Evidence Hub

Clinical practice for migraine treatment and characteristics of medical facilities and physicians treating migraine: Insights from a retrospective cohort study using a Japanese claims database

Tsubasa Takizawa, Takahiro Kitano, K. Togo, Reiko Yoshikawa, Masahiro Iijima

PLoS ONE, 2024

231,156 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

The real-world treatment patterns at medical facilities and their physicians’ specialties treating migraine have not been fully investigated in Japan. Therefore, a retrospective cohort study aimed to describe real-world clinical practice and treatment patterns in Japanese patients with migraine according to medical facilities and physicians’ specialties. Anonymized claims data of patients with migraine was obtained from JMDC Inc (January 2018-June 2023). Patient characteristics and treatment pattern according to medical facilities and physicians’ specialties treating migraine were evaluated. Of 231,156 patients with migraine (mean age [SD], 38.8 [11.8] years; females, 65.3%), 81.8% had the first prescription at clinics (CPs), 42.5% underwent imaging tests, 44.4% visited general internal medicine, and 25.9% consulted neurosurgery at initial diagnosis. Imaging tests were carried out at CPs with specialists (59.4%), hospitals (HPs) with specialists (59.1%), HPs (32.9%), and CPs (26.9%) without specialists. Overall, 95.6% received acute treatment while 21.8% received preventive treatment. At facilities with specialists compared to without specialists, triptans were more frequently prescribed (67.9% vs 44.9%) whereas acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were less frequently prescribed (52.4% vs 69.2%). Preventive treatment use was higher at facilities with specialists (27.4%) than without specialists (15.7%) and increased annually regardless of the type of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 231,156 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