The relationship between migraine and alcohol consumption is unclear. We assessed the association between chronic migraine and alcohol use disorder(AUD), relative to chronic disease controls, and in conjunction with common comorbidities.

We conducted a retrospective, observational study. The primary outcome was the odds ratio for AUD in patients with chronic migraine or with chronic migraine and additional comorbidities relative to controls.

A total of 3701 patients with chronic migraine, 4450 patients with low back pain, and 1780 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus met inclusion criteria. Patients with chronic migraine had a lower risk of AUD relative to both controls of low back pain (OR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.29–0.47, p < 0.001) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (OR 0.39; 95% CI: 0.29–0.52, p < 0.001). Depression was associated with the largest OR for AUD in chronic migraine (OR 8.62; 95% CI: 4.99–14.88, p < 0.001), followed by post-traumatic stress disorder (OR 6.63; 95% CI: 4.13–10.64, p < 0.001) and anxiety (OR 3.58; 95% CI: 2.23–5.75, p < 0.001).

Patients with chronic migraine had a lower odds ratio of AUD relative to controls. But in patients with chronic migraine, those with comorbid depression, anxiety, or PTSD are at higher risk of AUD. When patients establish care, comorbid factors should be assessed and for those at higher risk, AUD should be screened for at every visit.

To describe demographic and clinical characteristics, healthcare resource use, costs, and treatment patterns in three migraine cohorts.

This retrospective observational study using administrative data examined patients with episodic migraine (EM), chronic migraine (CM) (without medication overuse headache [MOH]), and medication overuse headache in Alberta, Canada. Migraine patients were identified between 2012 and 2018 based on ≥ 1 diagnostic codes or triptan prescription. Patients with CM were defined using parameter estimates of a logistic regression model, and MOH was defined as patients with an average of ≥ 15 supply days covered of acute medications. EM was defined as patients without CM or MOH. Study outcomes were summarized using descriptive statistics.

Patients with EM (n = 144,574), CM (n = 27,283), and MOH (n = 11,485) were included. Higher rates of healthcare use and costs were observed for CM (mean [SD] all-cause cost: ($12,693 [40,664]) and MOH ($16,611.5 [$38,748]) versus episodic migraine ($4,251 [$40,637]). Across all cohorts, opioids were the most dispensed acute medication (range across cohorts: 31.7%–89.8%), while antidepressants and anticonvulsants were the most dispensed preventive medication. Preventative medication classes were used by a minority of patients in each cohort, except anticonvulsants, where 50% of medication overuse patients had a dispensation.

Patients with CM and MOH have a greater burden of illness compared to patients with EM. The overutilization of acute medication, particularly opioids, and the underutilization of preventive medications highlight an unmet need to more effectively manage migraine.

Migraine, including episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM), is a common neurological disorder that imparts a substantial health burden.

Understand the characteristics and treatment of EM and CM from a population-based perspective.

This retrospective population-based cross-sectional study utilized administrative data from Alberta. Among those with a migraine diagnostic code, CM and EM were identified by an algorithm and through exclusion, respectively; characteristics and migraine medication use were examined with descriptive statistics.

From 79,076 adults with a migraine diagnostic code, 12,700 met the criteria for CM and 54,686 were considered to have EM. The majority of migraineurs were female, the most common comorbidity was depression, and individuals with CM had more comorbidities than EM. A larger proportion of individuals with CM versus EM were dispensed acute (80.6%: CM; 63.4%: EM) and preventative (58.0%: CM; 28.9%: EM) migraine medications over 1 year. Among those with a dispensation, individuals with CM had more acute (13.6 ± 32.2 vs. 4.6 ± 10.9 [mean ± standard deviation], 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.7-8.3), and preventative (12.6 ± 43.5 vs. 5.0 ± 12.6, 95% CI 6.9-8.4) migraine medication dispensations than EM, over 1-year. Opioids were commonly used in both groups (proportion of individuals dispensed an opioid over 1-year: 53.1%: CM; 25.7%: EM).

Individuals with EM and CM displayed characteristics and medication use patterns consistent with other reports. Application of this algorithm for CM may be a useful and efficient means of identifying subgroups of migraine using routinely collected health data in Canada.

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a primary care-based group educational intervention about concepts of pain neuroscience for the management of migraine compared to the routine medical care delivered to patients with this condition.

The way pain is understood has been radically changed in recent decades, thanks to developments in the field of neuroscience. Thus, migraine may develop as a result of an exaggerated perception of threat that activates the pain neuromatrix, which might be modifiable, from a learning perspective, by adjusting the beliefs and behaviours that favour the onset of an attack.

A randomised controlled trial was carried out in five primary care health centres of Vitoria-Gasteiz (Basque Country, Spain). The follow-up period was 12 months. The main outcome measure was the reduction in days lost due to migraine-related disability according to the Migraine Disability Assessment Test (MIDAS) score. Secondary outcome measures included the intensity and frequency of the pain and the number of analgesic drugs taken in the previous three months. A positive response to treatment was considered when the MIDAS score decreased by at least 50% from baseline.

Days lost due to migraine-related disability decreased by at least 50% in 68.9% (n = 37) of patients in the intervention group and 34.6% of patients in the control group (n = 18) (P < 0.001). The intensity of the headache [odds ratio (OR) 9.116; P = 0.005] and the medication intake (OR 13.267; P < 0.001) were also significantly reduced with the intervention.

The provision of suitable information through a group educational intervention delivered in primary care appears to be effective in preventing migraine attacks. Moreover, the intervention could offer a new cost-effective management alternative that seems to reduce the need for pharmacological treatment in patients with migraine.

To outline the pathways a cohort of first attendees to our headache clinics had taken over the years in search of explanations and treatment for their headaches. To establish a greater awareness of the shortcomings and failures in their medical journey in the hope that better headache management will emerge in primary care.

At first attendance in primary care most headache sufferers will not receive a firm diagnosis. Treatments provided are often ineffective and so many patients embark on a somewhat random self-made journey searching for a remedy. If they reach a Headache Clinic the most common diagnoses are ‘chronic migraine’ and ‘medication overuse headache’. They are either no better or worse than when their headaches first started despite their efforts.

We undertook a prospective questionnaire-based study of over 200 patients on first attendance at each of our headache clinics, three based in District General Hospitals and one in a tertiary referral centre. We documented the patients’ headache characteristics, the ‘burden’ of their headaches, functional handicap and the financial costs incurred seeking help before referral. We also documented what our patients understood about their headache disorder and the treatments previously tried.

Most patients had not been given a formal diagnosis in primary care and many remained unconvinced of the benign nature of their headache problem and wanted further investigations. A few had sought help from headache charities. Many had unrealistic attitudes to their problem and medication overuse was rife. A few patients had been offered triptans in primary care. Key deficiencies in the primary care management of these patients included failure to provide a formal headache diagnosis, inadequate understanding of the nature and mechanism of headaches and failure to follow a resilient management strategy. We provide a more effective management pathway in primary care.