Luca Falsiroli Maistrello1, Marco Rafanelli2, Andrea Turolla3. 1. Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genova, Campus of Savona, Savona, Italy. ft.luca.maistrello@gmail.com. 2. , Cosenza, Italy. 3. Laboratory of Neurorehabilitation Technologies, Fondazione Ospedale San Camillo IRCCS, Venice, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: People with headache usually experienced significantly lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than the healthy subjects. The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapy on HRQoL in patients with tension-type headache (TTH), migraine (MH) or cervicogenic headache (CGH). RECENT FINDINGS: We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on MEDLINE, COCHRANE and PEDro databases. Treatment was manual therapy compared to usual care or placebo. The outcome was the HRQoL that could be measured by Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Headache Disability Inventory (HDI), Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire (MIDAS) and Short Form Health Survey 12/36 (SF-12/36). For the RCT internal validity, we used the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool. For the level of evidence, we used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE). We identified a total of 10 RCTs, 7 of which were included into the meta-analysis. For HIT-6 scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (mean difference (MD) - 3.67; 95% CI from - 5.71 to - 1.63) and at follow-up (MD - 2.47; 95% CI from - 3.27 to - 1.68). For HDI scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (MD - 4.01; 95% CI from - 5.82 to - 2.20) and at follow-up (MD - 5.62; 95% CI from - 10.69 to - 0.54). Other scales provided inconclusive results. Manual therapy should be considered as an effective approach in improving the quality of life in patients with TTH and MH, while in patients with CGH, the results were inconsistent. Those positive results should be considered with caution due to the very low level of evidence. Researchers should in future design primary studies using valid and reliable disease-specific outcome measures.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: People with headache usually experienced significantly lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than the healthy subjects. The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapy on HRQoL in patients with tension-type headache (TTH), migraine (MH) or cervicogenic headache (CGH). RECENT FINDINGS: We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on MEDLINE, COCHRANE and PEDro databases. Treatment was manual therapy compared to usual care or placebo. The outcome was the HRQoL that could be measured by Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Headache Disability Inventory (HDI), Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire (MIDAS) and Short Form Health Survey 12/36 (SF-12/36). For the RCT internal validity, we used the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool. For the level of evidence, we used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE). We identified a total of 10 RCTs, 7 of which were included into the meta-analysis. For HIT-6 scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (mean difference (MD) - 3.67; 95% CI from - 5.71 to - 1.63) and at follow-up (MD - 2.47; 95% CI from - 3.27 to - 1.68). For HDI scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (MD - 4.01; 95% CI from - 5.82 to - 2.20) and at follow-up (MD - 5.62; 95% CI from - 10.69 to - 0.54). Other scales provided inconclusive results. Manual therapy should be considered as an effective approach in improving the quality of life in patients with TTH and MH, while in patients with CGH, the results were inconsistent. Those positive results should be considered with caution due to the very low level of evidence. Researchers should in future design primary studies using valid and reliable disease-specific outcome measures.
Authors: Marie-Louise B Lenssinck; Léonie Damen; Arianne P Verhagen; Marjolein Y Berger; Jan Passchier; Bart W Koes Journal: Pain Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: César Fernández-de-Las-Peñas; Cristina Alonso-Blanco; Maria Luz Cuadrado; Juan Carlos Miangolarra; Francisco J Barriga; Juan A Pareja Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2006 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: Holger J Schünemann; Andrew D Oxman; Jan Brozek; Paul Glasziou; Patrick Bossuyt; Stephanie Chang; Paola Muti; Roman Jaeschke; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: Evid Based Med Date: 2008-12
Authors: Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Gunn E Vist; Regina Kunz; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Holger J Schünemann Journal: BMJ Date: 2008-04-26
Authors: R B Lipton; K Kolodner; M E Bigal; D Valade; M J A Láinez; J Pascual; A Gendolla; G Bussone; N Islam; K Albert; B Parsons Journal: Cephalalgia Date: 2009-02-23 Impact factor: 6.292
Authors: Elena Muñoz-Gómez; Marta Inglés; Marta Aguilar-Rodríguez; Sara Mollà-Casanova; Núria Sempere-Rubio; Pilar Serra-Añó; Gemma V Espí-López Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-01-30 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Francesco Cerritelli; Marco Chiera; Marco Abbro; Valentino Megale; Jorge Esteves; Alberto Gallace; Andrea Manzotti Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Rogier F de Best; Michel W Coppieters; Emie van Trijffel; Annette Compter; Maarten Uyttenboogaart; Joost C Bot; Rene Castien; Jan J M Pool; Barbara Cagnie; Gwendolyne G M Scholten-Peeters Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2021-10-01