ArticleNeurotrauma reports
Relief and Prevention of Post-Traumatic Headache Using Intranasal Delivery of Lidocaine for Youth (RAPPIDLY): A Feasibility Study.
Article in Neurotrauma reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Post-traumatic headache (PTH) is prevalent following concussion, yet few evidence-based treatments exist. Intranasal lidocaine (INL) may help treat migraine; however, it has not been studied specifically for PTH in youth populations. The objectives are to describe the feasibility and acceptability of INL as a PTH treatment for youth in a concussion clinic, explore the change in pain score pre- and post-treatment, and describe patient characteristics and clinical covariates associated with the change in pain score. This feasibility study is a health record review of a concussion clinic in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Patients aged 13-30 years presenting with PTH were eligible. Clinicians completed standardized questionnaires that captured patient-reported outcomes. Feasibility was measured by the proportion of patients who accepted INL treatment and acceptability was determined by patient-reported side effects, tolerability, and satisfaction. Proportions with 95% confidence intervals were generated with a Wilson score. Pain scores were reported using the numeric rating scale, where a ≥ 2-point change is clinically significant. The difference in pain after INL was determined using the median and interquartile range. Seventy-seven patients were offered INL, and 57 patients (61% female, median age = 18 years [interquartile range {IQR}:15, 26]) accepted treatment (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-83%). The median reported pre-treatment headache pain score was 5 (IQR: 5.0, 6.0) and post-INL pain score was 2 (IQR: 1.0-3.0), reflecting a median reduction from baseline of 3 points (IQR: -5.0, -2.0). No serious adverse events occurred. Mild side effects including throat irritation, numbness, or unpleasant taste were reported by 96% of patients (55/57). Participants reported that the procedure was tolerable (98%, 56/57) and expressed satisfaction (93%, 53/57). Post-INL, 88% (
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.