Literature DB >> 20078439

Standardizing emergency department-based migraine research: an analysis of commonly used clinical trial outcome measures.

Benjamin W Friedman1, Polly E Bijur, Richard B Lipton.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Although many high-quality migraine clinical trials have been performed in the emergency department (ED) setting, almost as many different primary outcome measures have been used, making data aggregation and meta-analysis difficult. The authors assessed commonly used migraine trial outcomes in two ways. First, the authors examined the association of each commonly used outcome versus the following patient-centered variable: the research subject's wish, when asked 24 hours after investigational medication administration, to receive the same medication the next time they presented to an ED with migraine ("would take again"). This variable was chosen as the criterion standard because it provides a simple, dichotomous, clinically sensible outcome, which allows migraineurs to factor important intangibles of efficacy and adverse effects of treatment into an overall assessment of care. The second part of the analysis assessed how sensitive to true efficacy each outcome measure was by calculating sample size requirements based on results observed in previously conducted clinical trials.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data previously collected in four ED-based migraine randomized trials performed between 2003 and 2007. In each of these trials, subjects were asked 24 hours after administration of an investigational medication whether or not they would want to receive the same medication the next time they came to the ED with a migraine. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for sex and medication received, were calculated as measures of association between the most commonly used outcome measures and "would take again." The sensitivity of each outcome measure to treatment efficacy was determined by calculating the sample size that would be required to detect a statistically significant result using estimates of that outcome obtained in two clinical trials.
RESULTS: Data from 378 subjects were used for this analysis. Adjusted ORs for association of "would take again" and other commonly used primary headache outcomes are as follows: achieving a pain-free state by 2 hours, OR = 3.1 (95% CI = 1.8 to 5.4); sustained pain-free status, OR = 4.5 (95% CI = 1.9 to 11.0); and no need for rescue medication, OR = 3.7 (95% CI = 2.1 to 6.6). An improvement on a standardized 11-point pain scale of > or =33% had an adjusted OR = 5.2 (95% CI = 2.2 to 12.4). The best performing alternate outcome, > or =33% improvement, correctly classified 288 subjects and misclassified 77 subjects when compared to "would take again." At least 33% improvement and pain-free by 2 hours required the smallest sample sizes, while sustained pain-free and "would take again" required many more subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: "Would take again" was associated with all migraine outcome measures we examined. No individual outcome was more closely associated with "would take again" than any other. Even the best-performing alternate outcome misclassified more than 20% of subjects. However, sample sizes based on "would take again" tended to be larger than other outcome measures. On the basis of these findings and this outcome measure's inherent patient-centered focus, "would take again," included as a secondary outcome in all ED migraine trials, is proposed. (c) 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20078439      PMCID: PMC2852678          DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00587.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  22 in total

1.  Guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine: second edition.

Authors:  P Tfelt-Hansen; G Block; C Dahlöf; H C Diener; M D Ferrari; P J Goadsby; V Guidetti; B Jones; R B Lipton; H Massiou; C Meinert; G Sandrini; T Steiner; P B Winter
Journal:  Cephalalgia       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 6.292

2.  A clinical trial of trimethobenzamide/diphenhydramine versus sumatriptan for acute migraines.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; Michael Hochberg; David Esses; Polly E Bijur; Jill Corbo; Joseph Paternoster; Clemencia Solorzano; Babak Toosi; Richard B Lipton; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.887

3.  Randomized clinical trial of intravenous magnesium sulfate as an adjunctive medication for emergency department treatment of migraine headache.

Authors:  J Corbo; D Esses; P E Bijur; R Iannaccone; E J Gallagher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.721

4.  Droperidol vs. prochlorperazine for benign headaches in the emergency department.

Authors:  J R Miner; S J Fish; S W Smith; M H Biros
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.451

5.  What do patients with migraine want from acute migraine treatment?

Authors:  Richard B Lipton; Sandra W Hamelsky; Jeffrey M Dayno
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.887

6.  A trial of metoclopramide vs sumatriptan for the emergency department treatment of migraines.

Authors:  B W Friedman; J Corbo; R B Lipton; P E Bijur; D Esses; C Solorzano; E J Gallagher
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2005-02-08       Impact factor: 9.910

7.  Recurrence of primary headache disorders after emergency department discharge: frequency and predictors of poor pain and functional outcomes.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; Michael L Hochberg; David Esses; Brian M Grosberg; Daniel Rothberg; Benjamin Bernstein; Polly E Bijur; Richard B Lipton; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2008-04-03       Impact factor: 5.721

8.  The effectiveness of nalbuphine and hydroxyzine for the emergency treatment of severe headache.

Authors:  D Tek; M Mellon
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 5.721

9.  A randomized controlled trial of prochlorperazine versus metoclopramide for treatment of acute migraine.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; David Esses; Clemencia Solorzano; Niels Dua; Peter Greenwald; Radu Radulescu; Esther Chang; Michael Hochberg; Caron Campbell; Amish Aghera; Tyson Valentin; Joseph Paternoster; Polly Bijur; Richard B Lipton; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2007-11-19       Impact factor: 5.721

10.  Intravenous chlorpromazine in the emergency department treatment of migraines: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Marcelo Eduardo Bigal; Carlos Alberto Bordini; José Geraldo Speciali
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 1.484

View more
  6 in total

1.  Metoclopramide for acute migraine: a dose-finding randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; Laura Mulvey; David Esses; Clemencia Solorzano; Joseph Paternoster; Richard B Lipton; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 5.721

2.  Diphenhydramine as Adjuvant Therapy for Acute Migraine: An Emergency Department-Based Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; Lisa Cabral; Victoria Adewunmi; Clemencia Solorzano; David Esses; Polly E Bijur; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2015-08-29       Impact factor: 5.721

3.  A Randomized, Double-Dummy, Emergency Department-Based Study of Greater Occipital Nerve Block With Bupivacaine vs Intravenous Metoclopramide for Treatment of Migraine.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; Eddie Irizarry; Andrew Williams; Clemencia Solorzano; Eleftheria Zias; Matthew S Robbins; Melissa A Harrilal; Michael Del Valle; Polly E Bijur; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2020-09-27       Impact factor: 5.887

4.  Randomized study of IV prochlorperazine plus diphenhydramine vs IV hydromorphone for migraine.

Authors:  Benjamin W Friedman; Eddie Irizarry; Clemencia Solorzano; Alexander Latev; Karolyn Rosa; Eleftheria Zias; David R Vinson; Polly E Bijur; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 9.910

5.  Intranasal lidocaine for acute migraine: A protocol for the systematic review of randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Pei-Wen Chi; Kun-Yi Hsieh; Chien-Wei Tsai; Chin-Wang Hsu; Chyi-Huey Bai; Chiehfeng Chen; Yuan-Pin Hsu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Intranasal lidocaine for acute migraine: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Pei-Wen Chi; Kun-Yi Hsieh; Kuan-Yu Chen; Chin-Wang Hsu; Chyi-Huey Bai; Chiehfeng Chen; Yuan-Pin Hsu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.