No description available.

Cerebral electrostimulation (CES) as a treatment for migraine headache was investigated. Eighteen participants recorded data on headaches for two baseline weeks. Six were assigned to each of three groups--an active treatment group receiving CES, a placebo group receiving a simulated version of CES, and a no-treatment control group placed on a waiting list during the study. The CES group evidenced a significant reduction in headache duration and intensity relative to the placebo group. The waiting list control group did as well as the CES group. A number of hypotheses were put forth in an attempt to account for the unexpected finding.

After an initial four week baseline period, during which headache activity and medication consumption were monitored, 28 migraineurs were randomly assigned to one of the following groups: (a) the biofeedback temperature warming group, (b) the visual imagery group, (c) the combined treatment group, or (d) the comparison group. All four groups continued to monitor their headache activity and medication consumption during the eight week treatment period and the eight week follow-up period. A two way analysis of variance computed on groups over time indicated a significant decrease in headache activity and medication consumption. During the follow-up period (a) the combined treatment group had significantly fewer headaches than the biofeedback group or the comparison group and (b) the visual imagery group and the combined treatment group had significantly fewer headache hours than the biofeedback group or the comparison group. These results do not appear to be attributable to differences between groups on the amount of time spent in home practice or subjective ratings of relaxation. There was no consistent relationship between increases in finger temperature and headache activity improvement. Decreases in powerful other scores, as measured by the Health Attribution Test, and increases in subjective ratings of internal control were consistent with a reduction in headache activity and medication consumption.

No description available.

Migräne ist die häufigste neurologische Erkrankung und kann mit einem hohen Grad der Beeinträchtigung einhergehen. Neben nichtmedikamentösen Ansätzen zur Reduktion der Migränefrequenz stehen medikamentöse Migräneprophylaxen zur Verfügung. Zur Indikation und Anwendung liegen evidenzbasierte Leitlinien der Deutschen Migräne- und Kopfschmerzgesellschaft (DMKG) und Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurologie (DGN), Österreichischen Kopfschmerzgesellschaft (ÖKSG) sowie Schweizer Kopfwehgesellschaft (SKG) vor. Für therapierelevante Fragen wie z. B. der notwendigen und sinnvollen Dauer einer medikamentösen Migräneprophylaxe können aus bisherigen Studiendaten keine Rückschlüsse gezogen werden. Ziel dieser Übersicht ist die Formulierung von Empfehlungen zur Therapiedauer bei wirksamer medikamentöser Migräneprophylaxe, die die aktuelle Datenlage und – bei fehlenden Daten – die Expertenmeinungen berücksichtigen. / Migraine is the most common neurological disorder and can be associated with a high degree of disability. In addition to non-pharmacological approaches to reduce migraine frequency, pharmacological migraine preventatives are available. Evidencebased guidelines from the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG), and German Society for Neurology (DGN), Austrian Headache Society (ÖKSG), and Swiss Headache Society (SKG) are available for indication and application. For therapyrelevant questions such as the duration of a pharmacological migraine prevention, no conclusions can be drawn from currently available study data. The aim of this review is to present a therapy consensus statement that integrates the current data situation and, where data are lacking, expert opinions. The resulting current recommendations on the duration of therapy for pharmacological migraine prophylaxis are shown here.

Background: Sensitization to sensory stimuli is an essential feature of migraine attacks. The relationship between the clinical course of migraine and increased sensitivity to olfactory stimuli has been little studied so far. - Methods: We analyzed the frequency and quality of osmophobia depending on the phase of migraine in patients with episodic and chronic migraine treated in an tertiary headache center with regard to gender, age, medical history and migraine disability assessment score (MIDAS). Standardized diagnostic questions were used for the assessment of osmophobia. - Results: In our cross-sectional investigation (n = 113), 38.1% of the patients showed an increased preictal hypersensitivity to odors, whereas 61.9% described ictal and 31.9% interictal hypersensitivity to odors, odor-triggered migraine was described in 30.1%. Median migraine disease duration has been statistically significantly longer in patients who suffered from interictal hypersensitivity to odors (28.5 years vs. 20 years; p = 0.012). There was a significant correlation between interictal hypersensitivity and higher age (54.50 vs. 45; p = 0.015). Patients with higher migraine disability in MIDAS experienced more frequently preictal and interictal olfactory sensitization and odor triggered migraine attacks. - Conclusions: In patients with longer migraine disease duration and higher migraine-related impairment, osmophobia was more frequently observed. These results might support the hypothesis of increasing sensitization with increasing burden of migraine.