Evidence Hub

Differences in pharmacological migraine treatment across different levels of clinical headache care – a cross-sectional study

M. Fitzek, L. H. Overeem, Marlene Ulrich, Jaehwa Hong, C. Hoehne, K. S. Lange, Yones Salim, Uwe Reuter et al.

The Journal of Headache and Pain, 2025

1,047 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Migraine significantly impairs quality of life, reduces workplace productivity, and imposes a substantial socio-economic burden. The severity of migraine correlates with its impact on quality of life and healthcare costs, emphasizing the need for adequate management. In the past, primary care services often faced issues of inadequate treatment. This study evaluates differences in pharmacological recommendations for acute and preventive migraine treatments across primary, secondary, and tertiary care settings. This cross-sectional study involves patients with confirmed migraine (with or without aura) visiting the tertiary headache center at Charité Berlin between 12/2015 and 01/2023 for the first time. Data on headache characteristics and prior treatments for acute and prophylactic treatments at primary/secondary and recommendations from tertiary level of care were retrieved from medical letters written after first consultation. Among 1,047 migraine patients (42 years, 84% women), 99% had received treatment for acute migraine attacks by primary/secondary care facilities, and 96% were using it at their first consultation, with 63% advised to use a triptan. The average number of triptans tested prior to referral was 1 ± 0.99. Prophylactic treatment was prescribed to 52% of patients by primary/secondary care facilities, with an average of 1.2 ± 1.6 prior prophylactic attempts per patient, and 44% were actively using it at the time of consultation. More than two thirds of…

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: 1,047 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