» Articles » PMID: 38386246

Factors Associated with Patient Adherence to Biofeedback Therapy Referral for Migraine: An Observational Study

Overview
Publisher Springer
Date 2024 Feb 22
PMID 38386246
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Biofeedback has Grade A evidence for the treatment of migraine, yet few studies have examined the factors associated with patients' decisions to pursue biofeedback treatment recommendations. We sought to examine reasons for adherence or non-adherence to referral to biofeedback therapy as treatment for migraine. Patients with migraine who had been referred for biofeedback by a headache specialist/behavioral neurologist were interviewed in person or via Webex. Patients completed an enrollment questionnaire addressing demographics and questions related to their headache histories. At one month, patients were sent a follow-up questionnaire via REDCap and asked if they had pursued the recommendation for biofeedback therapy, their reasons for their decision, and their impressions about biofeedback for those who pursued it. Nearly two-thirds (65%; 33/51) of patients responded at one month. Of these, fewer than half (45%, 15/33) had contacted biofeedback providers, and only 18% (6/33) completed a biofeedback session. Common themes emerged for patients who did not pursue biofeedback, including feeling that they did not have time, concern for financial obstacles (e.g., treatment cost and/or insurance coverage), and having difficulty scheduling an appointment due to limited provider availability. When asked about their preference between type of biofeedback provider (e.g., a physical therapist or psychologist), qualitative responses were mixed; many patients indicated no preference as long as they took insurance and/or were experienced, while others indicated a specific preference for a physical therapist or psychologist due to familiarity, or prior experiences with that kind of provider. Patients with migraine referred for biofeedback therapy face numerous obstacles to pursuing treatment.

References
1.
Ashina M, Goadsby P, Reuter U, Silberstein S, Dodick D, Xue F . Long-term efficacy and safety of erenumab in migraine prevention: Results from a 5-year, open-label treatment phase of a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Neurol. 2021; 28(5):1716-1725. PMC: 8248354. DOI: 10.1111/ene.14715. View

2.
Barbanti P, Egeo G, Aurilia C, Torelli P, Finocchi C, dOnofrio F . Early and sustained efficacy of fremanezumab over 24-weeks in migraine patients with multiple preventive treatment failures: the multicenter, prospective, real-life FRIEND2 study. J Headache Pain. 2023; 24(1):30. PMC: 10035286. DOI: 10.1186/s10194-023-01561-w. View

3.
Bastien C, Vallieres A, Morin C . Validation of the Insomnia Severity Index as an outcome measure for insomnia research. Sleep Med. 2001; 2(4):297-307. DOI: 10.1016/s1389-9457(00)00065-4. View

4.
Corrigan P, Penn D . Lessons from social psychology on discrediting psychiatric stigma. Am Psychol. 1999; 54(9):765-76. DOI: 10.1037//0003-066x.54.9.765. View

5.
Dodick D, Loder E, Manack Adams A, Buse D, Fanning K, Reed M . Assessing Barriers to Chronic Migraine Consultation, Diagnosis, and Treatment: Results From the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study. Headache. 2016; 56(5):821-834. PMC: 5084794. DOI: 10.1111/head.12774. View