4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for the Prophylaxis of Migraine in Adults: A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial

      case-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Behavioral approaches are central to the preventive treatment of migraine but empirical evidence regarding efficacy and effectiveness is still sparse. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a newly developed migraine-specific, integrative cognitive-behavioral therapy program (miCBT) combining several approaches (trigger and stress management, coping with fear of attacks, relaxation training) by comparing it with a single behavioral approach (relaxation training, RLX) as an active control group and a waiting-list control group (WLC).

          Methods

          In a three-armed open-label randomized controlled trial, 121 adults with migraine were assigned to either miCBT, RLX or WLC. The outpatient group therapy (miCBT or RLX) consisted of seven sessions each 90 min. Participants who completed the WLC were subsequently randomized to one of the two treatment groups. Primary outcomes were headache days, headache-related disability, emotional distress, and self-efficacy. The baseline was compared to post-treatment, and followed by assessments 4- and 12-months post-treatment to compare miCBT and RLX.

          Results

          Mixed-model analyses (intention-to-treat sample, 106 participants) showed significantly stronger pre-post improvements in self-efficacy (assessed by the Headache Management Self-Efficacy Scale, HMSE-G-SF) in both treatment groups compared to the WLC (mean difference at post; miCBT: 4.67 [0.55–8.78], p = 0.027; RLX: 4.42 [0.38 to 8.46], p = 0.032), whereas no other significant between-group differences were observed. The follow-up analyses revealed significant within-group improvements from baseline to 12-month follow-up in all four primary outcomes for both treatments. However, between-group effects (miCBT vs. RLX) were not significant at follow-up.

          Conclusion

          The miCBT has no better treatment effects compared to RLX in migraine-prophylaxis. Both treatments effectively increase patients' self-efficacy.

          Trial Registration

          German Clinical Trials Register ( www.drks.de; DRKS-ID: DRKS00011111).

          Related collections

          Most cited references56

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses.

          G*Power is a free power analysis program for a variety of statistical tests. We present extensions and improvements of the version introduced by Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, and Buchner (2007) in the domain of correlation and regression analyses. In the new version, we have added procedures to analyze the power of tests based on (1) single-sample tetrachoric correlations, (2) comparisons of dependent correlations, (3) bivariate linear regression, (4) multiple linear regression based on the random predictor model, (5) logistic regression, and (6) Poisson regression. We describe these new features and provide a brief introduction to their scope and handling.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs

            Effect sizes are the most important outcome of empirical studies. Most articles on effect sizes highlight their importance to communicate the practical significance of results. For scientists themselves, effect sizes are most useful because they facilitate cumulative science. Effect sizes can be used to determine the sample size for follow-up studies, or examining effects across studies. This article aims to provide a practical primer on how to calculate and report effect sizes for t-tests and ANOVA's such that effect sizes can be used in a-priori power analyses and meta-analyses. Whereas many articles about effect sizes focus on between-subjects designs and address within-subjects designs only briefly, I provide a detailed overview of the similarities and differences between within- and between-subjects designs. I suggest that some research questions in experimental psychology examine inherently intra-individual effects, which makes effect sizes that incorporate the correlation between measures the best summary of the results. Finally, a supplementary spreadsheet is provided to make it as easy as possible for researchers to incorporate effect size calculations into their workflow.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version).

              (2013)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Neurol
                Front Neurol
                Front. Neurol.
                Frontiers in Neurology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-2295
                28 April 2022
                2022
                : 13
                : 852616
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Psychology, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz , Mainz, Germany
                [2] 2Headache Center Frankfurt , Frankfurt, Germany
                [3] 3Migraine and Headache Clinic Königstein , Königstein, Germany
                Author notes

                Edited by: Tim. P. Jürgens, University Hospital Rostock, Germany

                Reviewed by: Peter Kropp, University Hospital Rostock, Germany; Federica Galli, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy

                *Correspondence: Timo Klan klan@ 123456uni-mainz.de

                This article was submitted to Headache and Neurogenic Pain, a section of the journal Frontiers in Neurology

                Article
                10.3389/fneur.2022.852616
                9101654
                35572937
                fa4f39b4-f5ea-4451-8592-60a22e828399
                Copyright © 2022 Klan, Gaul, Liesering-Latta, Both, Held, Hennemann and Witthöft.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 11 January 2022
                : 28 March 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 57, Pages: 14, Words: 9228
                Categories
                Neurology
                Clinical Trial

                Neurology
                migraine,prevention,randomized controlled trial,behavioral treatment,cognitive-behavioral therapy,relaxation therapy,behavioral therapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content362

                Cited by5

                Most referenced authors2,100