Chronic headache, including migraine, is often associated with psychiatric conditions and adverse childhood experiences. This study examines the feasibility of Creating Calm (CC), a modified form of Emotional Awareness and Expression Therapy (EAET) that targets the emotional impacts of adversity in headache patients at a tertiary headache center. We also explored changes in headache days, disability, psychosocial well-being and possible mechanisms to plan for a randomized controlled trial.

We conducted a prospective single-arm pragmatic pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of CC delivered as nine weekly group telehealth sessions in a tertiary headache clinic for adults with high-frequency episodic and chronic headache. Continuation of medical treatments was consistent with the pragmatic design. CC integrates education, mindfulness, cognitive and behavioral approaches, with an emotion-focused mind-body approach used in EAET. Feasibility was based on recruitment, retention and adherence measures. Acceptability was measured through participant satisfaction. We also explored changes in headache, psychosocial and mechanism measures before, after, and 2 months post-treatment.

Of the 33 participants recruited, 30 (91%) completed at least 7 out of 9 sessions, and 28 (85%) completed surveys. Participants reported satisfaction with the intervention (mean [SD] 47.6 [10.4] out of 60 Satisfaction with Therapy and Therapist Scale-Revised [STTS-R]). Exploratory analyses found a signal of reduction in headache days per month (mean [SD], 20.8 [7.6] to 15.5 [7.8], p = 0.004), disability, depression and improvement in global mental health following intervention.

This real-world pilot study supports the feasibility and acceptability of modified EAET for patients with headache, warranting a prospective randomized clinical trial.

A better understanding of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitor use is in migraine treatment needed.

A retrospective, observational, population-based cohort study was conducted using administrative data. Adults (≥18 years) who received ≥1 prophylactic CGRP inhibitor in Canada (six provinces) between 2018 (first approved) and 2023 were identified. CGRP inhibitor use was described; migraine-related acute medication and healthcare use were compared pre–post CGRP inhibitor initiation (independent and paired t-tests).

12,851 adults were identified. CGRP inhibitor use increased from 11.8 (incident/prevalent) to 22.4 (incident) and 57.3 (prevalent) per 100,000 adults. Erenumab use decreased over time, as use of newer agents increased. During the 1-year period after CGRP inhibitor initiation, 57.4% had concomitant use with a different prophylactic migraine medication class (onabotulinumtoxinA injection: 23.2%; oral non-CGRP inhibitor: 34.2%), and 30.4% stopped use (21.3% switched to a different prophylactic migraine medication class; 9.1% discontinued all prophylactic migraine medication). During the 1-year period after CGRP inhibitor initiation (versus before), days of supply for migraine-related acute medication was lower (mean [standard deviation]: 129 [191] versus 145 [197] days; mean difference [95% confidence interval]: −16: [−22, −11] days), as were the number of healthcare visits (7.36 [8.70] versus 9.18 [10.10]; −1.82 [−2.06, −1.58]).

CGRP inhibitor use increased from 2018 to 2023. After CGRP inhibitor initiation, most patients had concomitant use with a different prophylactic migraine medication class, and some stopped use; migraine-related acute medication and healthcare use were lower (versus before). Findings provide a real-world description of the evolving landscape of CGRP inhibitor use in Canada.

In this systematic review, we identify and critically appraise randomised controlled trials of effectiveness of available educational, behavioural, cognitive, and self-management support interventions for individuals with chronic migraine.

Non-pharmacological interventions have the potential to help people living with chronic migraine. Little is known about their true effectiveness.

We searched Cochrane, Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science for randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of educational, behavioural, cognitive, and self-management support interventions, compared to usual care, for adults with chronic migraine. Our outcomes of interest were headache frequency, headache-related disability, quality of life, pain intensity, medication consumption, and psychological wellbeing at baseline and follow-up.

We included six randomised controlled trials (713 participants) whose interventions met our inclusion criteria: two educational, two psycho-educational, and two behavioural interventions. Trial heterogeneity precluded statistical pooling. Several small trials reported some between-group differences. One trial (N = 177) found more people had ≥50 reduction in headache frequency at 12 months following a psychological (mindfulness-based) intervention added to acute medication withdrawal in people with medication overuse headache: 43/89 (48%) control vs. 69/88 (78%) intervention, p < 0.001. However, the largest included study (N = 396) had effectively excluded the possibility that their intervention had a worthwhile effect on headache-related disability at 12 months; mean difference in Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) 0.7 (95% Confidence Interval −0.65 to 1.97). Current evidence does not support the use of educational, behavioural, cognitive, and self-management support interventions for individuals with chronic migraine to improve headache-related symptoms and quality of life. Very limited evidence suggests they may contribute towards headache frequency reduction.

The influence of severity of migraine-like symptoms on different levels of executive functions is not well established. In this study, we investigate the impact of severity of migraine-like symptoms on the relationship between core-level executive functions (attention and memory) and fluid intelligence.

A cross-sectional study was conducted on university students (n = 427, age = 20.7 + 1.8 years). Participants completed self-report measures of Migraine Screen Questionnaire (MS-Q), single-item visual analogue scales (VASs) each for the subjective accounts of problems in core-level executive functions (attention and memory), and a single-item VAS for problems in fluid intelligence (PFI), and sociodemographics tool. The mediation effect model was used to determine the relationship.

The study found a correlation between i) attention problems and severity of migraine-like symptoms (b = 0.109, standard error (SE) = 0.026, p < 0.001), ii) severity of migraine-like symptoms and memory problems (b = 0.318, SE = 0.076, p < 0.001), and iii) severity of migraine-like symptoms – PFI (b = 0.243, SE = 0.083, p < 0.003), with an indirect effect of attention problems on memory problems and PFI and no correlation between severity of migraine-like symptoms and PFI.

Self-reported accounts of problems in core-level executive functions and fluid intelligence are correlated. Severity of migraine-like symptoms may mediate the inter-relationship between some core-level and higher-level executive functions.

In Canada, the management of migraine is commonly carried out by primary care providers. Guidelines for the acute and preventative management of migraine in Canada are published by the Canadian Headache Society (CHS). There are currently limited data describing prescribing patterns among clinicians caring for patients with migraine in Canada.

Our aim for this exploratory study was to characterize the current pharmacological treatments prescribed for patients with migraine in Nova Scotia, Canada, seeking care through their primary care providers.

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of deidentified electronic medical record (EMR) data collected from January 2019 to December 2023 from the Maritime Research Network for Family Practice (MaRNet-FP) to identify prescribing patterns for the acute and preventative management of migraine in Nova Scotia.

In total, 3075 active patients who received a diagnosis of migraine were identified in the MaRNet-FP EMR database (6.53% of total patients). Migraine patients were predominantly female (81%) with an average age of 44 ± 16 years. Between 2019 and 2023, 50% of patients with a migraine diagnosis received a prescription for a medication that can be used for the acute management of migraine, most commonly, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and triptans. Over the same period, 60.4% of patients were prescribed a medication that can be used for the prevention of migraine, the most common of which were anti-depressants and beta-blockers.

Our findings demonstrate alignment with CHS guidelines but highlight potential undertreatment of migraine.

Migraine is one of the most common neurological diseases, presenting different characteristics among patients. Therefore, there is a need to identify preventive medications that offer more efficacy and fewer adverse effects. Melatonin is a promising therapeutic alternative in this context due to its analgesic, neuromodulatory and cerebral blood flow regulatory mechanism.

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin treatment compared to placebo and other drugs in reducing migraine episodes’ frequency and secondary outcomes by analyzing randomized clinical trials.

The databases Cochrane, Embase and PubMed were used to search and select relevant studies, according to their specific inclusion criteria. Afterward, the relevant data was extracted, and statistical analysis was conducted with R Studio version 4.3.1, applying appropriate models to maintain heterogeneity within them and produce a combined estimate. Results were interpreted considering potential biases and limitations to form our final statement with the Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) tool from Cochrane.

A total of nine studies involving 783 patients were included in our analysis. Treatment methods were composed of seven different strategies. The network meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences related to monthly headache frequency between melatonin and amitriptyline (SD: −1.8; 95% Crl [−5.2, 1.0]); naproxen (SD: −0.98; 95% Crl [−5.5, 3.8]); valproic acid (SD: −0.60; 95% Crl [−5., 3.6]); topiramate (SD: 0.081; 95% Crl [−5.0, 4.7]); propanolol (SD: 1.4; 95% Crl [−3.7, 6.6]) and placebo (SD: 0.49; 95% Crl [−1.6, 2.7]). Other outcomes assessed were the MIDAS score, the mean number of analgesics used and headache duration, in hours, all of which had nonsignificant differences among treatment arms.

This systematic review and network meta-analysis found no substantial support for the efficacy of melatonin treatment in patients with episodic migraine, challenging the assumption of their correlation. Although the results showed no significant association between the disease and melatonin administration, more research is necessary to explore the influence of melatonin in migraine’s pathophysiology and further potential indirect mechanisms by which melatonin usage could benefit those who have not responded to conventional therapies.

Knowledge of environmental triggers for migraine attacks is limited and has mostly been acquired by studies using emergency room (ER) visits. However, it is unlikely that ER visits are a random sample of migraine events, even within strata of migraine severity. Additionally, time lags between attack onset and ER visits may vary across the population, posing challenges for assessing causal links of migraine with community-level or ecologic exposures.

Our objective was to assess the relationship between demographic and geographic measures and self-reported migraine-related ER visits.

We analyzed a targeted non-probability survey of ER use related to migraine in Canada and the USA. The 18-question online survey addressed ER use and behaviors related to recording attacks.

The final dataset included 389 respondents (Canada = 164 [42.2%], USA = 225 [57.8%]); 51 (13.1%) were Migraine Buddy app users who shared their diaries. In both countries, participants reported similar migraine symptoms. Barriers to attending the ER included cost and wait times. There was more variability in delays between attack onset and arrival to the ER than between onset and recording in the smartphone app. Younger participants and participants living in Canada were significantly more likely to present to the ER.

The sample of patients presenting to the ER for migraine may be biased toward younger patients and depend on the jurisdiction. Smartphone app records may have fewer barriers to creation and more consistent time lags compared to ER visit records.

The economic burden of migraine is substantial; determining the cost that migraine imposes on the Canadian healthcare system is needed.

Administrative data were used to identify adults living with migraine, including chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM), and matched controls in Alberta, Canada. One- and two-part generalized linear models with gamma distribution were used to estimate direct healthcare costs (hospitalization, emergency department, ambulatory care, physician visit, prescription medication; reported in 2022 Canadian dollars) of migraine during a 1-year observation period (2017/2018).

The fully adjusted total mean healthcare cost of migraine (n = 100,502) was 1.5 times (cost ratio: 1.53 [95% CI: 1.50, 1.55]) higher versus matched controls (n = 301,506), with a predicted annual incremental cost of $2,806 (95% CI: $2,664, $2,948) per person. The predicted annual incremental cost of CM and EM was $5,059 (95% CI: $4,836, $5,283) and $669 (95% CI: $512, $827) per person, respectively, compared with matched controls. All healthcare cost categories were greater for migraine (overall, CM and EM) compared with matched controls, with prescription medication the primary cost driver (incremental cost – overall: $1,381 [95% CI: $1,234, $1,529]; CM: $2,057 [95% CI: %1,891, $2,223]; EM: $414 [95% CI: $245, $583] per person per year).

Persons living with migraine had greater direct healthcare costs than those without. With an estimated migraine prevalence of 8.3%–10.2%, this condition may account for an additional $1.05–1.29 billion in healthcare costs per year in Alberta. Strategies to prevent and effectively manage migraine and associated healthcare costs are needed.

Migraine is a prevalent and debilitating neurological disorder that significantly affects quality of life. While pharmacological treatments exist, they can have limitations such as side effects, contraindications, and incomplete relief, prompting interest in non-pharmacological approaches for better symptom management.

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of alternate nostril breathing (ANB) as a non-pharmacological intervention to reduce the frequency and severity of migraine attacks and associated disability in adult patients.

A single-center, open-label, two-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial was conducted at six Family Health Centers (FHCs) of Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey. A total of 86 migraine patients aged 18–50 years, diagnosed with migraine based on ICD-10 criteria, were randomized into control (n = 43) and intervention (n = 43) groups. The intervention group practiced ANB three times daily for three months, while the control group continued their usual care. The primary outcomes were changes in migraine frequency and severity. Secondary outcomes included changes in migraine-related disability, both outcomes measured using the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS).

The intervention group showed a significant reduction in migraine attack frequency (P = 0.002) and MIDAS scores (P = 0.003) compared to the control group. Both groups experienced a reduction in attack severity (P = 0.001), though no significant difference was observed between the groups (P = 0.074). Within-group comparisons showed significant improvements in attack frequency, severity, and MIDAS scores in the intervention group (P = 0.001 for all).

ANB significantly reduced migraine frequency and disability, making it a promising non-invasive and accessible treatment option for migraine management. Further research with longer follow-up periods is needed to explore its long-term effects and broader applicability.

The choroid plexus produces cerebrospinal fluid, which is crucial for glymphatic system function. Evidence suggests that changes in the volume of the choroid plexus may be associated with glymphatic system function. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate alterations in choroid plexus volume in patients with migraines compared with healthy controls.

We enrolled 59 patients with migraines (39 and 20 with episodic and chronic migraines, respectively) and 61 healthy controls. All participants underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging, including three-dimensional T1-weighted imaging. We analyzed and compared choroid plexus volumes between patients with episodic migraines, those with chronic migraines and healthy controls. Additionally, we evaluated the association between choroid plexus volume and the clinical characteristics of patients with migraine.

The choroid plexus volume in patients with chronic migraines was higher than that in healthy controls (2.018 vs. 1.698%, p = 0.002) and patients with episodic migraines (2.018 vs. 1.680%, p = 0.010). However, no differences were observed in choroid plexus volumes between patients with episodic migraine and healthy controls. Choroid plexus volume was positively correlated with age in patients with migraines (r = 0.301, p = 0.020) and in healthy controls (r = 0.382, p = 0.002).

We demonstrated significant enlargement of the choroid plexus in patients with chronic migraine compared with healthy controls and those with episodic migraine. This finding suggests that chronic migraine may be associated with glymphatic system dysfunction.

A comprehensive understanding of the burden of migraine in Canada is needed to inform clinicians, clinical care and policymakers. This study assessed real-world healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs of patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) in Ontario, Canada.

This study utilized administrative databases from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) containing publicly funded health services records for the covered population of Ontario. Patients ≥26 years old with a migraine diagnosis between January 2013 and December 2017 were selected. EM and CM were inferred in eligible patients based on previously studied predictors. Cases were matched with non-migraine controls and followed for two years.

452,431 patients with migraine, 117,655 patients inferred with EM and 24,763 patients inferred with CM were selected and matched to controls. 39.4% of the inferred EM and 69.3% of the inferred CM subpopulations had ≥1 claims of preventive medications. Migraine-specific acute medications were underutilized (EM: 1.0%, CM: 3.3%), and high proportions of patients utilized opioids (EM: 38.8%, CM: 64.9%). Mean all-cause two-year costs per patient for the overall migraine population and inferred EM and CM subpopulations were $7,486 (CAD), $11,908 (CAD) and $24,716 (CAD), respectively. The two-year incremental all-cause cost of migraine to the Ontario public payer was $1.1 billion (CAD).

Migraine poses a significant unmet need and burden on the Canadian healthcare system. These results demonstrate a gap between real-world care and recommendations from treatment guidelines, emphasizing the need for improved awareness and expanded access to more effective treatment options.

Migraine management involves a wide range of clinical rehabilitation practices. This variability hampers the clinical applicability of these protocols. Before proposing any recommendations for migraine interventions, one needs to identify how interventions are generally structured. This study aimed to systematically map the activities in multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs for people with migraine.

We conducted a scoping review from January 2002 to April 2024 in MEDLINE®, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, AMED, APA PsycInfo and Academic Search Complete databases. Search terms were related to (i) migraine or headache, (ii) intervention and (iii) multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary care. Language and population inclusion criteria were applied. Two researchers independently screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles and extracted data according to three topics: (i) activities and their modalities, (ii) professionals involved and (iii) tools used.

The activities identified ranged from medication management and a variety of exercise types and lifestyle changes using education strategies to stress management techniques. Psychological interventions were rarely defined and appeared to overlap with education and stress management techniques. Information on treatment delivery was scarce. Professionals from many disciplines were mentioned. The outcomes assessed included migraine or headache characteristics, psychological symptoms, disability and quality of life. No explicit theoretical models were found.

The results highlight the heterogeneity of activities in multidisciplinary interventions for people with migraine. Operationalizing an intervention based on a theoretical model is essential for allowing replications, evaluation and implementation in rehabilitation settings.

Published guidelines for conducting clinical trials for migraine therapeutics recommend recruiting participants based on disease epidemiology and including sex/gender-based subpopulation analyses. These recommendations aim to improve the quality and generalizability of migraine clinical trials. The aim of this study was to summarize participant demographics in migraine clinical trials for FDA-approved calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeting drugs (receptor antagonists [gepants], CGRP peptide or receptor monoclonal antibodies [mAbs]) and assess the use of sex/gender-based subpopulation analyses in these studies.

We conducted a review of industry-sponsored migraine clinical trials for FDA-approved CGRP-targeting medications. Demographic data (sex and/or gender) from phase II or III trials were abstracted, and the use of sex/gender-based analyses was recorded.

Fourteen trials of gepants were included in this analysis. Participants who were identified as females or women were more likely to participate in these trials (87.0 ± 2.2%). Twenty-four trials of CGRP mAbs were reviewed. These studies also reported that participants were predominantly identified as female or women (84.9 ± 2.3%). None of the clinical trials reviewed reported sex/gender-based analyses of their results.

This study suggests that men are underrepresented in migraine CGRP clinical trials. Greater attention to sex and gender is needed in migraine clinical trial design so that they better align with current recommendations made by headache societies and regulatory agencies.

We have updated the migraine prevention guideline of the Canadian Headache Society from 2012, as there are new therapies available, and additionally, we have provided guidelines for the prevention of chronic migraine, which was not addressed in the previous iteration.

We undertook a systematic review to identify new studies since the last guideline. For studies identified, we performed data extraction and subsequent meta-analyses where possible. We composed a summary of the evidence found and undertook a modified Delphi recommendation process. We provide recommendations for treatments identified and additionally expert guidance on the use of the treatments available in important clinical situations.

We identified 61 studies that were included in this evidence update and identified 16 therapies we focused on. The anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) agents were approved by Health Canada between 2018 and 2024 and provide additional options for episodic and chronic migraine prevention. We also summarize evidence for the use of propranolol, topiramate and onabotulinumtoxinA in addition to anti-CGRP agents as treatments for chronic migraine. We have downgraded topiramate to a weak recommendation for use and gabapentin to a weak recommendation against its use in episodic migraine. We have weakly recommended the use of memantine, levetiracetam, enalapril and melatonin in episodic migraine.

Based on the evidence synthesis, we provide updated recommendations for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine utilizing treatments available in Canada. We additionally provided expert guidance on their use in clinical situations.