4.4 Article

Comparison of pre-headache phases and trigger factors of migraine and episodic tension-type headache: do they share similar clinical pathophysiology?

期刊

CEPHALALGIA
卷 25, 期 6, 页码 444-451

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2005.00880.x

关键词

aura; headache; pathophysiology; prodrome; trigger factors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trigger factors, signs and symptoms of the preheadache phases of episodic tension-type headache (ETTH), typical aura with non-migraine headache (TANMH), migraine with (MA) and without aura (MwA) may show similar features. Our objective was to investigate the preheadache phases and trigger factors of these headache types. Questionnaires including trigger factors, signs and symptoms of preheadache phases were answered by all headache patients. A total of 96 patients, 31 ETTH, nine TANMH, 23 MA and 33 MwA patients were included in this study. Analysis of seven groups consisting of 18 individual trigger factors showed that only two groups and five individual trigger factors were significantly different between groups. Hunger and odour were significantly more common in MA, MwA and TANMH patients. Foods were a significant precipitant factor for headache in MA patients. Head and neck movements were important trigger factors in ETTH. In prodrome phase only one out of three groups differed significantly between headache types. Migraine and TANMH patients reported significantly more general signs and symptoms. Analysis of aura signs and symptoms showed that only two out of six groups were significantly more frequent in MA and TANMH patients. Visual aura symptoms were more frequent in MA and TANMH groups, where sensorial auras were reported to be the most frequent in the MA group. Our results showed that different type of headaches share common prodrome and aura signs and symptoms as well as the same trigger factors. We suggest that similar trigger factors may trigger similar mechanisms and may cause common preheadache signs and symptoms in all headache types.

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