Background The Covid-19 pandemic is causing changes in delivery of medical care worldwide. It is not known how the management of headache patients was affected by the lockdown during the pandemic. The aim of the present study was to investigate how the initial phase of the Covid-19 pandemic affected the hospital management of headache in Denmark and Norway. Methods All neurological departments in Denmark (n = 14) and Norway (n = 18) were invited to a questionnaire survey. The study focused on the lockdown and all questions were answered in regard to the period between March 12th and April 15th, 2020. Results The responder rate was 91% (29/32). Of the neurological departments 86% changed their headache practice during the lockdown. The most common change was a shift to more telephone consultations (86%). Video consultations were offered by 45%. The number of new headache referrals decreased. Only 36% administered botulinum toxin A treatment according to usual schemes. Sixty% reported that fewer patients were admitted for in-hospital emergency diagnostics and treatment. Among departments conducting headache research 57% had to halt ongoing projects. Overall, 54% reported that the standard of care was worse for headache patients during the pandemic. Conclusion Hospital-based headache care and research was impacted in Denmark and Norway during the initial phase of the Covid-19-pandemic.

Introduction Large numbers of people with headache who would benefit are not reached by headache services. Among the causes are poor or disorganized provision of headache services, but reluctance to seek healthcare has frequently been identified as a significant barrier. We conducted a national survey of people with headache to assess the extent of this problem in Denmark, a country with well organized, highly resourced, and readily accessible services. Methods We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional survey of adults ≥ 18 years old in Denmark reporting at least one headache day in the last year. We used social media (Facebook) to publicize and drive a recruitment campaign. The survey investigated five items: (1) disease burden, (2) social life, (3) presenteeism, (4) social support, and (5) healthcare utilization. Results We included 6,567 respondents from May 2021 to June 2021; 70.2% were female, 39.8% male, and mean age was 43.2 ± 13.4 years. Of the respondents, 54.2% reported headache at least once a week, 33.4% reported headache a couple of times a month, and 12.4% reported headache a couple of times a year. Two-thirds of respondents (66.6%) reported that headache limited their social lives occasionally or frequently. Most respondents (86.8%) reported going to work or attending educational activities occasionally or more frequently even though they had headache. Half of the respondents (49.5%) experienced lack of understanding of their headaches from people occasionally or more frequently. Almost half of respondents (43.7%) had never consulted a medical doctor for their headache; even of those with weekly headache, more than a quarter (28.3%) had never done so in their lifetimes. Conclusions Headache disorders continue to be a problem, even in a high-income country with free and easily accessible headache services. Further studies are needed to investigate and clarify why even people with the highest burden are hesitant to seek and make use of widely available headache services.

Background A major barrier to adequate headache care is the relative lack of formal education and training of healthcare professionals. Concerted efforts should be made to pinpoint major gaps in knowledge in healthcare professionals to facilitate better educational policies in headache training. The aim of this study was to identify deficiencies and barriers in headache training among residents in neurology in Denmark. Methods We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of residents in neurology in Denmark from April 2019 to September 2019. The survey included questions on participant demographics, knowledge of and barriers in headache disorders, guidelines and diagnostic tools usage, contact with primary and tertiary care, medication overuse, and non-pharmacological interventions. Furthermore, respondents were asked to provide a ranked list from most to least interesting for six sub-specializations/disorders, i.e., cerebrovascular disease, dementia, epilepsy, headache, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease. Results Sixty (40%) out of estimated a population of ~ 150 resident across Denmark accepted the invitation. Of these, 54/60 (90%) completed the survey. Although two-thirds, 35/54 (65%), of the respondents had prior formalized training in headache disorders, we identified gaps in all explored domains including diagnosis, management, and referral patterns. Particularly, there was an inconsistent use of guidelines and diagnostic criteria from the Danish Headache Society (2.74 (± 1.14)), the Danish Neurological Society (3.15 (± 0.86)), and the International Classification of Headache Disorders (2.33 (± 1.08)); 1: never/have not heard of, 4: always. Headache was ranked second to last out of six sub-specializations in interest. Conclusions Overall knowledge on headache disorders amongst neurology residents in Denmark do not meet the expectations set out by national and international recommendations. Stakeholders should make strategic initiatives for structured education in headache for improved clinical outcomes in parallel with costs reduction through resource optimization.

Background: Involvement of People With Diabetes (PWD) is important for diabetes research and care, yet there is a lack of evidence-based and systematic methodologies. Aim: To evaluate the quality and value of a novel User Involvement (UI) process for people with diabetes (PWD) and caregivers in a national project to develop a new Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) questionnaire for routine diabetes care. Methodology: 56 PWD (type 1 and 2) and 9 caregivers were recruited for individual and group UI activities with consideration of age, gender, diabetes type, duration, complications, treatment, geographic region and patient advocacy experience. Analyses were done on qualitative data from interviews, focus groups and workshops over 1 year. 7 UI quality criteria were used for planning and evaluation: 1) Shared purpose, 2) Respect and Accessibility, 3) Representativeness, 4) Roles, 5) Capacity and Capability, 6) Transparency and Documentation, 7) Continuity. Results: UI generated multiple insights which impacted A) Aims and focus for PRO, B) PRO content and C) PRO implementation. Key insights included: A) PWD priority aims for use of PRO: To enable PWD to take more active role (incl. vulnerable groups), ensure all priority topics (incl e.g., sexual dysfunction) are covered consistently in visits, focus on what matters most to each PWD (use care resources where they add most value). B) PWD preferences for items: Simple, brief, relevant (individualized), supportive of autonomy, non-stigmatizing, non-paternalistic and not overly negative, C) PWD insights for implementation: PWD and care providers to be able to act on all PRO outputs (e.g., web tool and training). Stakeholders found the 7 quality criteria relevant for UI planning and evaluation. Conclusions: Systematic UI led to major new insights that impacted outcomes of a national PRO diabetes program. The systematic diabetes UI process is recommended for further use in diabetes research and care improvement. Disclosure S.E. Skovlund: Stock/Shareholder; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. L. Nørgaard: None. S. Stefansen: None. T. Honnens de Lichtenberg: None. L. Troelsen: None. A. Pietraszek: None. P.H. Kjær: None. H. Ravn Larsen: None. P.O. Jakobsen: None. N. Ejskjaer: None. Funding National Health Data Authority Region, Northern Denmark

Background: A major barrier to adequate headache care is lacking formal education and training of healthcare professionals. Concerted efforts should be made to pinpoint major gaps in knowledge in healthcare professionals to facilitate better educational policies in headache training. The aim of this study was to identify deficiencies and barriers in headache training among residents in neurology in Denmark.Methods: We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of residents in neurology in Denmark from April 2019 to September 2019. The survey included questions on participant demographics, knowledge of and barriers in headache disorders, guidelines and diagnostic tools usage, contact with primary and tertiary care, medication overuse, and non-pharmacological interventions.Results: Sixty residents across Denmark accepted the invitation and 54/60 (90%) completed the survey. Although two-thirds, 35/54 (65%), of the population had prior formalized training in headache disorders, we identified gaps in all explored domains including diagnosis, management, and referral patterns. Particularly, there was an inconsistent use of guidelines and diagnostic criteria from the Danish Headache Society (2.74 (±1.14)), the Danish Neurological Society (3.15 (±0.86)), and the International Classification of Headache Disorders (2.33 (±1.08)); 1: never/have not heard of, 4: always. Headache was ranked second to last out of six sub-specializations in popularity.Conclusions: Overall knowledge on headache disorders amongst neurology residents in Denmark do not meet the expectations set out by national and international recommendations. Stakeholders should make strategic initiatives for structured education in headache for improved clinical outcomes in parallel with costs reduction through resource optimization.