4.4 Article

Clinic-based characterization of continuous headache in children and adolescents: Comparing youth with chronic migraine to those with new daily persistent headache

期刊

CEPHALALGIA
卷 40, 期 10, 页码 1063-1069

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0333102420920644

关键词

Pediatric; pain; constant; functional disability

资金

  1. NIH [T32DK063929]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To describe the headache characteristics and functional disability of a large sample of treatment-seeking youth with continuous headache and compare these factors across diagnostic subgroups of chronic migraine and new daily persistent headache. Methods This retrospective study utilized clinical information (e.g. diagnosis, headache features, medication overuse, functional disability) from a large data repository of patients initially presenting to a multidisciplinary headache center with continuous headache. Patient inclusion in subgroup analyses for chronic migraine and new daily persistent headache was based on clinician diagnosis using International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) criteria. Results The current sample included 1170 youth (mean age = 13.95 years, 78.8% female) with continuous headache. The overwhelming majority of these youth had headaches with migrainous features, regardless of their clinical diagnosis. Youth with chronic migraine reported a longer history of continuous headache symptoms and earlier age of headache onset than youth with new daily persistent headache and were more likely to have medication overuse. Most youth with continuous headache experienced severe migraine-related functional disability, regardless of diagnostic subgroup. Conclusions Overall, youth with continuous chronic migraine and new daily persistent headache did not have clinically meaningful differences in headache features and associated disability. Findings suggest that chronic migraine and new daily persistent headache may be variants of the same underlying disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据