Health-Related and Condition-Specific Quality of Life in Episodic Cluster Headache

Ertsey, Csaba; Manhalter, Nóra; Bozsik, György; Áfra, Judit; Jelencsik, Ilona

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2982.2003.00655.x

Cited by 36 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In CH, assessment of QoL is currently limited to use of generic scales, such as the SF-36, and headache disability instruments, which have shown significantly diminished scores compared to headache-free controls [2, 5, 7, 16, 21]. Moreover, a study found significant differences between CH patients in the ictal versus the interictal period, but no significant differences between CH patients and migraineurs [7]. The authors postulated that since the study used a migraine-specific measure, it might not have been able to truly capture the essential aspects of CH [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development and validation of the Cluster Headache Quality of life scale (CHQ)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCluster headache (CH) is a rare, excruciating and highly disabling primary headache disorder. Using non cluster headache specific measures, previous studies have shown that CH has a significant negative impact on patients’ quality of life (QoL), but a CH-specific QoL scale is currently unavailable. Thus, the objective of this study was to develop and validate a CH-specific QoL scale.MethodsBased on a literature review, semi-structured patient interviews and expert panel consultation, we produced a 54-item questionnaire, which was pre-tested in a sample of CH patients and subsequently reduced to 47 items. The revised scale was then administered to CH sufferers attending a tertiary headache clinic and those registered with a patient group. A total of 406 completed questionnaires were received. To assess test-retest reliability, a subsample (N = 56) completed the scale on a second occasion, two weeks after the first. Standard statistical methods were used to analyse the data for validity and reliability.ResultsItem reduction and exploratory factor analysis led to 28-items, grouped into four subscales labelled “restriction of activities of daily living”, “impact on mood and interpersonal relationships”, “pain and anxiety”, and “lack of vitality”. The final CH-specific QoL scale, the CHQ, demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.9) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.8), with good internal construct validity between subscales (range 0.52–0.75) and convergent validity with other QoL measures.ConclusionsWe have developed and validated the first patient-reported outcome measure of QoL specifically for CH sufferers, which may be used to monitor QoL in clinical care and research.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development and validation of the Cluster Headache Quality of life scale (CHQ)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, a clinically effective therapy is not necessarily reflected by an improvement of the QOL scores of migraineurs (32). Patients may also feel that the instruments do not capture some important areas of their QOL, as was the case of our patients (suffering from cluster headache or migraine) during the above-mentioned trial (14).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MSQ2.1 was found to be a reliable and valid means of assessing QOL in migraine and has been formally validated for patients undergoing prophylactic migraine treatment (13). It has also been used in cluster headache (14). Recently, MSQ2.1 was validated for clinical use in episodic and chronic migraine (15) and was found to demonstrate significant differences between these, with chronic migraine sufferers having lower values in all dimensions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Owing to the availability of these instruments, there is a significant amount of scientific evidence about the negative effect of episodic and chronic migraine, cluster headache (2,14,27), TTH (28) and chronic daily headache (29) on generic and headache-specific QOL. The effects of acute (19,22) and prophylactic (13,18,30) migraine treatment on QOL have also been documented.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The validation of a new comprehensive headache-specific quality of life questionnaire

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Measuring quality of life (QOL) is an important means of assessing the impact of headache. The currently used QOL questionnaires are usually geared toward migraine and focus on a limited number of factors, thus they are not necessarily informative in other headache types. We report the psychometric properties of a new questionnaire, the Comprehensive Headache-related Quality of life Questionnaire (CHQQ) that may be more sensitive to the burden of headache. Patients and methods: A total of 202 patients suffering from migraine (n ¼ 168) or tension-type headache (TTH) (n ¼ 34) completed the CHQQ and SF-36, a generic QOL questionnaire. We assessed the reliability and validity of the CHQQ and its physical, mental and social dimensions. Results: The questionnaire was easy to administer. Reliability was excellent with Cronbach's alpha being 0.913 for the whole instrument (0.814-0.832 for its dimensions). The dimensions and total score showed significant correlations with the patients' headache characteristics (criterion validity), and were also significantly correlated with the SF-36 domains (convergent validity). The total score and dimensions were significantly (p < 0.005) lower in the migraine group than in the TTH group (discriminative validity). Conclusion: In this study the new headache-specific QOL instrument showed adequate psychometric properties.

show abstract

“…Health-related quality of life is significantly impaired in CH suf ferers. 4,5 Even though it is under-recognised and often suboptimally managed in primary care, 6,7 an early diagnosis and prompt treatment are essential to alleviate the devastating morbidity of these attacks. 8…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention and treatment of cluster headache

Cohen¹,

Goadsby²

2009

Prog Neurol Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CCluster headache (CH) is a stereotypical primar y headache syndrome, characterised by attacks of unilateral excruciating pain usually in the eye, periorbital region and temple, with associated cranial autonomic symptoms such as conjunctival injection, lacrimation, nasal blockage, rhinorrhea, ptosis, and eyelid oedema. Restlessness and agitation also feature prominently. Attacks last for 15-180 minutes, and have a frequency of one every other day up to eight a day. 1 They can be triggered by alcohol, 2 usually in under an hour, in contrast to migraine for which alcohol typically takes longer to trigger an attack. CH attacks often occur with so-called clock-like regularity, and may be precipitated by sleep.CH has a prevalence of 0.1 to 0.3 per cent in the general population, 3 and affects slightly more men than women, with a male: female ratio of 2.5:1 in a recent study. 2 Episodic cluster headache (ECH) is defined as bouts of attacks lasting from seven days up to one year, with breaks of one month or more between bouts. In chronic cluster headache (CCH) attacks occur for more than one year without remission, or with remissions lasting less than one month. In CCH there are micro-periods, and seasonal variation is sometimes seen. Unaware of this, clinicians and patients may feel prophylactics have 'stopped working' although in fact the disorder has changed. Over years this can lead to a creeping upwards of medicine doses and eventual accrual of side-effects. If one is aware of the phenomenon of periodicity even in CCH, the physician can, after a period of increased dosing, revert to the previous dose, or preferably use other strategies for short-term care to avoid changing the baseline preventive dose.CH is probably the most severe pain known to humans, with female patients describing each attack as worse than childbirth. Health-related quality of life is significantly impaired in CH suf ferers. 4,5 Even though it is under-recognised and often suboptimally managed in primary care, 6,7 an early diagnosis and prompt treatment are essential to alleviate the devastating morbidity of these attacks. 8 DiagnosisThe diagnosis is usually clear on taking a thorough history. The presence of autonomic symptoms, restlessness, and the length of the attacks usually distinguishes this from migraine, although a proportion of migraine patients may exhibit cranial autonomic features, 9-11 and migraine can coexist with CH by chance. The differential diagnosis for CH includes the other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs), which are paroxysmal hemicrania (PH) and SUNCT (shor t-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing), although these dif fer from CH in that the attack lengths are shorter. 1 There is considerable overlap in attack frequency, such that typical CH patients have one to two attacks a day, typical PH patients 10 and typical SUNCT/SUNA patients 50, there is a marked skew that favours lower attack frequencies. 12 Another useful clinical pointer is the lateralisation of photo...

show abstract

Health-Related and Condition-Specific Quality of Life in Episodic Cluster Headache

Cited by 36 publications

References 27 publications

The development and validation of the Cluster Headache Quality of life scale (CHQ)

The development and validation of the Cluster Headache Quality of life scale (CHQ)

The validation of a new comprehensive headache-specific quality of life questionnaire

Prevention and treatment of cluster headache

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About