Citations

Background: Chronic illness is often comorbid with the psychological state of loneliness. Models of care for patients who experience chronic migraines may often lack an understanding of psychosocial influences of the illness. Addressing the effects of loneliness on the health behaviors of chronic migraine patients may further elucidate gaps in care that exist beyond the biomedical approach to migraine treatment. The primary aim of this study was to assess the relationship between loneliness and behavioral health decisions in chronic migraine patients, specifically patient ability to self-manage, and effectiveness of treatments. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among patients (n = 500) with migraine and assessed for the experience of loneliness by using the University of California, Los Angeles–Revised (UCLA-R) Three-item Loneliness Scale and the extent of migraine-related disability via the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS). Furthermore, we evaluated patients for their ability to self-manage their migraines, and perceived effectiveness of treatment. Results: Nearly half of our population reported at least one measure of loneliness (230/500, 46.0%). Patients experiencing chronic migraine were statistically more likely to report feeling lonely when compared to patients with episodic migraines ( P < .001). Patients who report loneliness had lower odds of feeling ’very satisfied” with their ability to self-manage their migraine symptoms (aOR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.14-0.81) and had lower odds of feeling “very satisfied” with their ability to avoid conditions that cause their headache (aOR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.16-0.91). Conclusions: Loneliness has significant effects on the illness experience of patients with chronic migraines, including their ability to self-manage or be satisfied with their current state of care. Psychosocial models of care that address loneliness among patients with chronic migraine may help improve health outcomes and management.

Abstract Our study aims to quantitate neuromuscular morbidity from radiotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma including: (i) frequency and (ii) time of onsets for neurological localizations; (iii) degree of disabilities and (iv) number of clinical visits compared to cardiopulmonary Hodgkin lymphoma-radiation complications. Medical records from Mayo Health systems were retrieved; identifying neuromuscular radiation treated Hodgkin lymphoma-complications from 1 January 1994 to 31 December 2016. Of an estimated 4100 post-radiotherapy Hodgkin lymphoma patients, 4.6% (189) were identified with complications. Mean latency to physician visit for symptoms was 23.7 years (range: 1–50). Most commonly identified complications included: head drop 10% (19) with or without myopathy, myopathy 39% (73), plexopathy 29% (54), myelopathy 27% (51) and polyradiculopathy 13% (24). Other findings included benign and malignant nerve sheath tumours 5% (9), phrenic and long thoracic mononeuropathies 7% (14) and compressive spinal meningioma 2% (4). Patients frequently had multiple coexisting complications (single = 76% [144], double = 17% [33], triple = 4% [8], quadruple = 2% [4]). Cardiac 28% (53) and pulmonary 15% (29) complications were also seen in these patients. History of Hodgkin lymphoma was initially overlooked by neurologists (14.3%, 48/336 clinical notes). Hospital and outpatient visits for complications were frequent: neuromuscular 19% (77/411) versus cardiopulmonary 30% (125/411). Testing was largely exclusionary, except when imaging identified secondary malignancy. Modified Rankin score at diagnosis varied: 0–1 (55.8%), 2–3 (5.8%) and 4–5 (38.3%). Neuromuscular complications among post-radiation Hodgkin lymphoma are diverse, occurring in ∼1 of 20 having markedly delayed onsets often eluding diagnosis. Frequent care visits and major morbidity are common. Survivorship recommendations should recognize the diverse neurological complications.

Objective To inform migraine care model development by assessing differences between patients with chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM) in the current state of treatment, disability, patient satisfaction, and quality improvement opportunities. Background Efficient and focused use of scarce resources will be needed to address challenges within large populations of migraine patients. Methods We deployed a cross‐sectional survey study of randomly selected migraine patients within a community primary care practice. Results There were 516 survey respondents (516/1804 [30%] response rate). CM patients were more likely than EM patients to report care from a neurologist (76/110 [69%] vs 229/406 [56%]; P = .0026), and higher disability according to the Migraine Disability Assessment and Headache Impact Test – 6 questionnaires ( P < .0001). CM patients were less likely than EM patients to report overall satisfaction with care (16/110 [38%] vs 156/406 [66%], P = .0002), satisfaction with access to care (17/110 [33%] vs 176/406 [68%], P < .0001), and advice they needed (16/110 [31%] vs 160/406 [62%], P < .0001). Most patients with migraine had been offered triptan medications 377/516 (78%). Overall, 156/516 (31%) of individuals were currently taking any medication for migraine prevention, and 208/516 (40%) including botulinum toxin injections. CM patients were more likely to be taking preventive medication (39/110 [36%] vs 117/406 [29%], P = .0191) and report familiarity with the diagnosis of medication‐overuse headache than patients with EM (80/110 [81%] vs 256/406 [69%], P = .0178). Conclusions We observed differences between patients with chronic and EM and expected care delivery improvement opportunities for migraine patients in primary care. CM patients report higher levels of disability and less satisfaction with access to perceived needed medical advice and care. These findings support the need to further develop and study novel care models to efficiently and effectively deliver high‐quality care and expertise in limited supply to a diverse migraine population.

Objectives To develop neurology scenarios for use with the Quality Improvement Knowledge Application Tool Revised (QIKAT-R), gather and evaluate validity evidence, and project the impact of scenario number, rater number and rater type on score reliability. Methods Six neurological case scenarios were developed. Residents were randomly assigned three scenarios before and after a quality improvement (QI) course in 2015 and 2016. For each scenario, residents crafted an aim statement, selected a measure and proposed a change to address a quality gap. Responses were scored by six faculty raters (two with and four without QI expertise) using the QIKAT-R. Validity evidence from content, response process, internal structure, relations to other variables and consequences was collected. A generalisability (G) study examined sources of score variability, and decision analyses estimated projected reliability for different numbers of raters and scenarios and raters with and without QI expertise. Results Raters scored 163 responses from 28 residents. The mean QIKAT-R score was 5.69 (SD 1.06). G-coefficient and Phi-coefficient were 0.65 and 0.60, respectively. Interrater reliability was fair for raters without QI expertise (intraclass correlation = 0.53, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.72) and acceptable for raters with QI expertise (intraclass correlation = 0.66, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.88). Postcourse scores were significantly higher than precourse scores (6.05, SD 1.48 vs 5.22, SD 1.5; p < 0.001). Sufficient reliability for formative assessment (G-coefficient > 0.60) could be achieved by three raters scoring six scenarios or two raters scoring eight scenarios, regardless of rater QI expertise. Conclusions Validity evidence was sufficient to support the use of the QIKAT-R with multiple scenarios and raters to assess resident QI knowledge application for formative or low-stakes summative purposes. The results provide practical information for educators to guide implementation decisions.

Background Neuroimaging for headache commonly exceeds published guideline recommendations and may be overutilized. Methods We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of all outpatient community patients at Mayo Clinic Rochester who underwent a neuroimaging study for a headache indication in 2015. We assessed the neuroimaging utilization pattern, clinical application of red flags, and concordance with neuroimaging guidelines. Results We identified 190 outpatients who underwent 304 neuroimaging studies for headache. The median age was 46.5 years (range 18–91 years), 65% were female, and most reported no prior history of headache (n = 97, 51%). A minority of patients had prior brain imaging studies (n = 44, 23%) and neurological consultations for headache (n = 29, 15%). Few studies were ordered after consultation with a neurologist (n = 14, 7%). Seventy-seven percent of patients were documented to have a “red flag” justifying the imaging study. Abnormal neuroimaging findings were found in 3.1% of patients with warning flags (5/161); carotid dissection (n = 3) and reversible cerebral vasoconstrictive syndrome (n = 2). An estimated 35% of patients were imaged against guidelines. Conclusions The prevalence of serious causes of headache in a community practice was low despite the presence of a documented red flag symptom. Inadequate understanding or application of red flags may be contributing to recommendations to image patients against current guidelines. Interventions to reduce unnecessary neuroimaging of patients with headache need to be designed and implemented.