ID-Migraine™ questionnaire and accurate diagnosis of migraine

ABSTRACT

Objective

To analyze the applicability of the Portuguese version of ID-Migraine^TM in a sample of Brazilian patients.

Methods

Patients with headache were recruited from the neurology outpatient clinic of a tertiary hospital and submitted to the ID-Migraine^TM questionnaire. The diagnosis of headache was made according to the ICHD-2 criteria.

Results

Of the 232 patients, 86% had migraine. The questionnaire showed a sensitivity of 92% (95%CI, 88% to 95%), specificity of 60% (95%CI, 43% to 77%) and a positive predictive value of 93% (95%CI, 89% to 96%).

Discussion

Our results were similar to other international studies of the ID-Migraine^TM application. The Portuguese version is considered easy to use, and an appropriate screening tool for migraine diagnosis in our sample.

Conclusion

Considering the characteristics of our health system, we can infer that this questionnaire would be beneficial in a Brazilian primary care setting; however, more studies are necessary.

RESUMO

Objetivo

Analisar a aplicabilidade da versão em Português do ID-Migraine^TM em uma amostra de pacientes brasileiros.

Métodos

Pacientes com cefaleia foram recrutados no Ambulatório de Neurologia de um hospital terciário e submetidos ao questionário ID-Migraine^TM. O diagnóstico de cefaleia foi feito de acordo com os critérios da ICHD-2.

Resultados

Dos 232 pacientes, 86% tinham enxaqueca. O questionário apresentou sensibilidade de 92% (IC de 95% 88% a 95%), especificidade de 60% (IC de 95% 43% a 77%) e valor positivo preditivo positivo de 93% (IC 95 89% a 96%).

Discussão

Nossos resultados foram similares a outros estudos mundiais de aplicação do ID-Migraine^TM. A versão em Português é considerada de fácil utilização, sendo uma ferramenta adequada para triagem diagnóstica de migrânea em nossa amostra.

Conclusão

Considerando as características do nosso sistema de saúde, podemos inferir que este questionário seria útil nos serviços primários de saúde brasileiros, porém mais estudos são necessários.

migraine disorders - surveys and questionnaires - headache

transtornos de enxaqueca - inquéritos e questionários - cefaleia

• References

• 1 Stovner L, Hagen K, Jensen R, Katsarava Z, Lipton R, Scher A et al. The global burden of headache: a documentation of headache prevalence and disability worldwide. Cephalalgia. 2007;27(3):193-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2982.2007.01288.x
• 2 Queiroz LP, Peres MF, Piovesan EJ, Kowacs F, Ciciarelli MC, Souza JA et al. A nationwide population-based study of migraine in Brazil. Cephalalgia. 2009;29(6):642-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2982.2008.01782.x
• 3 Lipton RB, Scher AI, Kolodner K, Liberman J, Steiner TJ, Stewart WF. Migraine in the United States: epidemiology and patterns of health care use. Neurology. 2002;58(6):885-94. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.58.6.885
• 4 The International Headache Society. The international classification of headache disorders: 2nd edition. Cephalalgia. 2004;24(Suppl. 1):9-160.
• 5 Bigal ME, Bordini CA, Speciali JG. Etiology and distribution of headaches in two Brazilian primary care units. Headache. 2000;40(3):241-7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-4610.2000.00035.x
• 6 Vincent MB, de Carvalho JJ. Primary headache care delivery by nonspecialists in Brazil.. Cephalalgia. 1999;19(5):520-4. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-2982.1999.019005520.x
• 7 Diener HC, Limmroth V. Medication-overuse headache: a worldwide problem. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3(8):475-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00824-5
• 8 Bekkelund SI, Albretsen C. Evaluation of referrals from general practice to a neurological department. Fam Pract. 2002;19(3):297-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/19.3.297
• 9 Mathers CD, Bernard C, Iburg KM, Inoue M, Fat DM, Shibuya K et al. Global Burden of Disease in 2002: data sources, methods and results. 2004 [cited year month day] . Available from: http://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper54.pdf
• 10 Antonaci F, Nappi G, Galli F, Manzoni GC, Calabresi P, Costa A. Migraine and psychiatric comorbidity: a review of clinical findings. J Headache Pain. 2011;12(2):115-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10194-010-0282-4
• 11 Dahlof CG, Solomon GD. The burden of migraine to the individual sufferer: a review. Eur J Neurol. 1998;5(6):525-33. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-1331.1998.560525.x
• 12 Edmeads J, Mackell JA. The economic impact of migraine: an analysis is of direct and indirect costs. Headache. 2002;42(6):501-9. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-4610.2002.04262.x
• 13 Lipton RB, Stewart WF, von Korff M. Burden of migraine: societal costs and therapeutic opportunities. Neurology. 1997;48(3 Suppl 3):S4-9. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.48.3_Suppl_3.4S
• 14 Lipton RB, Dodick D, Sadovsky R, Kolodner K, Endicott J, Hettiarachchi J et al. A self-administered screener for migraine in primary care: the ID Migraine validation study. Neurology. 2003;61(3):375-82. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000078940.53438.83
• 15 Streel S, Donneau AF, Dardenne N, Hoge A, Bruyère O, Albert A et al. Validation of an extended French version of ID Migraine^TM as a migraine-screening tool. Cephalalgia. 2015;35(5):437-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102414544910
• 16 Brighina F, Salemi G, Fierro B, Gasparro A, Balletta A, Aloisio A et al. A validation study of an Italian version of the “ID Migraine”. Headache. 2007;47(6):905-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00628.x
• 17 Karli N, Ertas M, Baykan B, Uzunkaya O, Saip S, Zarifoglu M et al. The validation of ID Migraine screener in neurology outpatient clinics in Turkey. J Headache Pain. 2007;8(4):217-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10194-007-0397-4
• 18 Gil-Gouveia R, Martins I. Validation of the Portuguese version of ID-Migraine. Headache. 2010;50(3):396-402. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-4610.2009.01449.x
• 19 Cousins G, Hijazze S, Van de Laar FA, Fahey T. Diagnostic accuracy of the ID Migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Headache. 2011;51(7):1140-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.01916.x