Citations

Objectives We sought to survey the N ew I nvestigators and T rainees S ection ( NITS ) members of the A merican H eadache S ociety ( AHS ) to better understand their exposure to headache medicine during training and to determine their perceptions and attitudes about the field and the future of headache medicine. Background Despite the high prevalence of headache disorders in the general population, only about 2% of neurology residents pursue headache medicine fellowships. Furthermore, there is a paucity of U nited C ouncil of N eurologic S ubspecialties headache specialists in the country to meet the population demands. Thus, there needs to be a focus on how to recruit and retain more headache specialists. Methods A survey was distributed via S urvey M onkey to the NITS listserv. It remained online for 60 days, during which reminder emails were sent to members of the listserv. In addition, the survey was available on laptops at NITS ‐related events at an annual AHS meeting. Descriptive analyses were then conducted using S urvey M onkey and E xcel. Results Of the 93 members of NITS , 64 of the 96 (68.8%) clicked to initiate the survey and 52.7% successfully completed it. Attendings made up the majority of respondents (62.5%), followed by fellows (10.9%), and residents (7.8%). Key highlights of the survey included the following: just under 10% reported no exposure to a headache center during any time in their training (medical school, residency, or fellowship); less than 2% had exposure to a headache center during medical school; less than half of participants reported exposure to a headache center in residency (45.3%) and during fellowship (43.4%). Having a mentor in the field, liking the patient population, and working in a headache center, 64.7%, 52.9%, and 41.2%, respectively, were the top ways in which participants became interested in headache. The journal H eadache (56.9%), attendings (56.3%), and the AHS / A merican A cademy of N eurology guidelines for migraine management (52.0%) are the resources cited as being used all/most of the time. About 82.4% strongly agree that there needs to be improved headache education for physicians of all specialties (primary care, emergency department, psychiatry); 84.4% feel that they are appreciated by their patients; 68.6% feel that there is strong support in their departments for headache; 56.9% believe that their work schedule leaves enough time for personal and family life; and 60.8% agreed that their professional life will improve in years to come. Participants agreed/strongly agreed that they like to treat the following diseases/symptoms: migraine headache (98.0%), cluster headache (92%), chronic daily headache (84%), and post‐concussive syndrome (71.4%). Participants disagreed/strongly disagreed that they like to treat the following comorbid conditions/symptoms: low back pain (66.6%), dizziness (42.9%), sleep apnea (36.7%), depression (32.0%), and anxiety (32.0%). Conclusions In this detailed survey on the recruitment and retention of headache specialists, the following themes emerged: mentorship and exposure to a headache center are key foundations in the young investigator/trainee experience. Young headache specialists appear positive about their field of medicine. These specialists like to treat various headache types but not necessarily some of the related comorbidities (sleep disorders, depression, anxiety, back pain, and dizziness). Finally, there was strong agreement that there needs to be improved headache education for physicians of other medical specialties.

Background Migraine, particularly chronic migraine (CM), is underdiagnosed and undertreated worldwide. Our objective was to develop and validate a self-administered tool (ID-CM) to identify migraine and CM. Methods ID-CM was developed in four stages. (1) Expert clinicians suggested candidate items from existing instruments and experience (Delphi Panel method). (2) Candidate items were reviewed by people with CM during cognitive debriefing interviews. (3) Items were administered to a Web panel of people with severe headache to assess psychometric properties and refine ID-CM. (4) Classification accuracy was assessed using an ICHD-3β gold-standard clinician diagnosis. Results Stages 1 and 2 identified 20 items selected for psychometric validation in stage 3 ( n = 1562). The 12 psychometrically robust items from stage 3 underwent validity testing in stage 4. A scoring algorithm applied to four symptom items (moderate/severe pain intensity, photophobia, phonophobia, nausea) accurately classified most migraine cases among 111 people (sensitivity = 83.5%, specificity = 88.5%). Augmenting this algorithm with eight items assessing headache frequency, disability, medication use, and planning disruption correctly classified most CM cases (sensitivity = 80.6%, specificity = 88.6%). Discussion ID-CM is a simple yet accurate tool that correctly classifies most individuals with migraine and CM. Further testing in other settings will also be valuable.

Background . Eye movements are necessary for the physical act of reading and have been shown to relate to underlying cognitive and visuoattentional processes during reading. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of saccadic training using the King-Devick remediation software on reading fluency. Methods . In this prospective, single-blinded, randomized, crossover trial, a cohort of elementary students received standardized reading fluency testing pre- and posttreatment. Treatment consisted of in-school training 20 minutes per day, 3 days per week for 6 weeks. Results . The treatment group had significantly higher reading fluency scores after treatment ( P < .001), and posttreatment scores were significantly higher than the control group ( P < .005). Conclusion . Saccadic training can significantly improve reading fluency. We hypothesize that this improvement in reading fluency is a result of rigorous practice of eye movements and shifting visuospatial attention, which are vital to the act of reading.