A case of chronic migraine remission after chiropractic care

Journal of Chiropractic Medicine (2008) 7, 66–70 www.journalchiromed.com A case of chronic migraine remission after chiropractic care Peter J. Tuchin GradDipChiro, DipOHS, PhD⁎ Senior Lecturer, Department of Chiropractic, Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia Received 4 June 2007; received in revised form 18 February 2008; accepted 25 February 2008 Key indexing terms: Migraine; Chiropractic; Spinal manipulative therapy Abstract Objective: To present a case study of migraine sufferer who had a dramatic improvement after chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (CSMT). Clinical features: The case presented is a 72-year–old woman with a 60-year history of migraine headaches, which included nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia. Intervention and outcome: The average frequency of migraine episodes before treatment was 1 to 2 per week, including nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia; and the average duration of each episode was 1 to 3 days. The patient was treated with CSMT. She reported all episodes being eliminated after CSMT. The patient was certain there had been no other lifestyle changes that could have contributed to her improvement. She also noted that the use of her medication was reduced by 100%. A 7-year follow-up revealed that the person had still not had a single migraine episode in this period. Conclusion: This case highlights that a subgroup of migraine patients may respond favorably to CSMT. While a case study does not represent significant scientific evidence, in context with other studies conducted, this study suggests that a trial of CSMT should be considered for chronic, nonresponsive migraine headache, especially if migraine patients are nonresponsive to pharmaceuticals or prefer to use other treatment methods. © 2008 National University of Health Sciences. Introduction Migraine remains a common and debilitating condition. 1,2 It has an estimated incidence of 6% in males and 18% in females. 2 A study in Australia ⁎ Suite 222, Building E7A, Department of Chiropractic, Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia. Tel.: +61 2 9850 9380; fax: +61 2 9850 9389. E-mail address: [email protected]. found the cost to industry to be an estimated $750 million. 3 Lipton et al found that migraine is one of the most frequent reasons for consultations with general practitioners, affecting between 12 million and 18 million people each year in the United States. 4 The estimated cost in the United States is $25 billion in lost productivity due to 156 million full-time work days being lost each year.5 Recent information has suggested that these older figures above are still current, but also underestimated, because of many 0899-3467/$ – see front matter © 2008 National University of Health Sciences. doi:10.1016/j.jcme.2008.02.001 Chronic migraine remission sufferers not stating their problem because of a perceived poor social stigma. 6 The Brain Foundation in Australia notes that 23% of households contain at least one migraine sufferer. Nearly all migraine sufferers and 60% of those with tension-type headache experience reductions in social activities and work capacity. The direct and indirect costs of migraine alone would be about $1 billion per annum. 3 The Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) defines migraines as having the following: unilateral location, pulsating quality, moderate or severe intensity, and aggravated by routine physical activity. During the headache, the person must also experience nausea and/ or vomiting, photophobia, and/or phonophobia. 7 In addition, there is no suggestion either by history or by physical or neurologic examination that the person has a headache listed in groups 5 to 11 of their classification system. 7 Groups 5 to 11 of the classification system include headache associated with head trauma, vascular disorder, nonvascular intracranial disorder, substances or their withdrawal, noncephalic infection, or metabolic disorder, or with disorders of cranium, neck, eyes, nose, sinuses, teeth, mouth, or other facial or cranial structures. Some confusion relates to the “aura” feature that distinguishes migraine with aura (MA) and migraine without aura (MW). An aura usually consists of homonymous visual disturbances, unilateral paresthesias and/or numbness, unilateral weakness, aphasia, or unclassifiable speech difficulty.7 Some migraineurs describe the aura as an opaque object, or a zigzag line around a cloud; even cases of tactile hallucinations have been recorded. 8 The new terms MA and MW replace the old terms classic migraine and common migraine, respectively. The IHS diagnostic criteria for MA (category 1.2) is at least 3 of the following: 1) One or more fully reversible aura symptoms indicating focal cerebral cortex and/or brain stem dysfunction. 2) At least 1 aura symptom develops gradually over more than 4 minutes or 2 or more symptoms occurring in succession. 3) No aura symptom lasts more than 60 minutes. 4) Headache follows aura with a free interval of less than 60 minutes. Migraine is often still nonresponsive to treatment. 9 However, several studies have demonstrated statisti- 67 cally significant reduction in migraines after chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (CSMT). 10-15 This article will discuss a patient presenting with MW and her response after CSMT. The discussion will also outline specific diagnostic criteria for migraine and other headaches relevant to chiropractors, osteopaths, or other health practitioners. Case report A 72-year–old 61-kg white woman presented with migraine headaches that had commenced in early childhood (approximately 12 years old). The patient could not relate anything to the commencement of her migraines, although she believed there was a family history (father) of the condition. During the history, the patient stated that she suffered regular migraine headaches (1-2 per week) with which she also experienced nausea, vomiting, vertigo, and photophobia. She needed to cease activities to alleviate the symptoms, and she often required acetaminophen and codeine medication (25 mg) or sumatriptan succinate for pain relief. The patient was also taking verapamil (calcium ion antagonist, for essential hypertension), calcitriol (calcium uptake, for osteoporosis), pnuemenium on a daily basis, and carbamazipine (antiepileptic, neurotropic medication) twice daily. The patient reported that an average episode lasted 1 to 3 days and that she could not perform activities of daily living for a minimum of 12 hours. In addition, a visual analogue scale score for an average episode was 8.5 out of a possible maximum score of 10, corresponding to a description of “terrible” pain. The patient noted that stress or tension would precipitate a migraine and that light and noise aggravated her condition. She described the migraine as a throbbing head pain located in the parietotemporal region and was always left-sided. The patient had a previous history of a pulmonary embolism (2 years before treatment) and had a partial hysterectomy 4 years before treatment. She also stated she had hypertension that was controlled. She was a widow with 2 children, and she had never smoked. The patient had tried acupuncture, physiotherapy, substantial dental treatment, and numerous other medications; but nothing had changed her migraine pattern. She stated that she had never had previous chiropractic treatment. The patient also stated that she had been treated by a neurologist for “migraines” over many years. On examination, she was found to have very sensitive suboccipital and upper cervical musculature 68 P. J. Tuchin and decreased range of motion at the joint between the occiput and first cervical vertebra (Occ-C1), coupled with pain on flexion and extension of the cervical spine. She also had significant reduction in thoracic spine motion and a marked increase in her thoracic kyphosis. Blood pressure testing revealed she was hypertensive (178/94), which the patient reported was an average result (stage 2 hypertension using the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure 7 guidelines). Based on the IHS Headache Classification Committee classification and diagnostic criteria, the patient had an MW–category 1.1, previously called common migraine (Table 1). This appeared secondary to moderate cervical segmental dysfunction with mild to moderate suboccipital and cervical paraspinal myofibrosis. The patient received CSMT (diversified chiropractic “adjustments”) to her Occ-C1 joint, upper thoracic spine (T2 through T7), and the affected hypertonic musculature. Hypertonic muscles were released through gentle massage and stretching. An initial course of 8 treatments was conducted at a frequency of twice a week for 4 weeks. The treatment program also included recording several features for every migraine episode. This included frequency, visual analogue scores, episode duration, medication, and time before they could return to normal activities. Table 1 Headache classifications (IHS Headache Classification Committee) Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 Category 5 Category 6 Category 7 Category 8 Category 9 Category 10 Category 11 Category 12 Category 13 Migraine Tension-Type Headache Cluster Headache and Chronic Paroxysmal Hemicrania Miscellaneous Headaches Unassociated With Structural Lesion Headache Associated With Head Trauma Headache Associated With Vascular Disorder Headache Associated With Nonvascular Intracranial Disorder Headache Associated With Substances or Their Withdrawal Headache Associated With Noncephilic Infection Headache Associated With Metabolic Disorder Headache or Neck Pain Associated With Disorder of Cranium, Neck, Eyes, Nose, Sinuses, Teeth, Mouth, or Other Facial or Cranial Structures Cranial Neuralgias Headache Not Classifiable Table 2 Category 1: migraine (IHS Headache Classification Committee) 1.1 MW 1.2 MA 1.2.1 Migraine With Typical Aura 1.2.2 Migraine With Prolonged Aura 1.2.3 Facial Hemiplegic Migraine 1.2.4 Basilar Migraine 1.2.5 Migraine Aura Without Headache 1.2.6 Migraine With Acute Onset Aura 1.3 Ophthalmoplegic Migraine 1.4 Retinal Migraine 1.5 Childhood Periodic Syndromes That May Be Precursors to Migraine 1.5.1 Benign Paroxysmal Vertigo 1.5.2 Alternating Hemiplegia 1.6 Complications of Migraine 1.6.1 Status Migrainous 1.6.2 Migrainous Infarction 1.7 Migrainous Disorder Not Fulfilling Above Criteria The patient reported a dramatic improvement after her first treatment and noticed a reduction in the intensity of her head and neck pain. This continued with the patient reporting having no migraines in the initial month course of treatment. Further treatment was recommended to increase her range of motion, increase muscle tone, and reduce suboccipital muscle tension. In addition, monitoring of her migraine symptoms was continued. A program of treatment at a frequency of once a week for a further 8 weeks was instigated. After the next phase of treatment, the patient noted much less neck tension, better movement, and no migraine. In addition, she no longer used pain-relieving medication (acetaminophen, codeine, and sumatriptan succinate) and noted that she did not experience nausea, vomiting, photophobia, or phonophobia (Table 2). The patient continued treatment at 2-weekly intervals and stated that, after 6 months, her migraine episodes had disappeared completely. In addition, she was no longer experiencing neck pain. Examination revealed no pain on active neck movement; however, a passive motion restriction at the C1-2 motion segment was still present. The patient is currently having treatment every 4 weeks, and she still reports no return of her migraine Chronic migraine remission 69 episodes or neck pain. The patient has now not experienced any migraines for a period of more than 7 years since her last episode, which was immediately before her having her first chiropractic treatment. Discussion Case studies do not form high levels of scientific data. However, some cases do present significant findings. For example, cases with long (chronic) and/ or severe symptomatology can highlight alternative treatment options. With case studies such as this, there is always a possibility that the symptoms spontaneously resolved, with no effective from the treatment. The case presented highlights a potential alternative treatment option. A 7-year follow-up revealed that the person had still not had a single migraine episode in this period. The patient was certain that there had been no other lifestyle changes that could have contributed to her improvement. She also noted that the migraines had stopped after her first treatment. The average frequency of her migraines before treatment was 1 to 2 per week, with episodes that always included nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia. In addition, the average duration of each episode was 1 to 3 days before her receiving CSMT. The person also noted that the use of her pain-relieving medication was also reduced by 100% (Table 3). Migraines are a common and debilitating condition; yet because they have an uncertain etiology, the most appropriate treatment regime is often unclear.16 Previous etiological models described vascular causes of migraine, where episodes seem to be initiated by a decreased blood flow to the cerebrum followed by extracranial vasodilation during the headache phase. 8 However, other etiological models seem connected with vascular changes related to neurologic changes and associated serotonergic disturbances. 9 Therefore, previous treatments have focused on pharmacological modification of blood flow or serotonin antagonist block. 17 Studies examining the role of the cervical spine to headache (ie, “cervicogenic headache”) have been well described in the literature. 18-30 However, the relation of the cervical spine to migraine is less well documen- Table 3 ted. 10-15 Previous studies by this author have demonstrated an apparent reduction in migraines after CSMT.10,11 In addition, other studies have suggested that CSMT may be an effective intervention for migraine. 14,15 Although, previous studies have some limitations (inaccurate diagnosis, overlapping symptoms, inadequate control groups), the level of evidence gives support for CSMT in migraine treatment. 11 However, practitioners need to be critically aware of potential overlap of diagnoses when reviewing migraine research or case studies on effectiveness of their treatment. 18-22 This is especially important in comparison of migraine patients who may be suitable for chiropractic manipulative therapy.23-28 Between 40% and 66% of patients with migraine, particularly those with severe or frequent migraine attacks, do not seek help from a physician. 29 Among those who do, many do not continue regular physician visits. 30 This may be due to patients' perceived lack of empathy from the physician and a belief that physicians cannot effectively treat migraine. In a 1999 British survey, 17% of 9770 migraineurs had not consulted a physician because they believed their condition would not be taken seriously; and 8% had not seen a physician because they believed existing migraine medications were ineffective. 30 The most common reason for not seeking a physician's advice (cited by 76% of patients) was the patients' belief that they did not need a physician's opinion to treat their migraine attacks. The case was presented to assist practitioners making a more informed decision on the treatment of choice for migraines. The outcome of this case is also relevant in relation to other research that concludes that CSMT is a very effective treatment for some people. Practitioners could consider CSMT for migraine based on the following: 1) Limitation of passive neck movements. 2) Changes in neck muscle contour, texture, or response to active and passive stretching and contraction. 3) Abnormal tenderness of the suboccipital area. 4) Neck pain before or at the onset of the migraine. 5) Initial response to CSMT. Summary of key changes for this case Patient Features Major Findings Before Treatment Post Treatment 72-Year–Old Female, Retired Chronic Recurring MA (A, N, S, Ph, Pn) 1-2 Migraines/wk (6-8/mo) Zero Migraines, Zero Medication A, Aura; N, nausea; Ph, photophobia; Pn, phonophobia; S, sinus problems. 70 As with all case reports, results are limited in application to larger populations. Careful clinical decision making should be used when applying these results to other patients and clinical situations. Conclusion This case demonstrates that some migraine sufferers may respond well with manual therapies, which includes CSMT. Therefore, migraine patients who have not received a trial of CSMT should be encouraged to consider this treatment and assess any potential response. Where there are no contraindications to CSMT, an initial trial of treatment may be warranted. Following evidence-based medicine guidelines, medical practitioners should discuss CSMT with migraine patients as an option for treatment. 31,32 Subsequent studies should address this issue and the role that CSMT has in migraine management. References 1. Bigal ME, Lipton RB, Stewart WF. The epidemiology and impact of migraine. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2004;4(2): 98-104. 2. Lipton RB, Stewart WF, Diamond ML, Diamond S, Reed M. Prevalence and burden of migraine in the United States: data from the American Migraine Study 11. Headache 2001;41: 646-57. 3. Alexander L. Migraine in the workplace. Brainwaves. Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Brain Foundation; 2003. p. 1-4. 4. Lipton RB, Bigal ME. The epidemiology of migraine. Am J Med 2005;118(Suppl 1):3S-10S. 5. Lipton RB, Bigal ME. Migraine: epidemiology, impact, and risk factors for progression. Headache 2005;45(Suppl 1): S3-S13. 6. Stewart WF, Lipton RB. Migraine headache: epidemiology and health care utilization. Cephalalgia 1993;13(suppl 12):41-6. 7. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache, Society. Classification and diagnostic criteria for headache disorders, cranial neuralgias and facial pain. Cephalgia 2004;24(Suppl 1):1-151. 8. Goadsby PJ, Lipton RB, Ferrari MD. Migraine—current understanding and treatment. N Engl J Med 2002;346:257-63 [PMID 11807151]. 9. Goadsby PJ. The scientific basis of medication choice in symptomatic migraine treatment. Can J Neurol Sci 1999;26 (suppl 3):S20-6. 10. Tuchin PJ, Pollard H, Bonello R. A randomized controlled trial of chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy for migraine. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2000;23:91-5. 11. Tuchin PJ. The efficacy of chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) in the treatment of migraine—a pilot study. Aust Chiropr Osteopath 1997;6:41-7. 12. Tuchin PJ, Bonello R. Classic migraine or not classic migraine, that is the question. Aust Chiropr Osteopath 1996;5:66-74. P. J. Tuchin 13. Tuchin PJ, Scwafer T, Brookes M. A case study of chronic headaches. Aust Chiropr Osteopath 1996;5:47-53. 14. Nelson CF, Bronfort G, Evans R, Boline P, Goldsmith C, Anderson AV. The efficacy of spinal manipulation, amitriptyline and the combination of both therapies for the prophylaxis of migraine headache. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1998;21: 511-9. 15. Parker GB, Tupling H, Pryor DS. A controlled trial of cervical manipulation for migraine. Aust NZ J Med 1978;8:585-93. 16. Dowson AJ, Lipscome S, Sender J. New guidelines for the management of migraine in primary care. Curr Med Res Opin 2002;18:414-39. 17. Ferrari MD, Roon KI, Lipton RB, et al. Oral triptans (serotonin 5-HT1B/1D agonists) in acute migraine treatment: a metaanalysis of 53 trials. Lancet 2001;358:1668-75. 18. Sjasstad O, Saunte C, Hovdahl H, Breivek H, Gronback E. Cervical headache: an hypothesis. Cephalgia 1983;3:249-56. 19. Vernon HT. Spinal manipulation and headache of cervical origin. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1989;12:455-68. 20. Sjasstad O, Fredricksen TA, Stolt-Nielsen A. Cervicogenic headache, C2 rhizopathy, and occipital neuralgia: a connection. Cephalgia 1986;6:189-95. 21. Bogduk N. Cervical causes of headache and dizziness. In: Greive GP, editor. Modern manual therapy of the vertebral column. 2nd ed. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh; 1994. p. 317-31. 22. Jull GA. Cervical headache: a review. In: Greive GP, editor. Modern manual therapy of the vertebral column. 2nd ed. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh; 1994. p. 333-46. 23. Boline PD, Kassak K, Bronfort G, et al. Spinal manipulations vs. amitriptyline for the treatment of chronic tension-type headaches: a randomized clinical trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1995;18:148-54. 24. Vernon H, Steiman I, Hagino C. Cervicogenic dysfunction in muscle contraction headache and migraine: a descriptive study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1992;15:418-29. 25. Kidd R, Nelson C. Musculoskeletal dysfunction of the neck in migraine and tension headache. Headache 1993;33:566-9. 26. Whittingham W, Ellis WS, Molyneux TP. The effect of manipulation (Toggle recoil technique) for headaches with upper cervical joint dysfunction: a case study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1994;17:369-75. 27. Jull G, Trott P, Potter H, Zito G, Shirley D, Richardson C. A randomized controlled trial of exercise and spinal manipulation for cervicogenic headache. Spine 2002;27:1835-43. 28. Bronfort G, Nilsson N, Assendelft WJJ, Bouter L, Goldsmith C, Evans R, et al. Non-invasive physical treatments for chronic headache (a Cochrane review). In: The Cochrane Library Issue 2 2003. Oxford: Update Software. 29. Dowson A, Jagger S. The UK migraine patient survey: quality of life and treatment. Curr Med Res Opin 1999;15:241-53. 30. Solomon GD, Price KL. Burden of migraine: a review of its socioeconomic impact. Pharmacoeconomics 1997;11(Suppl 1): 1-10. 31. Bronfort G, Assendelft WJJ, Evans R, Haas M, Bouter L. Efficacy of spinal manipulation for chronic headache: a systematic review. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2001;24: 457-66. 32. Vernon HT. Spinal manipulation in the management of tensiontype migraine and cervicogenic headaches: the state of the evidence. Top Clin Chiropr 2002;9:14-21.