Dataset Information

Diagnostic and therapeutic errors in cluster headache: a hospital-based study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cluster headache (CH) is a severe, disabling form of headache. Even though CH has a typical clinical picture it seems that its diagnosis is often missed or delayed in clinical practice. CH patients may thus face: misdiagnosis, unnecessary investigations and delays in accessing adequate treatment. This study was conducted to investigate the occurrence of diagnostic and therapeutic errors with a view to improving the clinical and instrumental work-up in affected patients.

Methods

Our study comprised 144 episodic CH patients: 116 from Italy and 28 from Eastern European countries (Moldova, Ukraine, Bulgaria). One hundred six patients (73.6%) were examined personally and 38 (26.4%) were evaluated through telephone interviews conducted by headache specialists using an ad hoc questionnaire developed by the authors.

Results

The sample was predominantly male (M:F ratio 2.79:1) and had a mean age of 42.4 ± 9.8 years; approximately 76% of the patients had already consulted a physician about their CH at the onset of the disease. The mean interval between onset of the disease and first consultation at a headache center was 4.1 ± 5.6 years. The patients had consulted different specialists prior to receiving their CH diagnosis: neurologists (49%), primary care physicians (35%), ENT specialists (10%), dentists (3%), etc. Misdiagnoses at first consultation were recorded in 77% of the cases: trigeminal neuralgia (22%), migraine without aura (19%), sinusitis (15%), etc. The average "diagnostic delay" was 5.3 ± 6.4 years and the condition was diagnosed approximately ("doctor delay": one year). Instrumental and laboratory investigations were carried out in 93% of the patients prior to diagnosis of CH. Some of the patients had never received abortive or preventive medications, either before or after diagnosis. Medical prescription compliance: 88% of the cases.

Conclusions

Our results emphasize the need to improve specialist education in this field in order to improve recognition of the clinical picture of CH and increase knowledge of the proper medical treatments for de novo CH. Continuous medical education on CH should target general neurologists, primary care physicians, ENT specialists and dentists. A study on a larger population of CH patients may further improve error-avoidance strategies.

SUBMITTER: Voiticovschi-Iosob C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4166399 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnostic and therapeutic errors in cluster headache: a hospital-based study.

Voiticovschi-Iosob Cristina C Allena Marta M De Cillis Ilaria I Nappi Giuseppe G Sjaastad Ottar O Antonaci Fabio F

The journal of headache and pain 20140901

<h4>Background</h4>Cluster headache (CH) is a severe, disabling form of headache. Even though CH has a typical clinical picture it seems that its diagnosis is often missed or delayed in clinical practice. CH patients may thus face: misdiagnosis, unnecessary investigations and delays in accessing adequate treatment. This study was conducted to investigate the occurrence of diagnostic and therapeutic errors with a view to improving the clinical and instrumental work-up in affected patients.<h4>Met ...[more]

PMID: 25178541

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo use 1) newly generated data, 2) existing evidence, and 3) expert opinion to create and validate a new cluster headache screening tool.MethodsIn phase 1 of the study, we performed a prospective study of an English translation of an Italian screen on 95 participants (45 with cluster headache, 17 with other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, 30 with migraine, and 3 with trigeminal neuralgia). In phase 2, we performed a systematic review in PubMed of all studies until September 2019 with diagnostic screening tools for cluster headache. In phase 3, a 6-person panel of cluster headache patients, research coordinators, and headache specialists analyzed the data from the first two phases to generate a new diagnostic screening tool. Finally, in phase 4 this new screen was validated on participants at a single headache center (all diagnoses) and through research recruitment (trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias only, as recruitment was essential but was otherwise low).ResultsIn total, this study included 319 unique participants including 109 cluster headache participants (95 total participants/45 cluster headache participants in phase 1, and 224 total participants/64 cluster headache participants in phase 4). It also found 123 articles on potential screening tools in our systematic review. In phase 1, analysis of the English translation of an Italian screen generated 7 questions with high sensitivity and specificity against migraine, trigeminal neuralgia, and other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, but had grammatical and other limitations as a general screening tool. In phase 2, the systematic review revealed nine studies that met inclusion criteria as diagnostic screening tools for cluster headache, including four where sensitivity and specificity were available for individual questions or small groups of questions. In phase 3, this data was reviewed by the expert panel to generate a brief (6-item), binary (yes/no), written screening test. In phase 4, a total of 224 participants completed the new 6-item screening test (81 migraine, 64 cluster headache, 21 other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, 35 secondary headaches, 7 neuralgias, 5 probable migraine, and 11 other headache disorders). Answers to the 6 items were combined in a decision tree algorithm and three items had a sensitivity of 84% (confidence interval or 95% confidence interval 73-92%), specificity of 89% (95% confidence interval 84-94%), positive predictive value of 76% (95% confidence interval 64-85%), and negative predictive value of 93% (95% confidence interval 88-97%) for the diagnosis of cluster headache. These three items focused on headache intensity, duration, and autonomic features.ConclusionThe 3-item Erwin Test for Cluster Headache is a promising diagnostic screening tool for cluster headache.

Project description:Evidence is limited regarding the comorbidity burden of patients with cluster headache (CH). We aimed to characterize comorbid conditions in a cohort of CH patients diagnosed by headache experts, using electronic health record information from the Partners Research Patient Data Registry (RPDR).We identified and reviewed the charts of unique patients diagnosed by headache specialists over an 11-year period, and a set of matched controls. Patients were categorized as having Definite, Unconfirmed or no CH. We calculated the prevalence of and tested for statistically significant differences of selected comorbid conditions in these populations.An RPDR query identified 170 patients with a free text or ICD diagnosis of cluster headache. 15 records belonging to Partners employees were excluded. 75 patients met diagnostic criteria for CH (Definite CH). 22 had headaches with some features of CH but the diagnosis was uncertain (Unconfirmed CH). In 58 the diagnosis was determined to be inaccurate due to data entry errors. Patients with Definite CH had an average age of 43.4 years; 80% were male. The average time from CH onset to diagnosis was 12.7 years (range 1-51). The average number of yearly emergency department and outpatient visits for the group of Definite CH patients was 4.5 and 25.4, respectively, compared with 1.1 and 6.9 in controls. Of the 55 examined conditions, four were statistically significantly less common in patients with definite CH compared with controls (diabetes, musculoskeletal/orthopaedic problems, "other gastrointestinal diagnoses" and skin conditions) and four were statistically significantly more common (smoking, depression, dental disorders and deviated septum).In this large population-based study, we identified a surprisingly small number of patients who met strict diagnostic criteria for CH. In these patients, however, we identified a distinct pattern of selected comorbidities. The pattern is somewhat but not entirely consistent with that of the "classic" CH patient depicted in the medical literature. CH patients are frequently diagnosed with sinus or dental problems. Many experience substantial delay in receiving a diagnosis. These things may in part explain the high frequency of medical visits in this population. It is difficult to distinguish conditions that are genuinely comorbid with CH from those that reflect misdiagnoses or medical scrutiny of patients in frequent contact with the healthcare system.

Project description:Background:Cluster headache (CH) is considered to be a catastrophic disease presenting the most severe human pain condition. Available pharmacological treatments are hampered by unwanted side effects, and there is an urgent need for non-pharmacological treatment alternatives. We present a novel therapeutic approach for chronic CH, having evolved from an episodic CH, using a non-invasive percutaneous bioelectric current stimulation (PBCS), which generates static electric fields in the range of the naturally occurring electric potentials. Patients and Methods:This study employed a retrospective data analysis of 20 cases of chronic cluster headache (CCH) patients, four of those having had cluster-related surgery (SPG, ONS). All patients were treated with PBCS between 2014 and 2018. Data of these patients were analyzed with respect to frequency of CH attacks and triptan application and followed up for one (20 cases) or two (12 cases) years. Results:Four weeks after the first PBCS treatment, cluster headache attacks were reduced from 2.8 to 1.7 per day and triptan application decreased from 2.5 to 1.5 times/day. Six non-responders, 4 of which had pre-CH surgery, did not show any reaction to PBCS, while 14 responders improved within 4 weeks from 2.2 to 0.7 attacks/day and 2.0 to 0.4 triptan applications/day. A 50% or greater reduction of attack frequency was observed in 10 patients after 4 weeks and in 11 patients after 12 weeks. One year after the first treatment, 13/20 patients experienced a reduction of attack frequency of 50% or more, while remarkably 10 patients were completely free of attack. After 2 years, 8 of 12 patients experienced a reduction of attack frequency of 50% or more and 7 of those were completely symptom-free. No serious adverse effects were observed. Conclusion:PBCS is a promising transformative treatment approach for CCH patients. Drug consumption was reduced significantly, and the CCH may revert back to an episodic cluster headache with increasingly long times of remission. Responders can be clearly differentiated from non-responders. The data support the need for randomized controlled trials.

Dataset Information

Diagnostic and therapeutic errors in cluster headache: a hospital-based study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Diagnostic and therapeutic errors in cluster headache: a hospital-based study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure