BACKGROUND: Many clinical neurologists have considered cluster headache patients to differ from migraine patients as to behavioral patterns. There is, however, little empirical validation of such a differentiation. METHODS: Coping profiles and social networks were studied in patients suffering from two kinds of recurrent headache. Twenty-four female patients with cluster headache, aged 23-72 years, and 24 age-matched migraine patients with and without aura participated in the study. All female cluster patients treated at the neurologic clinic of the hospital were included, and consecutive outpatients, who had been referred to the policlinics for diagnosis and treatment, whose symptoms agreed with the IHS criteria for migraine and who had ages matching the cluster headache patients, participated in the study. RESULTS: In the semiprojective coping tests the cluster headache patients were found to be statistically significant more 'positive' as to their anticipated activities in the future compared to the migraine patients (p < 0.04). No other statistical differences were found between the two groups. Compared to randomly selected and age-matched referents in the population. cluster headache patients reported significantly poorer social support (p < 0.01), while no other difference was found when the migraine patients were compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that there are differences in perception of anticipated activities and social support between patients with cluster headache and migraine.
BACKGROUND: Many clinical neurologists have considered cluster headachepatients to differ from migrainepatients as to behavioral patterns. There is, however, little empirical validation of such a differentiation. METHODS: Coping profiles and social networks were studied in patients suffering from two kinds of recurrent headache. Twenty-four female patients with cluster headache, aged 23-72 years, and 24 age-matched migrainepatients with and without aura participated in the study. All female cluster patients treated at the neurologic clinic of the hospital were included, and consecutive outpatients, who had been referred to the policlinics for diagnosis and treatment, whose symptoms agreed with the IHS criteria for migraine and who had ages matching the cluster headachepatients, participated in the study. RESULTS: In the semiprojective coping tests the cluster headachepatients were found to be statistically significant more 'positive' as to their anticipated activities in the future compared to the migrainepatients (p < 0.04). No other statistical differences were found between the two groups. Compared to randomly selected and age-matched referents in the population. cluster headachepatients reported significantly poorer social support (p < 0.01), while no other difference was found when the migrainepatients were compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that there are differences in perception of anticipated activities and social support between patients with cluster headache and migraine.