-
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Dec 2023The main objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of intraoral splints in treating migraine and tension-type headaches. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The main objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of intraoral splints in treating migraine and tension-type headaches.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The article search was conducted within seven electronic databases (Medline, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL PLUS with full text, Cochrane Library Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus) with no date limits or language restrictions up to June 12, 2022. Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were set for article selection. At the same time as data extraction, each study's risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated using the Cochrane tool to assess their RoB. Subsequently, the Cochrane Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.
RESULTS
Four controlled clinical trials were included. These trials were heterogeneous in terms of (1) diagnosis, (2) design of the intraoral splints, and (3) tools for reporting the results, which made it difficult to compile the data as well as evaluate its quality. Trials reported a reduction in the frequency of headache and pain intensity when using intraoral splints; however, this therapy was not superior to medications.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is very low for the use of oral splints as a therapeutic alternative to medication in the treatment of migraine and/or tension-type headache.
Topics: Humans; Tension-Type Headache; Splints; Migraine Disorders
PubMed: 37680032
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.779 -
Journal of the American Dental... Feb 2022The primary objective of this systematic review was to answer the following question systematically: Is there any association between primary headaches (PHs) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The primary objective of this systematic review was to answer the following question systematically: Is there any association between primary headaches (PHs) and temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) in adults?
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED
The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. The authors performed the search in 6 main databases and 3 gray literature sources. The included articles had to have adult samples. PHs must have been diagnosed using the International Classification of Headache Disorders, and TMDs must have been diagnosed using Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders, Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders, or International Classification of Orofacial Pain. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument tools. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software, Version 5.4. Certainty of evidence was screened according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
RESULTS
Nine of 2,574 articles reviewed met the inclusion criteria for qualitative analysis and, of these, 7 met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) for painful TMD and tension-type headache (OR, 1.94 [95% CI, 0.56 to 6.76] to OR, 7.61 [95% CI, 1.84 to 31.48]), migraines (OR, 4.14 [95% CI, 1.38 to 12.43] to OR, 5.44 [95% CI, 3.61 to 8.21]), and chronic headaches (OR, 40.40 [95% CI, 8.67 to 188.15] to OR, 95.93 [95% CI, 12.53 to 734.27]) were calculated. Articular TMDs without pain were evaluated in 2 articles, and both did not show positive association with tension-type headache nor migraine. Three studies were classified as moderate risk of bias and 6 as low risk of bias. The certainty of evidence varied between very low and low.
CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Recognizing the positive association between painful TMD and PHs can help dentists and physicians treat the pain and avoid it, or recommend the patient to a specialist.
Topics: Adult; Facial Pain; Headache; Humans; Migraine Disorders; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Tension-Type Headache
PubMed: 34649707
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2021.07.021 -
Neurology Jul 2017To identify predictors of prognosis and trial outcomes in prospective studies of people with chronic headache. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To identify predictors of prognosis and trial outcomes in prospective studies of people with chronic headache.
METHODS
This was a systematic review of published literature in peer-reviewed journals We included (1) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for chronic headache that reported subgroup analyses and (2) prospective cohort studies, published in English, since 1980. Participants included adults with chronic headache (including chronic headache, chronic migraine, and chronic tension-type headache with or without medication overuse headache). We searched key databases using free text and MeSH terms. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the methodologic quality of studies and overall quality of evidence identified using appropriate published checklists.
RESULTS
We identified 16,556 titles, removed 663 duplicates, and reviewed 199 articles, of which 27 were included in the review-17 prospective cohorts and 10 RCTs with subgroup analyses reported. There was moderate-quality evidence indicating that depression, anxiety, poor sleep and stress, medication overuse, and poor self-efficacy for managing headaches are potential prognostic factors for poor prognosis and unfavorable outcomes from preventive treatment in chronic headache. There was inconclusive evidence about treatment expectations, age, age at onset, body mass index, employment, and several headache features.
CONCLUSIONS
This review identified several potential predictors of poor prognosis and worse outcome postinterventions in people with chronic headache. The majority of these are modifiable. The findings also highlight the need for more longitudinal high-quality research of prognostic factors in chronic headache.
Topics: Headache Disorders; Humans; Prognosis
PubMed: 28615422
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000004112 -
Evidence to Use Botulinum Toxin Injections in Tension-Type Headache Management: A Systematic Review.Toxins Nov 2017Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common type of chronic recurring head pain. It can occur twice as often in women as in men. It is the most common type of... (Review)
Review
Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common type of chronic recurring head pain. It can occur twice as often in women as in men. It is the most common type of headache. Its lifetime prevalence is 30% to 78% in the general population. TTH treatment should be multilevel. It often consists of taking pain medication, muscle relaxants, antidepressants, using biofeedback therapy, acupuncture, and attending behavioral therapy. Several clinical trials also suggest that botulinum toxin (BTX) may be an effective treatment option for such patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate if BTX can be used as a treatment method in TTH in the light of current medical literature. The authors searched the PubMed, EBSCOhost, OVID, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases to identify relevant publications. The authors finally included 11 papers-prospective and retrospective cohort studies. Among most of the selected studies, there was a significant correlation between using BTX and reduction of TTH pain intensity and severity. By analyzing qualified studies, it can be concluded that botulinum toxin seems to be effective in TTH management.
Topics: Botulinum Toxins; Female; Humans; Male; Tension-Type Headache
PubMed: 29140286
DOI: 10.3390/toxins9110370 -
Journal of Pain Research 2017This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy, effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in patients with headache. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy, effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in patients with headache.
BACKGROUND
Migraine is one of the most common and disabling medical conditions. It affects more than 15% of the general population, causing high global socioeconomic costs, and the currently available treatment options are inadequate.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed all available studies investigating the use of OMT in patients with migraine and other forms of headache.
RESULTS
The search of literature produced six studies, five of which were eligible for review. The reviewed papers collectively support the notion that patients with migraine can benefit from OMT. OMT could most likely reduce the number of episodes per month as well as drug use. None of the included studies, however, was classified as low risk of bias according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias.
CONCLUSION
The results from this systematic review show a preliminary low level of evidence that OMT is effective in the management of headache. However, studies with more rigorous designs and methodology are needed to strengthen this evidence. Moreover, this review suggests that new manual interventions for the treatment of acute migraine are available and developing.
PubMed: 28352200
DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S130501 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2017Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about 1 person in 5 worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic TTH... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about 1 person in 5 worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic TTH (two to 14 headache days per month), and chronic TTH (15 headache days per month or more). Aspirin is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of episodic TTH.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of aspirin for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache (TTH) in adults compared with placebo or any active comparator.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database from inception to September 2016, and also reference lists of relevant published studies and reviews. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral aspirin for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective, with participants aged 18 years or over, and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. For various outcomes (predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS)), we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNT), one additional harmful outcome (NNH), or to prevent one event (NNTp) for oral aspirin compared to placebo or an active intervention.We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five studies enrolling adults with frequent episodic TTH; 1812 participants took medication, of which 767 were included in comparisons of aspirin 1000 mg with placebo, and 405 in comparisons of aspirin 500 mg or 650 mg with placebo. Not all of these participants provided data for outcomes of interest in this review. Four studies specified using IHS diagnostic criteria; one predated commonly recognised criteria, but described comparable characteristics and excluded migraine. All participants treated headaches of at least moderate pain intensity.None of the included studies were at low risk of bias across all domains considered, although for most studies and domains this was likely to be due to inadequate reporting rather than poor methods. We judged one study to be at high risk of bias due to small size.There were no data for aspirin at any dose for the IHS preferred outcome of being pain free at two hours, or for being pain free at any other time, and only one study provided data equivalent to having no or mild pain at two hours (very low quality evidence). Use of rescue medication was lower with aspirin 1000 mg than with placebo (2 studies, 397 participants); 14% of participants used rescue medication with aspirin 1000 mg compared with 31% with placebo (NNTp 6.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1 to 12) (low quality evidence). Two studies (397 participants) reported a Patient Global Evaluation at the end of the study; we combined the top two categories for both studies to determine the number of participants who were 'satisfied' with treatment. Aspirin 1000 mg produced more satisfied participants (55%) than did placebo (37%) (NNT 5.7, 95% CI 3.7 to 12) (very low quality evidence).Adverse events were not different between aspirin 1000 mg and placebo (RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.5), or aspirin 500 mg or 650 mg and placebo (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.8 to 2.0) (low quality evidence). Studies reported no serious adverse events.The quality of the evidence using GRADE comparing aspirin doses between 500 mg and 1000 mg with placebo was low or very low. Evidence was downgraded because of the small number of studies and events, and because the most important measures of efficacy were not reported.There were insufficient data to compare aspirin with any active comparator (paracetamol alone, paracetamol plus codeine, peppermint oil, or metamizole) at any of the doses tested.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
A single dose of aspirin between 500 mg and 1000 mg provided some benefit in terms of less frequent use of rescue medication and more participants satisfied with treatment compared with placebo in adults with frequent episodic TTH who have an acute headache of moderate or severe intensity. There was no difference between a single dose of aspirin and placebo for the number of people experiencing adverse events. The amount and quality of the evidence was very limited and should be interpreted with caution.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Analgesics; Aspirin; Codeine; Dipyrone; Humans; Mentha piperita; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Plant Oils; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tension-Type Headache; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28084009
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011888.pub2 -
Pain Research & Management 2024To assess the effectiveness of myofascial release (MFR) techniques on the intensity of headache pain and associated disability in patients with tension-type headache... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness of myofascial release (MFR) techniques on the intensity of headache pain and associated disability in patients with tension-type headache (TTH), cervicogenic headache (CGH), or migraine.
DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Eight databases were searched on September 15, 2023, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang Database. The risk of bias was evaluated utilizing the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool.
RESULTS
Pooled results showed that MFR intervention significantly reduces pain intensity [SMD = -2.01, 95% CI (-2.98, -1.03), = 90%, < 0.001] and improves disability [SMD = -1.3, 95% CI (-1.82, -0.79), = 74%, < 0.001]. Subgroup analysis based on the type of headache revealed significant reductions in pain intensity for CGH [SMD = -2.01, 95% CI (-2.73, -1.29), = 63%, < 0.001], TTH [SMD = -0.86, 95% CI (-1.52, -0.20), = 50%, =0.01] and migraine [SMD = -6.52, 95% CI (-8.15, -4.89), < 0.001] and in disability for CGH [SMD = -1.45, 95% CI (-2.07, -0.83), = 0%, < 0.001]; TTH [SMD = -0.98, 95% CI (-1.32, -0.65), = 0%, < 0.001] but not migraine [SMD = -2.44, 95% CI (-6.04, 1.16), = 97%, =0.18].
CONCLUSION
The meta-analysis results indicate that MFR intervention can significantly alleviate pain and disability in TTH and CGH. For migraine, however, the results were inconsistent, and there was only moderate quality evidence of disability improvement for TTH and CGH. In contrast, the quality of other evidence was low or very low.
Topics: Humans; Post-Traumatic Headache; Myofascial Release Therapy; Migraine Disorders; Headache; Tension-Type Headache; Pain
PubMed: 38585645
DOI: 10.1155/2024/2042069 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2015Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about one person in five worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about one person in five worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic TTH (1 to 14 headaches per month), and chronic TTH (15 headaches a month or more). Ibuprofen is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of headaches in frequent episodic TTH.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of oral ibuprofen for treatment of acute episodic TTH in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and our own in-house database to January 2015. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching on-line clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral ibuprofen for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNH) of oral ibuprofen compared to placebo for a range of outcomes, predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 studies, all of which enrolled adult participants with frequent episodic TTH. Nine used the IHS diagnostic criteria, but two used the older classification of the Ad Hoc Committee, and one did not describe diagnostic criteria but excluded participants with migraines. While 3094 people with TTH participated in these studies, the numbers available for any form of analysis were lower than this; placebo was taken by 733, standard ibuprofen 200 mg by 127, standard ibuprofen 400 mg by 892, and fast-acting ibuprofen 400 mg by 230. Participants had moderate or severe pain at the start of treatment. Other participants were either in studies not reporting outcomes we could analyse, or were given one of several active comparators in single studies.For the IHS-preferred outcome of being pain free at 2 hours the NNT for ibuprofen 400 mg (all formulations) compared with placebo was 14 (95% confidence interval (CI), 8.4 to 47) in four studies, with no significant difference from placebo at 1 hour (moderate quality evidence). The NNT was 5.9 (4.2 to 9.5) for the global evaluation of 'very good' or 'excellent' in three studies (moderate quality evidence). No study reported the number of participants experiencing no worse than mild pain at 1 or 2 hours. The use of rescue medication was lower with ibuprofen 400 mg than with placebo, with the number needed to treat to prevent one event (NNTp) of 8.9 (5.6 to 21) in two studies (low quality evidence).Adverse events were not different between ibuprofen 400 mg and placebo; RR 1.1 (0.64 to 1.7) (high-quality evidence). No serious adverse events were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Ibuprofen 400 mg provides an important benefit in terms of being pain free at 2 hours for a small number of people with frequent episodic tension-type headache who have an acute headache with moderate or severe initial pain. There is no information about the lesser benefit of no worse than mild pain at 2 hours.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Administration, Oral; Adult; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Diclofenac; Humans; Ibuprofen; Ketoprofen; Naproxen; Numbers Needed To Treat; Pain Measurement; Piroxicam; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tension-Type Headache; Time Factors
PubMed: 26230487
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011474.pub2 -
Atencion Primaria Mar 2022The objective of this work was to systematically review the published literature in relation to the estimated indirect costs associated with TTH.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this work was to systematically review the published literature in relation to the estimated indirect costs associated with TTH.
DESIGN
This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items Statement for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyzes (PRISMA).
DATA SOURCES
The review was performed in two main databases, PubMed and EconLit, and was completed with the gray literature search.
STUDY SELECTION
The basic criterion for the inclusion of studies was that they present at least one measure of indirect costs specific to TTH.
DATA EXTRACTION
12 studies were finally selected for information extraction. Of all the selected articles, the characteristics of the study design, the types of costs included, as well as the measurement instrument, and the main results were synthesized.
RESULTS
The search yielded a total of 568 studies. Heterogeneity was found in the designs and samples/populations of the included studies. Only two studies estimated direct and indirect costs for TTH. Among the most notable results, we find an estimated moderate impact of disability due to TTH (between 0.037 and 0.15 per person, 0.06-0.09% for the population). Productivity and efficiency losses were observed and were very heterogeneous. The willingness to pay for effective treatment would range from $1.32 to $9.20 per month. Quality of life is low, between 28.2 and 28.4 points out of 100, and health-related quality of life seems to improve significantly with treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the high heterogeneity of the results, we can conclude that tension headache is characterized by a moderate impact on disability, on productivity and efficiency at work or school, and on the quality of life of those who suffer it.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Tension-Type Headache; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35077913
DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2021.102238 -
Neurologia (Barcelona, Spain) 2016To study the efficacy of manual therapy in the treatment of tension-type headache (TTH) by assessing the quality of randomized control trials (RCTs) published from the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To study the efficacy of manual therapy in the treatment of tension-type headache (TTH) by assessing the quality of randomized control trials (RCTs) published from the year 2000 to April 2013.
METHODS
A search was performed in the following databases: MEDLINE, EBSCO, CINAHL, SCOPUS, PEDRO and OVID. An analysis was made of RCT including patients with TTH receiving any manual therapy, and assessing outcome measures including the intensity, and frequency or duration of the headache. Two independent referees reviewed the methodological quality of RCTs using the Jadad scale. Data from the studies were extracted by two different reviewers.
RESULTS
A total of fourteen RCTs were selected. Twelve studies showed acceptable quality (Jadad scale ≥3), and the remaining 2 had low quality (Jadad=2). The studies showed positive results, including reduction in headache intensity and/or frequency, reduction of medication consumption, and improvement in quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS
The effectiveness of manual therapy for TTH cannot be completely assessed due to the heterogeneity in study design, outcome measures, and different treatments. Nevertheless, the results suggest patients with TTH receiving manual therapies showed better progress than those receiving conventional treatment or placebo. Further studies of high quality using manual therapy protocols, and also including standardized outcome measures, are now needed to clarify the efficacy of manual therapy in the management of TTH.
Topics: Humans; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tension-Type Headache
PubMed: 24856370
DOI: 10.1016/j.nrl.2014.01.002