Suppr超能文献

前瞻性头痛日记与回顾性四周头痛问卷比较:一项随机对照试验的二次数据分析。

Comparing prospective headache diary and retrospective four-week headache questionnaire over 20 weeks: Secondary data analysis from a randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Program on Integrative Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

出版信息

Cephalalgia. 2020 Nov;40(13):1523-1531. doi: 10.1177/0333102420949180. Epub 2020 Aug 16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Headache diaries and recall questionnaires are frequently used to assess headache frequency and severity in clinical and research settings.

METHODS

Using 20 weeks of data from an intervention trial with 182 participants, we evaluated concordance between an electronic headache diary administered on a daily basis and designed to capture the presence and severity of headaches on an hourly basis (the headache diary) and a recall questionnaire, with retrospective estimation of the number of headache days assessed on a monthly basis. We further examined whether the duration or severity of headaches assessed by the electronic diary impacted concordance between these two measures.

RESULTS

Over the course of four 28-day periods, people with migraine participating in a dietary intervention reported an average of 13.7 and 11.1 headache days in the headache diary and recall questionnaire, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Over time, the concordance between headache days reported in these two measures tended to increase; however, the recall questionnaire headache estimates were lower than the diary measures in all four periods. When analysis was restricted to headaches lasting 8 hours or more, the number of headache days was more closely aligned with days reported in the recall questionnaire, indicating that the accuracy of recall estimates is likely to be influenced by headache duration. Restriction of analyses to moderate-to-severe headaches did not change results as much as headache duration. The findings indicate that recall questionnaires administered on a monthly basis may underestimate headache frequency and therefore should not be used interchangeably with headache diaries.: NCT02012790.

摘要

背景

头痛日记和回忆问卷常用于评估临床和研究环境中的头痛频率和严重程度。

方法

我们使用一项干预试验的 20 周数据(共 182 名参与者),评估了每天记录并设计用于每小时记录头痛发作的存在和严重程度的电子头痛日记(头痛日记)与回忆问卷之间的一致性,回忆问卷则回顾性估计每月评估的头痛天数。我们进一步研究了电子日记中评估的头痛持续时间或严重程度是否会影响这两种措施之间的一致性。

结果

在四个为期 28 天的周期中,参加饮食干预的偏头痛患者在头痛日记和回忆问卷中分别报告了平均 13.7 和 11.1 个头痛日。

结论

随着时间的推移,这两种措施报告的头痛日数之间的一致性趋于增加;然而,在所有四个时期,回忆问卷的头痛估计值均低于日记测量值。当分析仅限于持续 8 小时或更长时间的头痛时,头痛天数与回忆问卷中报告的天数更接近,这表明回忆估计的准确性可能受到头痛持续时间的影响。将分析仅限于中重度头痛,对结果的影响不如头痛持续时间大。这些发现表明,每月进行的回忆问卷可能会低估头痛频率,因此不应与头痛日记互换使用。NCT02012790。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

9
The chronobiology of migraine: a systematic review.偏头痛的时间生物学:系统评价。
J Headache Pain. 2021 Jul 19;22(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s10194-021-01276-w.

本文引用的文献

10
Diaries and calendars for migraine. A review.偏头痛的日记和日历。一篇综述。
Cephalalgia. 2006 Aug;26(8):905-16. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2006.01155.x.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验