The impact of updates in headache quality measures on adherence to best practices in a neurology resident clinic: A quality improvement study.

OBJECTIVE: To apply the 2019 joint American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and American Headache Society (AHS) quality measures for headache management to a cohort of neurology resident physicians and then assess outcomes related to guideline adherence. BACKGROUND: The optimization of headache management is essential to reduce both the individual and systemic impact of these disorders. In 2014, the AAN developed 10 quality measures for evidence-based management of patients with headache. A workgroup updated and condensed its headache quality measures in 2019, narrowing the set to six measurements, four of which would primarily focus on the management of migraine and two of which would address the management of cluster headache. METHODS: This quality improvement study was conducted using a pretest-posttest study design. A pre-intervention survey based on retrospective analysis of five clinic notes for adherence to the measures was designed and distributed to all neurology residents (n = 32) at a large, academic tertiary referral center. The intervention included the creation of an electronic medical record template to aid residents in following the measures during clinical encounters, as well as the provision of direct feedback based on pre-intervention results. Finally, a post-intervention survey was distributed for completion based on notes written during the intervention period. Analysis was limited to migraine, given the low percentage of cluster headache seen in clinic. RESULTS: An increase in adherence was seen in three of the four migraine-related quality measures, with the Use of Abortive Medications for Migraine and Documentation of Counseling on Modifiable Lifestyle and Chronification Factors demonstrating statistically significant improvements (75.8% to 88.0% [p = 0.013] and 83.9% to 94.0% [p = 0.029] adherence, respectively). For secondary outcomes, the increase in the utilization of appropriate diagnostic criteria (82.6% to 93.2%, p = 0.018) was significant, and the self-assessed confidence rating for adherence to guidelines was significant (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the quality improvement intervention led to increased adherence to the AAN and AHS migraine-related measures. It is anticipated that increased adherence may lead to improved patient outcomes.

Sequential administration of peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of chronic migraine and other headache disorders-A retrospective tolerability and safety study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the tolerability and safety of concurrent peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA treatment during a single outpatient clinic procedure visit. BACKGROUND: Procedural interventions are available for the treatment of headache disorders. OnabotulinumtoxinA and peripheral nerve blocks are used as alternatives or in addition to oral therapies to reduce the frequency and intensity of migraine attacks. There is currently a lack of safety data focusing on the sequential administration of local anesthetic via peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA during a single clinical encounter for the treatment of headache. The primary aim of the study was to determine the safety and tolerability of concurrent peripheral nerve blockade and onabotulinumtoxinA injections during a single outpatient clinic procedure visit. We hypothesized that the dual intervention would be safe and well tolerated by patients with chronic migraine and other headache disorders. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed using clinical data from patients seen by multiple providers over a 16-month timeframe at one outpatient headache clinic. Patients were identified by procedure codes and those receiving peripheral nerve block(s) and onabotulinumtoxinA injections during a single encounter within the study period were eligible for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were (1) patients 18 years and older who were (2) receiving both peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA injections for the treatment of chronic migraine. Patients were excluded if they were under age 18, received their procedure outside of the clinic (emergency room, inpatient ward), or were receiving sphenopalatine ganglion blocks. Age- and sex-matched patients who received one procedure, either peripheral nerve blocks or onabotulinumtoxinA, were used for control. The primary outcome of this safety study was the number of adverse events that occurred in the dual intervention group compared to the single intervention control arms. Information regarding adverse events was gathered via retrospective chart review. If an adverse event was recorded, it was then graded by the reviewer utilizing the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events ranging from Grade 1 Mild Event to Grade 5 Death. Additionally, it was noted whether the adverse event led to treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: In total, 375 patients were considered eligible for inclusion in the study. After age and sex matching of controls, 131 patients receiving dual intervention were able to be compared to 131 patients receiving onabotulinumtoxinA alone and 104 patients receiving dual intervention were able to be compared to 104 patients receiving peripheral nerve block(s) alone. The primary endpoint analysis showed no significant difference in total adverse events between dual intervention compared to nerve blocks alone or onabotulinumtoxinA alone. The number of adverse events that led to treatment discontinuation approached but did not reach statistical significance for those receiving dual intervention versus onabotulinumtoxinA alone in the number of adverse events that led to treatment termination (4.6%, 6/131 vs. 0.8%, 1/131, p = 0.065); however, the number of patients who discontinued therapy was not significantly different between those groups (2.3%, 3/131 vs. 0.8%, 1/131; p = 0.314; odds ratio 0.3 [0-3.2]; p = 0.338). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective chart review, there was no significant difference in adverse events or therapy discontinuation between patients receiving sequential peripheral nerve block(s) and onabotulinumtoxinA injections versus those receiving either peripheral nerve block(s) or onabotulinumtoxinA injections alone. As a result, we concluded that the combination procedure is likely safe and well tolerated in routine clinical practice.

Profile of Lasmiditan in the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adults: Design, Development, and Place in Therapy.

Migraine is a common neurological disorder that is present in a large proportion of the global population. It is estimated to occur in around 20.7% of women and 10.7% of men in the United States. The pathophysiology of migraine is a major focus of research, and medications have been developed to interrupt the processes that generate headache and other bothersome symptoms of migraine attacks. The triptan class of medications acts as a direct agonist at the 5-HT1B/D receptor but its use is limited by contraindications for those with coronary or cerebrovascular disease. Lasmiditan is a first-in-class agonist at the 5-HT1F serotonin receptor that does not appear to generate vasoconstriction. This article reviews the design, development, and place in therapy for lasmiditan. A narrative review of the literature using the Ovid MEDLINE database was performed. The rationale behind the development of lasmiditan and pre-clinical, proof-of-concept, Phase II, pivotal, Phase III trials and post-hoc data is covered. Additionally, the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan when compared to other acute treatments in migraine is described, including lasmiditan's side effect profile and status as a Schedule V substance. Further, head-to-head studies of lasmiditan compared with other acute treatments are required.

Joint European Academy of Neurology-European Pain Federation-Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In these guidelines, we aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of screening questionnaires and diagnostic tests in patients with neuropathic pain (NeP). METHODS: We systematically reviewed studies providing information on the sensitivity and specificity of screening questionnaires, and quantitative sensory testing, neurophysiology, skin biopsy, and corneal confocal microscopy. We also analysed how functional neuroimaging, peripheral nerve blocks, and genetic testing might provide useful information in diagnosing NeP. RESULTS: Of the screening questionnaires, Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4), I-DN4 (self-administered DN4), and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) received a strong recommendation, and S-LANSS (self-administered LANSS) and PainDETECT weak recommendations for their use in the diagnostic pathway for patients with possible NeP. We devised a strong recommendation for the use of skin biopsy and a weak recommendation for quantitative sensory testing and nociceptive evoked potentials in the NeP diagnosis. Trigeminal reflex testing received a strong recommendation in diagnosing secondary trigeminal neuralgia. Although many studies support the usefulness of corneal confocal microscopy in diagnosing peripheral neuropathy, no study specifically investigated the diagnostic accuracy of this technique in patients with NeP. Functional neuroimaging and peripheral nerve blocks are helpful in disclosing pathophysiology and/or predicting outcomes, but current literature does not support their use for diagnosing NeP. Genetic testing may be considered at specialist centres, in selected cases. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations provide evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for NeP diagnosis. Due to the poor-to-moderate quality of evidence identified by this review, future large-scale, well-designed, multicentre studies assessing the accuracy of diagnostic tests for NeP are needed.

Effects of Procedural Discomfort and Expectation of Benefit on Therapy Continuation in Chronic Migraine Patients Treated With OnabotulinumtoxinA.

BACKGROUND: OnabotulinumtoxinA (BTX) has become a mainstream treatment for chronic migraine (CM). Patients often have varied expectations for treatment success but little is known about how these initial impressions influence continuation of therapy. OBJECTIVE: To record expectations of benefit and procedural discomfort (PD) from initial BTX treatment and to investigate their association with treatment success, defined as continuation of treatment for >3 sessions within a 2-year period. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of CM patients receiving initial treatment with BTX was performed. Patients were questioned about their expectations of benefit and PD as rated on a 0-10 scale. Responses were then compared with continuation of therapy beyond 3 sessions to identify the presence of significant association. RESULTS: Responses from patients (N = 297) were analyzed. About 173 subjects continued with BTX therapy for more than 3 sessions (173/297, 58.3%). Unadjusted odds ratios (OR) for expectation of benefit (EOB) (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99-1.24, P = .087) and PD (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90-1.16, P = .780) were not significantly predictive of continuing treatment. After considering sex, age, year of treatment, and previous headache preventative trials, only female sex (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.09-3.74, P = .025) was found to be significantly associated with treatment continuation. CONCLUSIONS: In the usual care setting, PD and EOB are not significantly associated with therapy continuation in patients receiving initial treatment with BTX for the prevention of CM. However, after considering sex, age, year of treatment, and number of previous headache preventives attempted, we found that female patients had twice the likelihood of continuing with BTX therapy compared to male patients with CM.

Maintaining baseline, corrective surgical care during asymmetrical warfare: a case study of a humanitarian mission in the safe zone of a neighboring country.

The current insurgency warfare in Iraq is of an unconventional or asymmetrical nature. The deteriorating security has resulted in problems recovering and maintaining essential health services. Before the 2003 war, Iraq was considered a developed country with the capacity to routinely perform baseline medical and surgical care. These procedures now are performed irregularly, if at all. Due to the unconventional warfare, traditional Military Medical Civilian Assistance Programs (MEDCAPs) and civilian humanitarian missions, which routinely are mobilized post-conflict, are unable to function. In December 2005, an international medical mission conducted by the Operation Smile International Chapter in neighboring Jordan employed civilian physicians and nurses to provide surgery and post-operative care for Iraqi children with newly diagnosed cleft lip and palates and the complications that had occurred from previous surgical repair. Seventy-one children, their families, and a team of Iraqi physicians were safely transported to Jordan and returned to Iraq across the Iraqi western province war zone. Although complications may occur during transport, treatment within a safe zone is a solution for providing services in an insecure environment.