Objective To describe a standardized methodology for the performance of peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) in the treatment of headache disorders. Background PNBs have long been employed in the management of headache disorders, but a wide variety of techniques are utilized in literature reports and clinical practice. Methods The American Headache Society Special Interest Section for PNBs and other Interventional Procedures convened meetings during 2010‐2011 featuring formal discussions and agreements about the procedural details for occipital and trigeminal PNBs. A subcommittee then generated a narrative review detailing the methodology. Results PNB indications may include select primary headache disorders, secondary headache disorders, and cranial neuralgias. Special procedural considerations may be necessary in certain patient populations, including pregnancy, the elderly, anesthetic allergy, prior vasovagal attacks, an open skull defect, antiplatelet/anticoagulant use, and cosmetic concerns. PNBs described include greater occipital, lesser occipital, supratrochlear, supraorbital, and auriculotemporal injections. Technical success of the PNB should result in cutaneous anesthesia. Targeted clinical outcomes depend on the indication, and include relief of an acute headache attack, terminating a headache cycle, and transitioning out of a medication‐overuse pattern. Reinjection frequency is variable, depending on the indications and agents used, and the addition of corticosteroids may be most appropriate when treating cluster headache. Conclusions These recommendations from the American Headache Society Special Interest Section for PNBs and other Interventional Procedures members for PNB methodology in headache disorder treatment are derived from the available literature and expert consensus. With the exception of cluster headache, there is a paucity of evidence, and further research may result in the revision of these recommendations to improve the outcome and safety of these interventions.

The sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) has attracted the interest of practitioners treating head and face pain for over a century because of its anatomical connections and role in the trigemino-autonomic reflex. In this review, we discuss the anatomy of the SPG, as well as what is known about its role in the pathophysiology of headache disorders, including cluster headache and migraine. We then address various therapies that target the SPG, including intranasal medication delivery, new SPG blocking catheter devices, neurostimulation, chemical neurolysis, and ablation procedures.

Conclusions.-When performed in the appropriate setting and with the proper expertise, TPIs seem to have a role in the adjunctive treatment of the most common headache disorders. We hope our effort to characterize the methodology of TPIs by expert opinion in the context of published data motivates the performance of evidence-based and standardized treatment protocols.

Objective: To assess rates of and factors associated with traversing fundamental barriers to good medical outcomes and pharmacologic care in individuals with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM), including socioeconomic status and race.Background: Barriers to good outcomes in migraine include the lack of appropriate medical consultation, failure to receive an accurate diagnosis, not being offered a regimen with acute and preventive pharmacologic treatments (if indicated), and not avoiding medication overuse. Methods: The Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study was a longitudinal Internet-based survey. Respondents who met criteria for migraine consistent with the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, had a Migraine Disability Assessment score ≥ 6, and provided health insurance coverage status were included in this analysis. Successfully traversing each barrier to care and the effects of sociodemographic characteristics were examined. Results: Among 16,789 respondents with migraine, 9184 (54.7%; EM: 7930; CM: 1254) were eligible. Current headache consultation was reported by 27.6% (2187/7930) of EM and 40.8% (512/1254) of CM respondents. Among consulters, 75.7% (1655/2187) with EM and 32.8% (168/512) with CM were accurately diagnosed. Among diagnosed consulters, 59.9% (992/1655) with EM and 54.2% (91/168) with CM reported minimally appropriate acute and preventive pharmacologic treatment. Among diagnosed and treated consulters, in the EM group 31.8% (315/992) and in the CM group 74.7% (68/91) met medication overuse criteria. Only 8.5% (677/7930) of EM and 1.8% (23/1254) of CM respondents traversed all four barriers. Higher income was positively associated with likelihood of traversing each barrier. Blacks and/orAfrican Americans had higher rates of consultation than other racial groups. Blacks and/or African Americans and multiracial people had higher rates of acute medication overuse.

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a complex chronic disorder of orofacial sensation that is challenging in both diagnosis and treatment. The diagnosis of BMS is primarily one of exclusion, and recently classification of the disorder has been challenged. Although the exact pathophysiology of primary BMS is unknown, there has been a growing body of work to provide insight into the pathogenesis of the disorder over the past few years. Pharmacological treatments recently reported to have some success in BMS include anxiolytics, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, atypical antipsychotics, histamine receptor antagonist, and dopamine agonists. In addition, other therapies and treatments are being considered. This paper reports many of the most recent data related to BMS and its classification, diagnosis, impact on quality of life, pathophysiology, co-morbidities, and pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments.

No abstract

Background Racial disparities in migraine have been reported in the US. Migraine in African Americans (AA) is more frequent, more severe, more likely to become chronic and associated with more depression and lower quality of life compared to non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). It is possible that racial differences in prescribing practices contribute to these differences, but little is known about the quality of migraine prescribing patterns in the US or whether racial differences exist. Objective To determine if racial differences in quality of migraine medical prescription care exist. Methods We used data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey to estimate differences in the use of migraine prophylactic and abortive medications by race. Quality of migraine care was defined using the American Academy of Neurology Headache Quality Measure Set (AAN-HQMS). Patients were assigned to one of four categories representing the overall quality of evidence for their abortive and prophylactic medications using the AAN-HQMS. We hypothesized that there would be suboptimal migraine treatment in minority populations. Racial comparisons were made using descriptive statistics after applying NAMCS survey weights. Results Two thousand, eight hundred and sixty visits were included in the study, representing approximately 50 million migraine visits in the US from 2006-2013. In all, 41.3% of AA, 40.8% of NHW, and 41.2% of Hispanic (HI) patients received no prophylactic treatments ( p = 0.99). A total of 18.8% of AA patients, 11.9% of NHW patients, and 6.9% of HI patients received exclusively Level A prophylaxis ( p = 0.30). A total of 47.1% of AA patients, 38.2% of NHW patients, and 36.3% of HI patients received no abortive treatments ( p = 0.23). In total, 15.3% of AA patients, 19.4% of NHW patients, and 17.7% of HI patients received any Level A abortives (i.e. triptans or Dihydroergotamine; DHE, p = 0.64). A total of 15.2% of all patients had a prescription for opiates, but there were no racial differences. Conclusions Migraine may be undertreated with prophylactic medications. Level A acute analgesics may be underused and opiates overused. No major racial/ethnic differences in abortive or prophylactic treatment were identified.

There are many barriers and challenges that affect people with migraine who are underinsured or uninsured, particularly those of under-represented racial backgrounds and of lower socioeconomic status.