School of Applied Psychology, Behavioural Basis of Health Research Centre, Griffith University, Mt Gravatt Campus, 176 Messines Ridge Road, Mt Gravatt, Queensland 4122, Australia.
School of Health Sciences, RMIT University, PO Box 71, Bundoora, Victoria 3083, Australia; Australian College of Applied Psychology, Australia.
Behav Res Ther. 2014 Oct;61:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2014.07.002. Epub 2014 Jul 16.
This study was designed to evaluate the traditional advice to headache sufferers to avoid all triggers ('Avoidance'), and a novel approach to trigger management (Learning to Cope with Triggers - 'LCT') that included graduated exposure to selected triggers to promote desensitization. Individuals (84F, 43M) with migraine and/or tension-type headache were assigned randomly to one of four groups: Waiting-list (Waitlist); Avoidance; Avoidance combined with cognitive behavior therapy (Avoid + CBT); and LCT. Changes in headaches and medication consumption (in parentheses) from pre- to post-treatment were (a minus sign indicates improvement): Waitlist, +11.0% (+15.4%); Avoidance, -13.2% (-9.0%); Avoid + CBT, -30.0% (-19.4%); and LCT, -35.9% (-27.9%). Avoidance did not differ significantly from Waitlist on headaches or medication use, but LCT differed significantly from Waitlist on both measures. Avoid + CBT significantly differed from Waitlist on headaches but not medication consumption. In summary, the study failed to find support for the standard approach to trigger management of advising avoidance, but LCT emerged as a promising strategy. LCT resulted in greater improvement than the other three conditions on all measures of headaches and medication consumption, and was the only treatment condition that significantly differed from the waiting-list control condition in terms of treatment responder rate (50% or greater reduction in headaches) and medication consumption.
本研究旨在评估针对头痛患者的传统建议,即避免所有诱因(“回避”),以及一种新的触发管理方法(“学会应对触发因素”——“LCT”),该方法包括有针对性地逐渐暴露于选定的触发因素,以促进脱敏。将偏头痛和/或紧张型头痛患者随机分配到以下四个组之一:等候名单组(等待名单);回避组;回避联合认知行为疗法组(回避+CBT);以及 LCT 组。治疗前后头痛和药物使用的变化(负号表示改善)如下:等待名单组,+11.0%(+15.4%);回避组,-13.2%(-9.0%);回避+CBT 组,-30.0%(-19.4%);LCT 组,-35.9%(-27.9%)。回避组在头痛或药物使用方面与等待名单组无显著差异,但 LCT 组在这两个指标上与等待名单组有显著差异。回避+CBT 组在头痛方面与等待名单组有显著差异,但在药物使用方面无差异。综上所述,本研究未能为回避作为触发因素管理的标准方法提供支持,但 LCT 作为一种有前途的策略脱颖而出。LCT 在所有头痛和药物使用的测量指标上都比其他三种情况有更大的改善,并且是唯一一种在治疗应答率(头痛减少 50%或更多)和药物使用方面与等待名单对照组显著不同的治疗条件。