outcome measure designed to assess and promote effectiveness of headache management in primary care. It links responses indicative of suboptimal treatment to specific clinical actions to improve outcomes. We aimed in this study to test whether integrating HURT into assessment and follow-up in primary care in Saudi Arabia improved headache management. Methods: With IRB approval, primary-care physicians (PCPs) were recruited from two health-care centres in Riyadh. After basic training in headache care, they were randomly assigned to either of two groups: one, with further instruction on its use, incorporating HURT into their management of patients with headache (intervention group), the other applying standard care without HURT (control group). Patients were randomised on presentation to a PCP in one or other group, thereby randomly receiving care directed by HURT or not. The primary outcome measures, estimated using the Headache-Attributed Lost Time (HALT) index, were reductions in lost productivity from paid work and household chores after 3 and 5 months’ follow-up. Results: A total of 28 PCPs participated. The study was stopped early, because of slow recruitment, after enrolment of 171 patients (84 control, 87 intervention) of 420 planned. Baseline characteristics were well matched between the groups. Patients in both groups benefited from the care they received, with no significant difference in the primary endpoint between groups after 5 months (5.2 versus 5.7 days lost; p=0.4). Patients’ understanding of their diagnosis reportedly improved in the intervention group during follow-up. Conclusion: The study failed in its purpose but delivered useful lessons for future study design in a difficult field of enquiry. First, the training we gave all PCPs, in order to balance the treatment groups, may have rendered HURT largely redundant as a management aid intended for non-experts. Second, the study demonstrates again the difficulty of conducting experiments of this sort in primary care, where interest in headache and motivation to conduct headache research are largely lacking. The second is the more intractable problem. *Correspondence to: TJ Steiner, Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, E-mail: t.steiner@imperial.ac.uk
期刊介绍:
Primary Health Care Research & Development is aimed specifically at both researchers and practitioners in primary health care, bridging the gap between the two areas. It provides a forum for the publication of international, interdisciplinary research and development in primary health care. It is essential reading for all involved in primary care: nurse practitioners, GPs and health service managers; professional and local groups in community health; researchers and academics; purchasers of primary health care services; allied health practitioners in secondary services and health-related consumer groups.