Objective: To analyze data from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes-International (CaMEO-I) Study in order to characterize preventive medication use and identify preventive usage gaps among people with migraine across multiple countries.

Background: Guidelines for the preventive treatment of migraine are available from scientific organizations in various countries. Although these guidelines differ among countries, eligibility for preventive treatment is generally based on monthly headache day (MHD) frequency and associated disability. The overwhelming majority of people with migraine who are eligible for preventive treatment do not receive it.

Methods: The CaMEO-I Study was a cross-sectional, observational, web-based panel survey study performed in six countries: Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. People were invited to complete an online survey in their national language(s) to identify those with migraine according to modified International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, criteria. People classified with migraine answered questions about current and ever use of both acute and preventive treatments for migraine. Available preventive medications for migraine differed by country. MHD frequency and associated disability data were collected. The American Headache Society (AHS) 2021 Consensus Statement algorithm was used to determine candidacy for preventive treatment (i.e., ≥3 monthly MHDs with severe disability, ≥4 MHDs with some disability, or ≥6 MHDs regardless of level of disability).

Results: Among 90,613 valid completers of the screening survey, 14,492 met criteria for migraine and completed the full survey, with approximately 2400 respondents from each country. Based on the AHS consensus statement preventive treatment candidacy algorithm, averaging across countries, 36.2% (5246/14,492) of respondents with migraine qualified for preventive treatment. Most respondents (84.5% [4431/5246]) who met criteria for preventive treatment according to the AHS consensus statement were not using a preventive medication at the time of the survey. Moreover, 19.3% (2799/14,492) of respondents had ever used preventive medication (ever users); 58.1% (1625/2799) of respondents who reported ever using a preventive medication for migraine were still taking it. Of the respondents who were currently using a preventive medication, 50.2% (815/1625) still met the criteria for needing preventive treatment based on the AHS consensus statement.

Conclusions: Most people with migraine who qualify for preventive treatment are not currently taking it. Additionally, many people currently taking preventive pharmacologic treatment still meet the algorithm criteria for needing preventive treatment, suggesting inadequate benefit from their current regimen.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/head.14721DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

preventive treatment
40
preventive
20
preventive medication
20
migraine
13
treatment
12
cameo-i study
12
people migraine
12
consensus statement
12
met criteria
12
ahs consensus
12

Similar Publications

Background: Even in the biological era, permanent stoma is not uncommon in patients with Crohn's Disease.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors of permanent stoma in Crohn's disease patients and provide clinical evidence for reducing this disabling outcome.

Design: Consecutive patients with Crohn's disease who underwent ostomies in the past decade were reviewed.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Evaluation and Management of Congenital Cytomegalovirus Infection.

Obstet Gynecol

January 2025

Medical Practice Evaluation Center, the Division of Infectious Disease, and the Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; the Department of Pediatrics, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.

The purpose of this review is to serve as an update on congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) evaluation and management for obstetrician-gynecologists and to provide a framework for counseling birthing people at risk for or diagnosed with a primary CMV infection or reactivation or reinfection during pregnancy. A DNA virus, CMV is the most common congenital viral infection and the most common cause of nongenetic childhood hearing loss in the United States. The risk of congenital CMV infection from transplacental viral transfer depends on the gestational age at the time of maternal infection and whether the infection is primary or nonprimary.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Impacts of State COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates for Health Care Workers on Health Sector Employment in the United States.

Am J Public Health

January 2025

Yin Wang, Kevin Callison, and Charles Stoecker are with the Department of Health Policy and Management and Julie H. Hernandez is with the Department of International Health and Sustainable Development, Celia Scott Weatherhead School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA.

To assess the impact of state COVID-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers (HCWs) on health sector employment in the United States. Using monthly state-level employment data from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages between January and October 2021, we employed a partially pooled synthetic control method that accounted for staggered mandate adoption and heterogeneous treatment effects. We conducted analyses separately for the 4 health care subsectors-ambulatory health care services, hospitals, nursing and residential care, and social assistance-with an additional analysis of 2 industry groups-skilled nursing care and community care for the elderly-under the nursing and residential care subsector.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Despite the acknowledged merits of precision oncology (PO) and its increasing global implementation, its full potential for advancing care and prevention remains unrealized. The benefits are currently accessible to only limited patient segments because of multifaceted barriers. Successful implementation hinges on various factors-scientific complexities not limited to technical, clinical, regulatory, economic, administrative, and health care policy-related challenges.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Aim: Patient barriers to accessing hospice and palliative care (PC) have been well studied. Important, yet less investigated, is how cancer patients whose hospice referrals were not accepted are being cared for. This article aims to understand the referral process from PC providers' perspectives and the implications of the current palliative system for patients, families and health professionals.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!