4.4 Article

Expert panel's guideline on cervicogenic headache: The Chinese Association for the Study of Pain recommendation

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CASES
Volume 9, Issue 9, Pages 2027-2036

Publisher

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i9.2027

Keywords

Cervicogenic headache; Expert recommendation; Expert panel’ s guideline; Chinese Association for the Study of Pain; Chronic pain

Funding

  1. Sichuan Science and Technology Program [2018SZ0386]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The translated content discusses the uniqueness of cervicogenic headache and the challenges and controversies in managing CEH patients in China. To develop comprehensive treatment recommendations, the Chinese Association for the Study of Pain experts conducted a systematic review and developed suggestions, aiming to provide guidance for clinicians and patients in treatment decision-making.
Cervicogenic headache (CEH) has been recognized as a unique category of headache that can be difficult to diagnose and treat. In China, CEH patients are managed by many different specialties, and the treatment plans remain controversial. Therefore, there is a great need for comprehensive evidence-based Chinese experts' recommendations for the management of CEH. The Chinese Association for the Study of Pain asked an expert panel to develop recommendations for a series of questions that are essential for daily clinical management of patients with CEH. A group of multidisciplinary Chinese Association for the Study of Pain experts identified the clinically relevant topics in CEH. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and evidence supporting the benefits and harms for the management of CEH was summarized. Twenty-four recommendations were finally developed through expert consensus voting for evidence quality and recommendation strength. We hope this guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making treatment decisions for the management of CEH.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available