ArticlePDF Available

Effectiveness of endonasal cranial balloon release technique in relieving symptoms of migraine and improving the quality of work in a sedentary worker -A single case study

Authors:
  • Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences
  • Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences

Abstract and Figures

Migraine is a neurological condition affecting women more than man is often a cause to decrease the quality of work and productivity in workers. This study introduces a novel technique Endonasal Cranial balloon release, which has potential benefits in the treatment of migraine and its symptoms. This is a single case report of 37-year-old female who presented with a 2-year history of migraine with no other comorbidities and having difficulty in participating actively in the workplace. After explaining the entire procedure and written consent, the patient was treated with Endonasal Cranial balloon release for four sessions, each session a day continuously. The pain was assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The impact of migraine was assessed by Headache Impact Test (HIT). The impact of migraine on work productivity was assessed by the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire. All the outcome measures were measured pre-treatment, Post-treatment after completion of all four sessions, and after one-month follow-up. The patient pain has reduced tremendously, with improved work productivity and participation. This study concludes that the Endonasal Cranial Balloon Release technique would reduce the pain and discomfort due to migraines without remissions. It rehabilitates the worker with improved productivity. We also suggest several randomized clinical trials should be conducted to identify the potential benefits of this therapy.
Content may be subject to copyright.
DOI: 10.55522/jmpas.V11I2.2224 ISSN NO. 23207418
Journal of medical pharmaceutical and allied sciences, Volume 11 – Issue 2, 2224, March – April 2022, Page – 4539 - 4541 4539
Research article
Effectiveness of endonasal cranial balloon release technique in relieving symptoms of migraine and
improving the quality of work in a sedentary worker - A single case study
Anjali Agarwal1, Suraj Kumar2, Gowrishankar Potturi2*
1Era University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences, Saifai, Etawah, Uttar Pradesh, India
ABSTRACT
Migraine is a neurological condition affecting women more than man is often a cause to decrease the quality of work and productivity in
workers. This study introduces a novel technique Endonasal Cranial balloon release, which has potential benefits in the treatment of migraine and its
symptoms. This is a single case report of 37-year-old female who presented with a 2-year history of migraine with no other comorbidities and having
difficulty in participating actively in the work-place. After explaining the entire procedure and written consent, the patient was treated with
Endonasal Cranial balloon release for four sessions, each session a day continuously. The pain was assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The
impact of migraine was assessed by Headache Impact Test (HIT). The impact of migraine on work productivity was assessed by the Work
Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire. All the outcome measures were measured pre-treatment, Post-treatment after
completion of all four sessions, and after one-month follow-up. The patient pain has reduced tremendously, with improved work productivity and
participation. This study concludes that the Endonasal Cranial Balloon Release technique would reduce the pain and discomfort due to migraines
without remissions. It rehabilitates the worker with improved productivity. We also suggest several randomized clinical trials should be conducted to
identify the potential benefits of this therapy.
Keywords: Migraine, Endonasal Cranial Balloon Release, Headache.
Received - 13-10-2021, Accepted- 14-02-2022
Correspondence: Gowrishankar Potturi* potturigowrishankar@gmail.com
Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences, Saifai, Etawah, UP, India
INTRODUCTION
Migraine is a neurological condition that can cause multiple
symptoms. Migraine affects over 20% of people at some time in their
life (1). Various studies suggest that approximately 1% of the world’s
population may have chronic migraines. (2). It is observed that women
are more affected than men (3). The International Classification of
Headache Disorders (ICHD) uses the term chronic migraine to
describe patients with frequent headaches, believed to be biologically
migrainous (4). The term ‘migraine’ originally comes from the Greek
word Hemicrania, which means ‘half of the head’, representing one
of the most striking features of the condition as in many cases pain
only affects one-half of the head. Equally commonly, pain may also
be felt bilaterally, at the front or back of the head, more rarely in the
face, and rarer still in the body (migraniouscorpalgia). The pain is
generally throbbing in nature. Migraine pain is typically accompanied
by other features such as nausea, dizziness, extreme sensitivity to
lights, noises, and smells, lack of appetite, disturbances of bowel
function and so on. Some persons have a warning symptom known as
an aura that occurs before or with the headache. An aura can include
visual disturbances (flashes of light or blind spots), or other
disturbances, such as tingling on one side of the face or in an arm or
leg and difficulty in speaking. Many studies confirmed that migraine
harms work and productivity (5). The results from previous studies
reveal that the headache, severity and frequency can impact the
quality of life. Mostly, the migraine headaches are treated with drugs
which have adverse effects on long-term use. It is also evident that
there are remissions once the drug is stopped. This study thus
highlights the evidence based novel approach in treating migraine.
This is a single case report to analyze the effectiveness of Endonasal
cranial balloon release in relieving symptoms of migraine and
improving the quality of work in a sedentary woman.
DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE
Patient history
A 37-year-old female ‘X’ who is in teaching profession,
reported to physiotherapy department of the University in Saifai,
Uttar Pradesh, India with severe headache at frontal and temporal
area, occasionally with a sense of foul smell since 2 years (Figure 1).
Often the pain radiated to neck. The patient had no past history of
DOI: 10.55522/jmpas.V11I2.2224 ISSN NO. 23207418
Journal of medical pharmaceutical and allied sciences, Volume 11 – Issue 2, 2224, March – April 2022, Page – 4539 - 4541 4540
trauma around head, neck &face. The patient was diagnosed with
Migraine by a neurologist after clinical examination and on medical
management. The patient had no complete relaxation, and had
frequent bouts of migraine attack. The patient reported no other
comorbidity.
Figure 1: site of pain of patient
Clinical Examination
Written consent was taken before examining the patient.
Cervical compression-distraction tests, Upper limb neural tissue
tension test, Vertebrobasilar insufficiency test, and cervical range of
motion were assessed. All the findings were negative ruling out the
possibility of cervical spine involvement.
Investigations
Investigations (MRI, CT Scan of Brain and Spine, Lab
investigations, X-ray Skull, and cervical spine) ruled no underlying
pathology.
Outcome Measures
The pain was assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). It is a
unidimensional measure of pain related to intensity. It is a patient
self- administered scale having a range from 0 to 10 on a straight
horizontal line with equidistant points. The point’0’ indicates no pain,
‘5’ indicates moderate pain and ‘10’ indicates severe pain. The
impact of migraine was assessed by Headache Impact Test (HIT).
The impact of migraine on work productivity was assessed by the
Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire.
WPAI-GH is expressed in percentages by multiplying the scores by
100. It has four components.
Percent work time missed due to health = Q2/(Q2 + Q4) for
those who were currently employed.
Percent impairment while working due to health = Q5/10
for those who were currently employed and worked in the past seven
days.
Percent overall work impairment due to health Q2/(Q2 +
Q4) + ((1 - Q2/(Q2 + Q4)) × (Q5/10)).
Percent activity impairment due to health Q6/10.
The overall mean of the four components was also
calculated. All the outcome measures were measured pre-treatment,
Post-treatment after completion of all four sessions, and after one-
month follow-up.
Interventions
Endonasal cranial balloon release technique was given to
the patient. The patient had four continuous sessions. The patient
didn’t take any other forms of therapy nor analgesics during and after
the therapy.
Procedure
Endonasal cranial balloon release: It is a powerful physical
technique that adjusts the bones of the skull and face. After
explaining the entire procedure and assurance, the patient is made to
lie supine on the treatment couch. Nasal Skeletal Release is
performed using a finger cot/balloon attached to a blood pressure
bulb. (Figure 2) The finger cot is lubricated and then placed into each
of the six nasal passages one by one. Once the balloon is positioned
properly, the balloon is then quickly inflated which mobilizes the
bones of the face and cranium. It is a very quick procedure and feels
similar to the sensation of water shooting up in the nose. The opposite
nostril is lightly compressed to prevent air from escaping. The patient
takes a deep breath through the mouth and holds it then the finger cot
is gently inflated making its way into the nasopharynx, causing it to
widen. The finger cot is inserted into the inferior turbinate of the nose
on both sides on the first day, then into the middle turbinate on the
second day, then into the upper turbinate on the third day, and then
into all three nasal passages of both sides on the fourth day. The
patient was given four treatment sessions on continuous days.
Figure 2: endonasal balloon release instrument
RESULTS
The outcome measures are measured pre-intervention, post-
intervention, and after one-month follow-up. The patient had a
reduction in pain, improved work productivity, and decreased
migraine-related symptoms. The summary of the scores is tabulated
in table 1.
Table 1: Outcome Measures pre-intervention, post-intervention and after one month
follow up
DOI: 10.55522/jmpas.V11I2.2224 ISSN NO. 23207418
Journal of medical pharmaceutical and allied sciences, Volume 11 – Issue 2, 2224, March – April 2022, Page – 4539 - 4541 4541
Outcome measure
Pre-
intervention
Post-
intervention
After one-month
follow-up
P<0.05
Pain vas*
9
1
1
Hit
78%
46%
42%
Wpai
-gh
Percent work time
missed due to
health
15.68%
2.27%
2.27%
Percent
impairment while
working due to
health
90%
10%
10%
Percent overall
work impairment
due to health
91.56%
11.8%
11.8%
Percent activity
impairment due to
health
80%
10%
10%
*Measured out of a total score of 10.
DISCUSSION
After four continuous sessions of Endonasal Cranial
balloon release, the patient had relief from pain and migraine-related
symptoms. The Pain VAS score reduced from 8 to 0 and the, HIT
score reduced from 78% to 46%. Endonasal Cranial balloon release
also known as Cranial Facial Release (CFR) technique was derived
from the Richard Stober technique. The mechanism of action behind
the Endonasal cranial balloon release technique is to induce mobility
in the cranial system especially sphenoid bone which facilitates the
normal cranial respiratory function (6). After the manipulation, there
will be an unrestricted and smooth flow of CSF (7). The Endonasal
Cranial Ballon release will align the bones of the skull for optimal
blood flow to the brain and spinal. The neurotransmitter activity is
also optimized.
Manipulative therapy is regarded as the best treatment
option in relieving headaches due to migraine in a study by Nelson
CF et.al (1998), have reported that cervical spine manipulations can
result in a decrease in headaches. Manipulative therapy had been
suggested as a treatment option in many studies. In the case of
craniofacial bones, the high-velocity low amplitude thrusts are not
possible as the range of motions in the craniofacial bones is very
minimal. The Endonasal Cranial balloon release technique is the
optimal option for mobilizing these bones.
Spenomandibularis muscle is often associated with retro-
orbital and temporal headaches. The Endonasal cranial balloon
release technique can release the spasm of the muscle resulting in the
relaxation and relief of pain.
Migraine is a major concern among the workers and their
productivity. Several studies across multiple countries reported that
migraine causes loss of productivity and monetary loss among the
workers (8). In this present study, our client is an Assistant professor,
who involved herself in teaching and other academic activities. The
migraine headaches prevented her from participating actively in
academic activities. After the treatment session, she started her
academic activities and had no complaints about productivity.
CONCLUSIONS
This study concludes that the Endonasal Cranial Balloon
Release technique would reduce the pain and discomfort due to
migraines without remissions. It rehabilitates the worker with
improved productivity. We also suggest several randomized clinical
trials should be conducted to identify the potential benefits of this
therapy.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge Vice Chancellor of Uttar Pradesh
University of Medical Sciences to conduct the research for the
betterment of the patients. The authors wish to acknowledge patient
for his supportive nature and cooperation.
Competing interests Nil
Funding Nil
REFERENCES
1. Welch KM, Goadsby PJ, 2002. Chronic daily headache:
nosology and pathophysiology, CurrOpin Neurol. 15(3):287-95.
2. Natoli JL, Manack A, Dean B, 2010. RBCephalalgia, Global
prevalence of chronic migraine: a systematic review. 30(5):599-
609.
3. B L Peterlin, S Gupta, T N Ward, 2011. A MacGregor, “Sex
matters: evaluating sex and gender in migraine and headache
research,” Headache, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 839–842.
4. The International classification of Headache Disorders, 2013,
3rd edition (beta version). Headache Classification Committee
of the International Headache Society (IHS), Cephalalgia.
33(9),629-808.
5. Burton WN, Landy SH, Downs KE, 2009. The impact of
migraine and the effect of migraine treatment on workplace
productivity in the United States and suggestions for future
research, Mayo Clin Proc. 2009,84(5),436-445.
6. Blum CL 2009. About Nasal Cranial Release Technique
(NCRT) / Cranial Facial Release (CFR): A Position Statement.
7. Dunn GF, Hack GD, Robbins WL, 1996. Anatomical
Observation of a Craniomandibular Muscle Originating from the
Skull Base: The Sphenomandibularis, Cranio. 14(2), 97-103.
8. Wong L, Alias H, Bhoo-Pathy, 2020. Impact of migraine on
workplace productivity and monetary loss: a study of employees
in banking sector in Malaysia, J Headache Pain. 21: 68.
Anjali Agarwal, Suraj Kumar, Gowrishankar Potturi, 2022.
Effectiveness of endonasal cranial balloon release technique in
relieving symptoms of migraine and improving the quality of
work in a sedentary worker-a single case study
P’ceutical Allied Sci. V 11 - I 2, Pages - 4539 - 4541 doi:
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Background/objective: Productivity and monetary loss due to migraine in the workplace may be substantial. This study aimed to determine the impact of migraine on productivity and monetary lost among employees in the banking sectors, in a multiethnic middle income country. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among employees in two multinational banks in Malaysia between April and July 2019. Screening for migraine was conducted using the self-administered ID-Migraine™ questionnaire. Migraine-related disability (MIDAS) and headache frequency were recorded. Impact of migraine on work productivity and activities were evaluated using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire. Results: Of the 1268 employees who submitted complete responses, 47.2% (n = 598) were screened positive for migraine. Strikingly, the mean percent productivity loss at work (presenteeism) was almost 20-fold higher than the mean percent work time missed due to migraine (absenteeism) (39.1% versus 1.9%). The mean percent productivity loss in regular activity (activity impairment) and overall work productivity loss (work impairment) was 38.4% and 39.9%, respectively. It was also found that the costs related to presenteeism (MYR 5392.6) (US$1296) was 3.5-fold higher than absenteeism (MYR1,548.3) (US$370). Highest monetary loss related to presenteeism was reported in migraineurs with frequency of headache of above 3 days (MYR 25,691.2) (US$6176), whereas highest monetary loss related to absenteeism was reported in migraineurs with MIDAS grade IV (MYR 12,369.1) (US$2973). Only 30% of migraineurs of MIDAS grade IV reported taking prescribed medication. Notably, a vast majority (96%) of migraineurs who had three or lower episodes of migraine per month did not seek treatment. Conclusion: The significant impact of migraine on work productivity and regular activity, appears to lead to substantial monetary loss attributed to not only absenteeism, but more importantly to presenteeism. This study also highlights the unmet needs in migraine management among employees in the banking sector.
Article
Evidence suggests that migraine is associated with decreased productivity. This article describes the results of a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed publications that measured the impact of migraine on workplace productivity in the United States and provides recommendations for future research. A MEDLINE search was conducted from January 1, 1990 to July 31, 2008. Articles were included if the results were from a prospective or retrospective study that reported work-specific productivity outcomes in adults with migraine in the United States. Twenty-six studies were included. Nine studies found that diagnosed and/or undiagnosed migraine had a negative impact on worker productivity. Although one migraine prophylactic study found a statistically significant improvement in worker productivity for topiramate-treated patients, another found an insignificant difference in lisinopril-treated patients. Fifteen studies compared the impact of triptan therapy with a control group. The control groups in these studies differed with regard to recall periods, time to follow-up, and types of questionnaires used. Almost all studies found that triptan therapy was associated with a statistically significant improvement in loss in worker productivity vs the control group. Health care professionals can reduce the impact of migraine on worker productivity with appropriate therapy. Researchers should collect presenteeism and absenteeism data, report results in units of time, use a validated instrument, carefully consider recall periods, and report worker productivity separately. In addition, patients with undiagnosed migraine should be included in disease burden studies. When evaluating effects of treatment on productivity, researchers should target well-controlled, double-blind studies and conduct productivity research for new treatments.
Article
(Headache 2011;51:839-842) Significant sex differences exist in migraine and other headache disorders. Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain these differences, including fluctuations in sex hormones and receptor binding, genetic factors, differences in exposure to environmental stressors, as well as differences in response to stress and pain perception; but how valid are some of these findings and can we improve the quality of research in this field? It is notable that the preponderance of animal pain studies use male subjects to study a predominantly female disorder. Furthermore, with respect to headache and migraine sex differences, limited data have been derived from animal models. Additionally, although sex differences (based on the categorization of male vs female) may be more routinely evaluated in clinical headache research than in the basic science research, greater attention to potential differences across the life cycle of women (ie, premenopausal vs postmenopausal differences) and menstrual cycle is warranted. In this manuscript we define the differences between “sex” and “gender” and highlight the importance of their application and use in headache research. The enhanced recognition and implementation of attention to sex differences throughout the hormonal and life-cycle phase in both human and animal research will only help to strengthen and further our understanding of migraine and may help guide the direction of future headache research.
Article
The aim of this review was to summarize population-based studies reporting prevalence and/or incidence of chronic migraine (CM) and to explore variation across studies. A systematic literature search was conducted. Relevant data were abstracted and estimates were subdivided based on the criteria used in each study. Sixteen publications representing 12 studies were accepted. None presented data on CM incidence. The prevalence of CM was 0-5.1%, with estimates typically in the range of 1.4-2.2%. Seven studies used Silberstein-Lipton criteria (or equivalent), with prevalence ranging from 0.9% to 5.1%. Three estimates used migraine that occurred ≥15 days per month, with prevalence ranging from 0 to 0.7%. Prevalence varied by World Health Organization region and gender. This review identified population-based studies of CM prevalence, although heterogeneity across studies and lack of data from certain regions leaves an incomplete picture. Future studies on CM would benefit from an International Classification of Headache Disorders consensus diagnosis that is clinically appropriate and operational in epidemiological studies.
Article
Systematic scientific classification of primary headaches is inexact, relying on clinical features because the disorders lack diagnostic markers, although the International Headache Society classification has been successful in providing relatively homogenous clinical groups for pathophysiological and therapeutic studies. One area in which there have been particular difficulties and uncertainty is in classifying patients with frequent headache, particularly chronic daily headache. Clinical research on the topic is limited, and imprecise because of uncertainties of definition. Rigorous basic or applied clinical research is a rarity, attested to by a paucity of new publications in the past year. Accordingly, the scientific basis of chronic daily headaches remains to be determined. There is agreement on one issue: for headache specialists and neurologists this is an important clinical problem. We take the position that chronic daily headache is what it says--frequent headache. As hematologists make a diagnosis of anemia, which invites further investigation and sub-classification, neurologists might diagnose chronic daily headache not to imply that all its causes are the same but simply to begin the clinical process.
Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS)
The International classification of Headache Disorders, 2013, 3rd edition (beta version). Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS), Cephalalgia. 33(9),629-808.
About Nasal Cranial Release Technique (NCRT) / Cranial Facial Release (CFR): A Position Statement
  • C L Blum
Blum CL 2009. About Nasal Cranial Release Technique (NCRT) / Cranial Facial Release (CFR): A Position Statement.
Anatomical Observation of a Craniomandibular Muscle Originating from the Skull Base: The Sphenomandibularis
  • G F Dunn
  • G D Hack
  • W L Robbins
Dunn GF, Hack GD, Robbins WL, 1996. Anatomical Observation of a Craniomandibular Muscle Originating from the Skull Base: The Sphenomandibularis, Cranio. 14(2), 97-103.