Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Migraine is a chronic disabling neurologic condition that can be treated with a combination of both pharmacologic and complementary and integrative health options. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION/METHODS:With the growing interest in the US population in the use of nonpharmacologic treatments, we reviewed the evidence for supplements and behavioral interventions used for migraine prevention. RESULTS:Supplements reviewed included vitamins, minerals, and certain herbal preparations. Behavioral interventions reviewed included cognitive behavioral therapy, biofeedback, relaxation, the third-wave therapies, acupuncture, hypnosis, and aerobic exercise. CONCLUSIONS:This article should provide an appreciation for the wide range of nonpharmacologic therapies that might be offered to patients in place of or in addition to migraine-preventive medications.

BACKGROUND:Migraine and epilepsy are comorbid conditions. While it is well known that epilepsy can have an impact on cognitive abilities, there is conflicting evidence in the literature on the relationship between migraine and cognitive function. The aim of this study was to assess whether migraine comorbidity in patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy is associated with cognitive dysfunction. METHODS:This is a post hoc analysis of data prospectively collected for the Human Epilepsy Project (HEP). There were 349 participants screened for migraine with the 13 questions used in the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study. Participants were also screened for depression using the Neurological Disorder Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and for anxiety using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) scale. Cognitive performance was assessed with the Cogstate Brief Battery and Aldenkamp-Baker Neuropsychological Assessment Schedule (ABNAS). RESULTS:About a fifth (21.2%) of patients with a new diagnosis of focal epilepsy screened positive for migraine. There were more women and less participants employed full time among the participants with comorbid migraine. They reported slightly more depressive and anxious symptoms than the participants without migraine. Migraine comorbidity was associated with ABNAS memory score (median: 2, range: 0-12, Mann Whitney U p-value: 0.015). However, migraine comorbidity was not associated with Cogstate scores nor ABNAS total scores or other ABNAS domain scores. In linear regressions, depression and anxiety scores were associated with the ABNAS memory score. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In this study, there was no association between migraine comorbidity and objective cognitive scores in patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. The relationship between migraine comorbidity and subjective memory deficits seemed to be mediated by the higher prevalence of depression and anxiety symptoms in patients with epilepsy with comorbid migraine.

OBJECTIVE:/UNASSIGNED:Despite the potential benefits of mobile mental health apps, real-world results indicate engagement issues because of low uptake and sustained use. This review examined how studies have measured and reported on user engagement indicators (UEIs) for mental health apps. METHODS:/UNASSIGNED:A systematic review of multiple databases was performed in July 2018 for studies of mental health apps for depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and anxiety that reported on UEIs, namely usability, user satisfaction, acceptability, and feasibility. The subjective and objective criteria used to assess UEIs, among other data, were extracted from each study. RESULTS:/UNASSIGNED:Of 925 results, 40 studies were eligible. Every study reported positive results for the usability, satisfaction, acceptability, or feasibility of the app. Of the 40 studies, 36 (90%) employed 371 indistinct subjective criteria that were assessed with surveys, interviews, or both, and 23 studies used custom subjective scales, rather than preexisting standardized assessment tools. A total of 25 studies (63%) used objective criteria-with 71 indistinct measures. No two studies used the same combination of subjective or objective criteria to assess UEIs of the app. CONCLUSIONS:/UNASSIGNED:The high heterogeneity and use of custom criteria to assess mental health apps in terms of usability, user satisfaction, acceptability, or feasibility present a challenge for understanding real-world low uptake of these apps. Every study reviewed claimed that UEIs for the app were rated highly, which suggests a need for the field to focus on engagement by creating reporting standards and more carefully considering claims.

Objective/UNASSIGNED:Scalable nonpharmacologic treatment options are needed for chronic pain conditions. Migraine is an ideal condition to test smartphone-based mind-body interventions (MBIs) because it is a very prevalent, costly, disabling condition. Progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) is a standardized, evidence-based MBI previously adapted for smartphone applications for other conditions. We sought to examine the usability of the RELAXaHEAD application (app), which has a headache diary and PMR capability. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Using the "Think Aloud" approach, we iteratively beta-tested RELAXaHEAD in people with migraine. Individual interviews were conducted, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Using Grounded Theory, we conducted thematic analysis. Participants also were asked Likert scale questions about satisfaction with the app and the PMR. Results/UNASSIGNED:Twelve subjects participated in the study. The mean duration of the interviews (SD, range) was 36 (11, 19-53) minutes. From the interviews, four main themes emerged. People were most interested in app utility/practicality, user interface, app functionality, and the potential utility of the PMR. Participants reported that the daily diary was easy to use (75%), was relevant for tracking headaches (75%), maintained their interest and attention (75%), and was easy to understand (83%). Ninety-two percent of the participants would be happy to use the app again. Participants reported that PMR maintained their interest and attention (75%) and improved their stress and low mood (75%). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:The RELAXaHEAD app may be acceptable and useful to migraine participants. Future studies will examine the use of the RELAXaHEAD app to deliver PMR to people with migraine in a low-cost, scalable manner.

BACKGROUND:There are no clear guidelines on how to treat posttraumatic headache (PTH) or post-concussive symptoms (PCS). However, behavioral interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy, biofeedback, and relaxation are Level-A evidence-based treatments for headache prevention. To understand how to develop and study further mind-body interventions (MBIs) and behavioral therapies for PTH and PCS, we developed the following question using the PICO framework: Are behavioral therapies and MBIs effective for treating PTH and PCS? METHODS:We conducted a systematic search of 3 databases (Medline, PsycINFO, and EMBASE) for behavioral interventions and MBIs with the subject headings and keywords for PTH, concussion, and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Inclusion criteria were (1) randomized controlled trials, (2) the majority of the intervention had to be behavioral or mind-body therapy focused, (3) the majority of the participants (>50%) had to have had a mild TBI (not a moderate or severe TBI), (4) published in a peer-reviewed publication, and (5) meeting pre-specified primary and/or secondary outcomes. Primary outcome(s): whether there was a significant change in concussion symptom severity (yes/no) based on the symptom severity checklist/scale used, whether there was a 50% reduction in headache days and/or disability; secondary outcome(s): sleep variables, cognitive complaints, depression, and anxiety. The search identified 917 individual studies. Two independent reviewers screened citations and full-text articles independently. Nineteen articles were pulled for full article review. Seven articles met the final inclusion criteria. The systematic review was registered in Prospero (CRD42017070072). RESULTS:Overall, there was vast heterogeneity across the studies, making it difficult to fully assess efficacy. The heterogeneity ranged from differences in patient populations, the timing of when the interventions were initiated, the types of intervention implemented, and the measures used to assess outcomes. Seven studies were identified as meeting final inclusion criteria, resulting in a total of 1108 adult participants ranging from 18 to 80. Sixty-nine percent were male. Of the 7 studies, 3 were focused on military staff (retired and active). Time post-injury for inclusion into the studies varied from 48 hours post-injury to more than 2 years post-injury. One of the 7 studies did not include time post-TBI in the inclusion criteria. Two studies recruited patients who had visited their emergency departments, 4 of the studies recruited subjects through outpatient referrals, and 1 study recruited patients who had been in a prior traffic accident with resulting chronic PTH directly from a headache center. Group cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) sessions and telephonic counseling or communication were common intervention methods used in the studies, with group CBT being used in 2 of the studies and telephonic counseling being used in 3. Other intervention methods used included individual CBT, cognitive training, psychoeducation, and computer-based and/or therapist-directed cognitive rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS:Many of the interventions offered vastly different methods of delivery of intervention and doses of intervention. Many of the negative studies were done after an extended duration post-injury (>1-year posttraumatic brain injury [TBI]). In addition, the participants were lumped together regardless of their pre-concussion comorbidities, their mechanism of injury, their symptoms, and the duration from injury to the start of the intervention. The mass heterogeneity found between the studies led to inconclusive findings. Thus, there are various considerations for the design of the intervention for future behavioral/MBI studies for PTH and concussion that must be addressed before the leading question of this review may be effectively answered.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:In other disease states, adherence to behavioral therapies has gained attention, with a greater amount of studies discussing, defining, and optimizing adherence. For example, a meta-analysis formally discussed adherence in 25 studies of CBT for 11 different disorders, with only 6 of the 25 omitting addressing or defining adherence. Many studies have discussed the use of text messages, graph-based adherence rates, and email/telephone reminders to improve adherence. This paper examined the available literature regarding adherence to behavioral therapy for migraine as well as adherence to similar therapies in other disease states. The goal of this research is to apply lessons learned from adherence to behavioral therapy for other diseases in better understanding how we can improve adherence to behavioral therapy for migraine. RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:Treatment for migraine typically includes both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies, including progressive muscle relaxation (PMR), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and biofeedback. Behavioral therapies have been shown to significantly reduce headache frequency and intensity, but high attrition rates and suboptimal adherence can undermine their efficacy. Traditionally, adherence to behavioral therapy has been defined by self-report, including paper headache diaries and assignments. In person attendance has also been employed as a method of defining and monitoring adherence. With the advent of personal electronics, measurements of adherence have shifted to include electronic-based methods such as computer-based programs and mobile-based therapies. Furthermore, some studies have taken advantage of electronic methods such as email reminders, push notifications, and other mobile-based reminders to optimize adherence. The JITA-I, a novel method of engaging individual patient adherence, has also been suggested as a possible method to improve adherence by tailoring engagement with a mobile health app-based on patient input. These novel methods may be utilized in behavioral therapy for migraine for further optimizing adherence. Few intervention studies to date have addressed the optimal ways to impact adherence to migraine behavioral therapy. Further research is required regarding adherence with behavioral therapies, specifically via mobile health interventions to better understand how to define and improve adherence via this novel forum. Once we are able to understand optimal methods of tracking adherence, we will be better equipped to understand the role of adherence in shaping outcomes for behavioral therapy in migraine.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Nonpharmacological interventions, such as biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, and relaxation techniques are Level-A evidence-based treatments for headache. The impact of these interventions is often equivalent to or greater than pharmacological interventions, with fewer side effects. Despite such evidence, the rate of participation in nonpharmacological interventions for headache remains low. Once obstacles to optimizing use of behavioral interventions, such as local access to nonpharmacological treatment and primary headache providers are traversed, identification of barriers contributing to low adherence is imperative given the high levels of disability and cost associated with treating headache disorders. In this review of factors in adults associated with underuse of nonpharmacological interventions, we discuss psychological factors relevant to participation in nonpharmacological treatment, including attitudes and beliefs, motivation for change, awareness of triggers, locus of control, self-efficacy, acceptance, coping styles, personality traits, and psychiatric comorbidities associated with treatment adherence. Finally, future prospects and approaches to optimizing treatment matching and minimizing adherence issues are addressed. METHODS:An interdisciplinary team conducted this narrative review. Neuropsychologists conducted a literature search during the month of July 2017 using a combination of the keywords ("headache" or "migraine") and ("adherence" or "compliance") or "barriers to treatment" or various "psychological factors" discussed in this narrative review. Content experts, a psychiatrist, and a complementary and integrative health specialist provided additional commentary and input to this narrative review resulting in integration of additional noteworthy studies, book chapters and books. RESULTS:Various psychological factors, such as attitudes and beliefs, lack of motivation, poor awareness of triggers, external locus of control, poor self-efficacy, low levels of acceptance, and engagement in maladaptive coping styles can contribute to nonadherence. CONCLUSIONS:To maximize adherence, clinicians can assess and address an individual's level of treatment acceptance, beliefs that may present as barriers, readiness for change, locus of control, self-efficacy and psychiatric comorbidities. Identification of barriers to adherence as well as the application of relevant assessment and intervention techniques have the potential to facilitate adherence and ultimately improve treatment success.

Progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) is an under-utilized Level A evidence-based treatment for migraine prevention. We studied the feasibility and acceptability of smartphone application (app)-based PMR for migraine in a neurology setting, explored whether app-based PMR might reduce headache (HA) days, and examined potential predictors of app and/or PMR use. In this single-arm pilot study, adults with ICHD3 migraine, 4+ HA days/month, a smartphone, and no prior behavioral migraine therapy in the past year were asked to complete a daily HA diary and do PMR for 20 min/day for 90 days. Outcomes were: adherence to PMR (no. and duration of audio plays) and frequency of diary use. Predictors in the models were baseline demographics, HA-specific variables, baseline PROMIS (patient-reported outcomes measurement information system) depression and anxiety scores, presence of overlapping pain conditions studied and app satisfaction scores at time of enrollment. Fifty-one patients enrolled (94% female). Mean age was 39 ± 13 years. The majority (63%) had severe migraine disability at baseline (MIDAS). PMR was played 22 ± 21 days on average. Mean/session duration was 11 ± 7 min. About half (47%) of uses were 1+ time/week and 35% of uses were 2+ times/week. There was a decline in use/week. On average, high users (PMR 2+ days/week in the first month) had 4 fewer days of reported HAs in month 2 vs. month 1, whereas low PMR users (PMR < 2 days/week in the first month) had only 2 fewer HA days in month 2. PROMIS depression score was negatively associated with the log odds of using the diary at least once (vs. no activity) in a week (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = [0.55, 0.85]) and of doing the PMR at least once in a week (OR = 0.77, 95% CI = [0.68, 0.91]). PROMIS anxiety was positively associated with using the diary at least once every week (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = [1.09, 1.73]) and with doing the PMR at least once every week (OR = 1.14 [95% CI = [1.02, 1.31]). In conclusion, about half of participants used smartphone-based PMR intervention based upon a brief, initial introduction to the app. App use was associated with reduction in HA days. Higher depression scores were negatively associated with diary and PMR use, whereas higher anxiety scores were positively associated.