Evidence Hub

Patterns of Migraine Disease in Otolaryngology: A CHEER Network Study

Schulz KA, Esmati E, Godley FA, Hill CL, Monfared A, Teixido M, Tucci DL, Witsell DL

Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2018

1,458 participants

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the prevalence of migraine disease in an otolaryngologic cohort and migraine-related otologic and sinonasal symptoms in this population. Study Design Cross-sectional study utilizing the CHEER (Creating Healthcare Excellence through Education and Research) network for recruitment. Setting Patients were recruited in a cross-sectional and pragmatic manner in 14 CHEER sites between June 2015 and March 2017 (9 academic, 5 community based). Subjects and Methods Patients were included if they were aged ≥18 years and seen for any concern that was not head and neck cancer. Patients with any history of brain abnormality or headaches that began within 2 weeks of a medical illness, trauma, or head injury were excluded. Patients were screened for migraine with a validated instrument. If they screened positive on the Migraine Assessment Tool (MAT+), the subjects also filled out validated and custom questionnaires for sinonasal, otologic, and migraine-specific symptoms. Results Of 1458 patients screened, 235 (16.1%) screened positive for migraine (MAT+), which is higher than general population (13%, P < .001). The MAT+ group was significantly younger (47.2 vs 55.6 years of age, P < .001) and predominantly women (80.0% vs 55.9%, P < .001). The MAT+ cohort commonly reported ear- and sinus-related symptoms, such as tinnitus (70.5%), ear pressure (61.9%), balance problems (82%), facial pressure (85%), and rhinorrhea (49.9%). There were significantly higher levels of sinus…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 1,458 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free