Chronic migraine

Classification and comparisons

Z. Katsarava, A. Manack, M. S. Yoon, M. Obermann, H. Becker, P. Dommes, C. Turkel, Richard B. Lipton, H. C. Diener

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

47 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The objective of our study was to field test different chronic migraine (CM) criteria and compare CM epidemiological profiles, which include demographic, personal, and lifestyle characteristics, with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM). Methods: Questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 18,000 18-65-year-olds in demographically diverse regions of Germany. The epidemiological data for the three classifications of CM, LFEM and HFEM were assessed using descriptive statistics, Pearson Chi-square, and analysis of variance tests. Results: Among 9350 respondents, CM-I was the most restrictive (N = 37, 0.4%), followed by CM-II (N = 45, 0.5%) and CM-III (N = 185, 2.0%). CM groups did not differ in distribution by age, gender, body mass index, education or smoking and alcohol consumption. Compared to those with LFEM and HFEM, those with CM (CM-III) had significantly different epidemiological profiles. Conclusions: CM prevalence varies by case definition. The epidemiological profiles of the three CM groups are similar but differ significantly from those of HFEM and LFEM. Optimal definitions for clinical practice and epidemiological research require additional field testing.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)520-529
Number of pages10
JournalCephalalgia
Volume31
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2011

Fingerprint

Migraine Disorders
Age Distribution
Alcohol Drinking

Keywords

  • Chronic migraine
  • classification
  • definition
  • epidemiology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Katsarava, Z., Manack, A., Yoon, M. S., Obermann, M., Becker, H., Dommes, P., ... Diener, H. C. (2011). Chronic migraine: Classification and comparisons. Cephalalgia, 31(5), 520-529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102410383590

Chronic migraine : Classification and comparisons. / Katsarava, Z.; Manack, A.; Yoon, M. S.; Obermann, M.; Becker, H.; Dommes, P.; Turkel, C.; Lipton, Richard B.; Diener, H. C.

In: Cephalalgia, Vol. 31, No. 5, 05.2011, p. 520-529.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Katsarava, Z, Manack, A, Yoon, MS, Obermann, M, Becker, H, Dommes, P, Turkel, C, Lipton, RB & Diener, HC 2011, 'Chronic migraine: Classification and comparisons', Cephalalgia, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 520-529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102410383590
Katsarava Z, Manack A, Yoon MS, Obermann M, Becker H, Dommes P et al. Chronic migraine: Classification and comparisons. Cephalalgia. 2011 May;31(5):520-529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102410383590
Katsarava, Z. ; Manack, A. ; Yoon, M. S. ; Obermann, M. ; Becker, H. ; Dommes, P. ; Turkel, C. ; Lipton, Richard B. ; Diener, H. C. / Chronic migraine : Classification and comparisons. In: Cephalalgia. 2011 ; Vol. 31, No. 5. pp. 520-529.
@article{ca9ad74fd50047ed9fd4b933005b9cf0,
title = "Chronic migraine: Classification and comparisons",
abstract = "Objective: The objective of our study was to field test different chronic migraine (CM) criteria and compare CM epidemiological profiles, which include demographic, personal, and lifestyle characteristics, with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM). Methods: Questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 18,000 18-65-year-olds in demographically diverse regions of Germany. The epidemiological data for the three classifications of CM, LFEM and HFEM were assessed using descriptive statistics, Pearson Chi-square, and analysis of variance tests. Results: Among 9350 respondents, CM-I was the most restrictive (N = 37, 0.4{\%}), followed by CM-II (N = 45, 0.5{\%}) and CM-III (N = 185, 2.0{\%}). CM groups did not differ in distribution by age, gender, body mass index, education or smoking and alcohol consumption. Compared to those with LFEM and HFEM, those with CM (CM-III) had significantly different epidemiological profiles. Conclusions: CM prevalence varies by case definition. The epidemiological profiles of the three CM groups are similar but differ significantly from those of HFEM and LFEM. Optimal definitions for clinical practice and epidemiological research require additional field testing.",
keywords = "Chronic migraine, classification, definition, epidemiology",
author = "Z. Katsarava and A. Manack and Yoon, {M. S.} and M. Obermann and H. Becker and P. Dommes and C. Turkel and Lipton, {Richard B.} and Diener, {H. C.}",
year = "2011",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1177/0333102410383590",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "520--529",
journal = "Cephalalgia",
issn = "0333-1024",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Chronic migraine

T2 - Classification and comparisons

AU - Katsarava, Z.

AU - Manack, A.

AU - Yoon, M. S.

AU - Obermann, M.

AU - Becker, H.

AU - Dommes, P.

AU - Turkel, C.

AU - Lipton, Richard B.

AU - Diener, H. C.

PY - 2011/5

Y1 - 2011/5

N2 - Objective: The objective of our study was to field test different chronic migraine (CM) criteria and compare CM epidemiological profiles, which include demographic, personal, and lifestyle characteristics, with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM). Methods: Questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 18,000 18-65-year-olds in demographically diverse regions of Germany. The epidemiological data for the three classifications of CM, LFEM and HFEM were assessed using descriptive statistics, Pearson Chi-square, and analysis of variance tests. Results: Among 9350 respondents, CM-I was the most restrictive (N = 37, 0.4%), followed by CM-II (N = 45, 0.5%) and CM-III (N = 185, 2.0%). CM groups did not differ in distribution by age, gender, body mass index, education or smoking and alcohol consumption. Compared to those with LFEM and HFEM, those with CM (CM-III) had significantly different epidemiological profiles. Conclusions: CM prevalence varies by case definition. The epidemiological profiles of the three CM groups are similar but differ significantly from those of HFEM and LFEM. Optimal definitions for clinical practice and epidemiological research require additional field testing.

AB - Objective: The objective of our study was to field test different chronic migraine (CM) criteria and compare CM epidemiological profiles, which include demographic, personal, and lifestyle characteristics, with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM). Methods: Questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 18,000 18-65-year-olds in demographically diverse regions of Germany. The epidemiological data for the three classifications of CM, LFEM and HFEM were assessed using descriptive statistics, Pearson Chi-square, and analysis of variance tests. Results: Among 9350 respondents, CM-I was the most restrictive (N = 37, 0.4%), followed by CM-II (N = 45, 0.5%) and CM-III (N = 185, 2.0%). CM groups did not differ in distribution by age, gender, body mass index, education or smoking and alcohol consumption. Compared to those with LFEM and HFEM, those with CM (CM-III) had significantly different epidemiological profiles. Conclusions: CM prevalence varies by case definition. The epidemiological profiles of the three CM groups are similar but differ significantly from those of HFEM and LFEM. Optimal definitions for clinical practice and epidemiological research require additional field testing.

KW - Chronic migraine

KW - classification

KW - definition

KW - epidemiology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953196522&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79953196522&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0333102410383590

DO - 10.1177/0333102410383590

M3 - Article

VL - 31

SP - 520

EP - 529

JO - Cephalalgia

JF - Cephalalgia

SN - 0333-1024

IS - 5

ER -