Angermaier Anselm, Koennecke Andy, Kloetzer Christine, Strauss Sebastian, Fleischmann Robert
Department of Neurology, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Front Neurol. 2023 Aug 25;14:1238266. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1238266. eCollection 2023.
The study aimed to test the reliability of a semi-structured telephone interview for the classification of headache disorders according to the ICHD-3.
Questionnaire-based screening tools are often optimized for single primary headache diagnoses [e.g., migraine (MIG) and tension headache (TTH)] and therefore insufficiently represent the diagnostic precision of the ICHD-3, which limits epidemiological research of rare headache disorders. Brief semi-structured telephone interviews could be an effective alternative to improve classification.
A patient population representative of different primary and secondary headache disorders ( = 60) was recruited from the outpatient clinic (HSA) of a tertiary care headache center. These patients completed an established population-based questionnaire for the classification of MIG, TTH, or trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia (TAC). In addition, they received a semi-structured telephone interview call from three blinded headache specialists individually. The agreement of diagnoses made either using the questionnaires or interviews with the HSA diagnoses was evaluated.
Of the 59 patients ( = 1 dropout), 24% had a second-order and 5% had a third-order headache disorder. The main diagnoses were as follows: frequent primary headaches with 61% MIG, 10% TAC, 9% TTH, and 5% rare primary and 16% secondary headaches. Second-order diagnosis was chronic migraine throughout, and third-order diagnoses were medication overuse headache and TTH. Agreement between main headaches from the HSA was significantly better for the telephone interview than for the questionnaire (questionnaire: κ = 0.330; interview: κ = 0.822; < 0.001). Second-order diagnoses were not adequately captured by questionnaires, while there was a trend for good agreement with the telephone interview (κ = 0.433; = 0.074). Headache frequency and psychiatric comorbidities were independent predictors of HSA and telephone interview agreement. Male sex, headache frequency, severity, and depressive disorders were independently predictive for agreement between the questionnaire and HSA. The telephone interview showed high sensitivity (≥71%) and specificity (≥92%) for all primary headache disorders, whereas the questionnaire was below 50% in either sensitivity or specificity.
The semi-structured telephone interview appears to be a more reliable tool for accurate diagnosis of headache disorders than self-report questionnaires. This offers the potential to improve epidemiological headache research and care even in underserved areas.
本研究旨在测试根据国际头痛疾病分类第三版(ICHD-3)对头痛疾病进行分类的半结构化电话访谈的可靠性。
基于问卷的筛查工具通常针对单一原发性头痛诊断(如偏头痛(MIG)和紧张性头痛(TTH))进行了优化,因此不能充分体现ICHD-3的诊断精度,这限制了对罕见头痛疾病的流行病学研究。简短的半结构化电话访谈可能是改善分类的有效替代方法。
从一家三级护理头痛中心的门诊诊所(HSA)招募了代表不同原发性和继发性头痛疾病的患者群体(n = 60)。这些患者完成了一份既定的基于人群的问卷,用于MIG、TTH或三叉自主神经性头痛(TAC)的分类。此外,他们分别接受了三位不知情的头痛专家的半结构化电话访谈。评估了使用问卷或访谈做出的诊断与HSA诊断之间的一致性。
在59名患者中(1名退出),24%患有二级头痛疾病,5%患有三级头痛疾病。主要诊断如下:常见原发性头痛中,MIG占61%,TAC占10%,TTH占9%,罕见原发性头痛占5%,继发性头痛占16%。二级诊断均为慢性偏头痛,三级诊断为药物过量使用性头痛和TTH。电话访谈的主要头痛诊断与HSA之间的一致性显著优于问卷(问卷:κ = 0.330;访谈:κ = 0.822;P < 0.001)。问卷未能充分捕捉二级诊断,而电话访谈有良好一致性的趋势(κ = 0.433;P = 0.074)。头痛频率和精神共病是HSA与电话访谈一致性的独立预测因素。男性、头痛频率、严重程度和抑郁障碍是问卷与HSA之间一致性的独立预测因素。电话访谈对所有原发性头痛疾病显示出高敏感性(≥71%)和特异性(≥92%),而问卷的敏感性或特异性均低于50%。
半结构化电话访谈似乎是比自我报告问卷更可靠的准确诊断头痛疾病的工具。这为改善流行病学头痛研究和护理提供了潜力,即使在服务不足的地区也是如此。