Trial reportHeadache2022
Telephone follow-up on treatment and patient satisfaction at a Danish tertiary headache center: A prospective study.
Trial report in Headache, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Telephone follow-up on treatment and patient satisfaction at a Danish tertiary headache center: A prospective study.Headache · 2022Trial
- Factors Impacting the Telephone Follow-Up Response Rate in Patients With Migraine Without Aura: A Cross-Sectional Study of 1299 Females.Pain research & management · 2026Article
- Evolving migraine management: Lithuania's telemedicine experience.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Evaluating Headache and Facial Pain in a Headache Diagnostic Laboratory: Experiences from the Danish Headache Center.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Reliability of a telephone interview for the classification of headache disorders.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe investigated whether telephone follow-up consultations could lead to appropriate adjustment of treatments and a higher degree of patient satisfaction among patients with migraine and tension-type headache (TTH).
backgroundMigraine and TTH are disabling headache forms requiring optimized treatment.
methodsIn a prospective, non-randomized, quality control study with controls comparing telephone-interview intervention (TeII) with business-as-usual (BAU) treatment, we included newly referred patients with migraine and/or TTH. The TeII group was contacted by telephone by healthcare professionals at 8 and 16 weeks after the first visit addressing headache treatment. Electronic questionnaires were sent to all participants before the first visit and after 6 months. Predefined outcomes were number of patients with change in preventive and acute medication; change in headache frequency; migraine frequency; scores from the eight-item Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT-8) questionnaire, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS); and patient satisfaction after 6 months.
resultsFrom May 2020 to April 2021, there were 230 patients enrolled in the TeII program, whereof 96 patients were included in the analysis. For the BAU group, 91 patients with similar sex and age distribution were identified via medical-record reviews in the same period. More patients in the TeII group than in the BAU group had a change in acute medication (27/96 [28%] vs. five of 91 [6%], p < 0.001) and preventive medication (28/96 [29%] vs. 12/91 [13%], p = 0.006). Headache days per month decreased in the TeII group (-4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.5 to -2.7; p = 0.001) and the BAU group (-2.5, 95% CI -4.6 to -0.4; p = 0.018), without significant difference between the groups (p = 0.080). There was no difference in migraine frequency between the groups (TeII: 1.0 day, 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.0; BAU: 1.0 day, 95% CI, -2.5 to 0.5; p = 0.718) or HURT-8 score (TeII: 10.5, 95% CI 9.5-11.5; BAU: 13.0, 95% CI 11.7-14.2; p = 0.053). There were no changes in the ISI score (TeII: 1.0, interquartile range [IQR] 6; p = 0.152; BAU: 0.5, IQR 4.5; p = 0.824), HADS-Anxiety score (TeII: -5, IQR 5.3; p = 0.186; BAU: 1.0, IQR 4.0; p = 0.445), or HADS-Depression score (TeII: 0.0, IQR 3.0; p = 0.163; BAU: 0.0, IQR 2.0; p = 0.303) in any of the groups. There was a higher degree of patient satisfaction in the TeII group compared with the BAU group in treatment (median [IQR] score 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p < 0.001), headache improvement (median [IQR] 3 [2-4] vs. 2 [1-3], p = 0.002), the headache program (median [IQR] 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p < 0.001), and information (median [IQR] 4 [3-5] vs. 3 [3-4], p = 0.005).
conclusionPatients with migraine and/or TTH benefit from a telephone follow-up approach within the first 6 months of their treatment course in terms of more efficient treatment and higher patient satisfaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.