Abstract
Background: Several patient-reported outcome measures are available to monitor headache impact, but are those reliable in real-life clinical practice? Methods: Two identical patient-reported outcome measures (HALT-90 and MIDAS) were applied simultaneously in each clinical visit to a series of patients treated with monoclonal antibodies for migraine and intra-individual agreement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: Our sample included 92 patients, 92.4% females, 45 years old on average. Moderate (0.50 to 0.75) and even poor (<0.50) ICC were observed in all but the first item of these patient-reported outcome measures in at least one evaluation. Over time, missing data were more frequent and no learning effect was detected. Discussion: We observed intra-personal variation in reliability when answering patient-reported outcome measures, persisting in repeated applications, and a decrease in the motivation to respond, which should alert clinicians for these additional challenges in real-life clinical practice.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 162-165 |
Number of pages | 4 |
Journal | Cephalalgia |
Volume | 42 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Feb 2022 |
Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- PROM
- Headache
- Migraine
- Outcomes evaluation
- Real-life clinical setting