Mobile Behavioral Therapy for Headache: Pilot Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Frequently recurring tension headaches, migraines, and orofacial pain affect over 2.4 billion people worldwide, representing the second most prevalent medical condition in the world. In-office behavioral therapy (ie, relaxation and mindfulness exercises) has been shown to be one of the most effective treatment options for these patients. However, it has been underutilized due to stigma, cost, and accessibility. Mobile health apps may be one way to provide accessible, lower cost care in a nonstigmatized environment. As a result, apps are becoming an increasingly popular method for delivering behavioral therapy interventions and may provide an effective means to reach this population. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of delivering a clinically validated behavioral therapy for migraine/headaches through a mobile app. Methods: Twenty-one migraine or headache sufferers met the criteria for severe migraine disability determined by the MIDAS test. Participants completed a two-week baseline period in which they kept a daily headache diary through the Halo app. They then began a four-week intervention period. During this period they were instructed to complete ten minutes of relaxation training exercises provided by the app each day, as well as monitor headaches via the daily headache diary. Relaxation training exercises consisted of various breathing techniques, progressive muscle relaxation, and mindfulness. Headache frequency was tracked throughout the intervention period, and further assessments, such as an in-person interview and posttreatment MIDAS test, were completed at the end of the four-week intervention period. Results: Analysis of data showed that there were significant differences between baseline scores (Headache Frequency Average=11.47/mo, MIDAS average=25.4) and postintervention follow-up (Headache Frequency Average=6.63/mo, MIDAS average=11.7, Frequency P<.01, MIDAS P<.01). Postintervention interviews revealed that more than 90% of the participants felt that the Halo beta app was easy to use and provided a benefit to the user. More than 85% of participants enjoyed using a daily headache diary and felt it gave them greater insights into their condition. More than 90% of the patients felt that the relaxation training had helped reduce the frequency of their headaches or headache related disability. Conclusions: We found that mindfulness and relaxation-based interventions administered through the Halo beta app was a feasible and acceptable treatment for people suffering from frequently recurring headaches and migraines or disability associated with headaches and migraines. The pilot demonstrated the potential feasibility and usability of a mobile health app in delivering behavioral therapy for headache and migraine as an adjunct or alternative to in-office behavioral therapy for headache and migraine.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».