Cargando…
Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study
BACKGROUND: We aim to describe and compare patients and general practitioners’ opinions about the different variables related to acute and preventive treatment for migraine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational descriptive study was performed. Patients with episodic migraine and general practition...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8281698/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34261459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02220-w |
_version_ | 1783722880053280768 |
---|---|
author | Trigo-López, Javier Guerrero-Peral, Ángel Luis Sierra, Álvaro Martínez-Pías, Enrique Gutiérrez-Sánchez, María Huzzey, Elizabeth García-Azorín, David |
author_facet | Trigo-López, Javier Guerrero-Peral, Ángel Luis Sierra, Álvaro Martínez-Pías, Enrique Gutiérrez-Sánchez, María Huzzey, Elizabeth García-Azorín, David |
author_sort | Trigo-López, Javier |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We aim to describe and compare patients and general practitioners’ opinions about the different variables related to acute and preventive treatment for migraine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational descriptive study was performed. Patients with episodic migraine and general practitioners, from our healthcare area, were invited to answer a survey about the different variables related to migraine treatment. They were asked for their opinions on the different variables, and to consider the desired efficacy in percentage terms and the desired action times of treatment. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients and fifty-five general practitioners were selected. Effectiveness was considered the most important variable for symptomatic and preventive treatment. Cost was considered the least important variable. Patients desired percentage of efficacy was 84.0% (±16.7%) for symptomatic treatment and 79.9% (±17.1%) for preventive treatment. General practitioners desired percentage of efficacy was 75.0% (±14.0) for symptomatic treatment and 70.4% (±14.3) for preventive treatment. For symptomatic treatment the desired action time for pain cessation was selected as 27.5 min (±13.8) for patients and 24.0 min (±18.3) for GPs. For preventive treatment the desired action time for effect was 7.1 days (±4.5) for patients and 13.9 days (±8.9) for general practitioners. CONCLUSION: The most important endpoints were, for acute: effectiveness, a short action time and a persistent effect. For prophylactic: effectiveness, sustained effect and tolerability. Both patients and general practitioners agreed on the most and least preferred endpoints. Desired percentage of efficacy was above 75% for both symptomatic and preventive treatment; and the desired action time was below 30 min for acute treatment and 2 weeks for preventive treatment. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8281698 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82816982021-07-16 Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study Trigo-López, Javier Guerrero-Peral, Ángel Luis Sierra, Álvaro Martínez-Pías, Enrique Gutiérrez-Sánchez, María Huzzey, Elizabeth García-Azorín, David BMC Neurol Research BACKGROUND: We aim to describe and compare patients and general practitioners’ opinions about the different variables related to acute and preventive treatment for migraine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational descriptive study was performed. Patients with episodic migraine and general practitioners, from our healthcare area, were invited to answer a survey about the different variables related to migraine treatment. They were asked for their opinions on the different variables, and to consider the desired efficacy in percentage terms and the desired action times of treatment. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients and fifty-five general practitioners were selected. Effectiveness was considered the most important variable for symptomatic and preventive treatment. Cost was considered the least important variable. Patients desired percentage of efficacy was 84.0% (±16.7%) for symptomatic treatment and 79.9% (±17.1%) for preventive treatment. General practitioners desired percentage of efficacy was 75.0% (±14.0) for symptomatic treatment and 70.4% (±14.3) for preventive treatment. For symptomatic treatment the desired action time for pain cessation was selected as 27.5 min (±13.8) for patients and 24.0 min (±18.3) for GPs. For preventive treatment the desired action time for effect was 7.1 days (±4.5) for patients and 13.9 days (±8.9) for general practitioners. CONCLUSION: The most important endpoints were, for acute: effectiveness, a short action time and a persistent effect. For prophylactic: effectiveness, sustained effect and tolerability. Both patients and general practitioners agreed on the most and least preferred endpoints. Desired percentage of efficacy was above 75% for both symptomatic and preventive treatment; and the desired action time was below 30 min for acute treatment and 2 weeks for preventive treatment. BioMed Central 2021-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8281698/ /pubmed/34261459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02220-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Trigo-López, Javier Guerrero-Peral, Ángel Luis Sierra, Álvaro Martínez-Pías, Enrique Gutiérrez-Sánchez, María Huzzey, Elizabeth García-Azorín, David Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study |
title | Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study |
title_full | Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study |
title_fullStr | Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study |
title_full_unstemmed | Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study |
title_short | Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study |
title_sort | patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8281698/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34261459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02220-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT trigolopezjavier patientsandgeneralpractitionersassessmentofthemainoutcomesemployedintheacuteandpreventivetreatmentofmigraineacrosssectionalstudy AT guerreroperalangelluis patientsandgeneralpractitionersassessmentofthemainoutcomesemployedintheacuteandpreventivetreatmentofmigraineacrosssectionalstudy AT sierraalvaro patientsandgeneralpractitionersassessmentofthemainoutcomesemployedintheacuteandpreventivetreatmentofmigraineacrosssectionalstudy AT martinezpiasenrique patientsandgeneralpractitionersassessmentofthemainoutcomesemployedintheacuteandpreventivetreatmentofmigraineacrosssectionalstudy AT gutierrezsanchezmaria patientsandgeneralpractitionersassessmentofthemainoutcomesemployedintheacuteandpreventivetreatmentofmigraineacrosssectionalstudy AT huzzeyelizabeth patientsandgeneralpractitionersassessmentofthemainoutcomesemployedintheacuteandpreventivetreatmentofmigraineacrosssectionalstudy AT garciaazorindavid patientsandgeneralpractitionersassessmentofthemainoutcomesemployedintheacuteandpreventivetreatmentofmigraineacrosssectionalstudy |