Article

What is the impact of physician communication and patient understanding in the management of headache?

Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment (Impact Factor: 2). 01/2008; 3(6):893-7.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Migraine is a common and debilitating condition. Despite the burden of disease and increasing availability of effective treatment, migraine management is unsatisfactory. Evidence in other chronic conditions indicates that effective physician communication results in better patient understanding and health outcomes.The current literature review was intended to evaluate evidence regarding the relationship of effective physician-provider communication to health outcomes and patient satisfaction among patients with migraine. The authors searched MEDLINE((R)) (1966-June 2007) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant publications. The search strategy combined the concepts of "headache disorders" and "physician-patient relations". 912 abstracts were identified, and 80 (9%) of them were included for data abstraction.There were no studies that met our eligibility criteria. Therefore we revised the eligibility criteria to allow for the inclusion of non-migraine primary headache disorders or the role of non-physician health care providers. Twelve published papers met the revised criteria. The findings from the limited evidence available suggests, but does not prove, that improvements in physician-patient communication could result in a significant decrease in the burden of suffering and health care resource utilization associated with migraine. More research is needed to assess the explicit role of physician-patient communication in the management of migraine.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
69 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Research suggests that approximately one half of recurrent headache sufferers fail to adhere properly to drug treatment regimens with as many as two thirds of patients failing to make optimal use of abortive medications such as ergotamine. In spite of these findings there are no controlled studies that have attempted to evaluate methods for improving adherence to drug regimens for the treatment of chronic headache disorders. In an initial effort to address this adherence problem thirty-four recurrent migraine sufferers were randomized to abortive therapy with ergotamine tartrate plus caffeine (standard abortive therapy) or to standard abortive therapy accompanied by a brief educational intervention designed to facilitate the migraine sufferer's effective use of ergotamine. Patients who received the adjunctive educational intervention attempted to abort a greater percentage of their migraine attacks (70% vs 40%) and showed larger reduction in headache activity (e.g., 40% vs 26% reduction in month two of treatment). However, patients in both treatment groups used similar amounts of abortive medication when attempting to abort a migraine attack and showed similar reductions in analgesic medication use with abortive therapy. There results suggest that brief educational interventions designed to address the problem of patient adherence may yield significant improvements in standard therapies. We argue that such educational interventions deserve more attention in the headache treatment literature than they have received to date.
    Headache The Journal of Head and Face Pain 04/1989; 29(3):148-53. · 2.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To ascertain whether the quality of physician-patient communication makes a significant difference to patient health outcomes. The MEDLINE database was searched for articles published from 1983 to 1993 using "physician-patient relations" as the primary medical subject heading. Several bibliographies and conference proceedings were also reviewed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and analytic studies of physician-patient communication in which patient health was an outcome variable. The following information was recorded about each study: sample size, patient characteristics, clinical setting, elements of communication assessed, patient outcomes measured, and direction and significance of any association found between aspects of communication and patient outcomes. Of the 21 studies that met the final criteria for review, 16 reported positive results, 4 reported negative (i.e., nonsignificant) results, and 1 was inconclusive. The quality of communication both in the history-taking segment of the visit and during discussion of the management plan was found to influence patient health outcomes. The outcomes affected were, in descending order of frequency, emotional health, symptom resolution, function, physiologic measures (i.e., blood pressure and blood sugar level) and pain control. Most of the studies reviewed demonstrated a correlation between effective physician-patient communication and improved patient health outcomes. The components of effective communication identified by these studies can be used as the basis both for curriculum development in medical education and for patient education programs. Future research should focus on evaluating such educational programs.
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 06/1995; 152(9):1423-33. · 6.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A study is reported of patients attending neurological outpatient clinics with a primary symptom of headache not due to structural disease. Patients were interviewed shortly after their hospital visit and one year after the referral and their views about communication from the doctor were obtained. Approximately one-quarter of patients expressed serious critical comments on this subject. No socio-demographic variable predicted this negative response. However, two groups of patients with particular needs were found to be significantly more critical. Otherwise concerns about information in the sample were limited. Dissatisfaction with communication was found to be significantly related to subsequent non-compliance.
    Journal of Psychosomatic Research 02/1981; 25(5):329-34. · 3.27 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
41 Downloads
Available from
May 26, 2014