Conflict of Interest: Dr. Bigal is an employee of Merck Research Laboratories.
Cervical Mobility in Women With Migraine
Version of Record online: 9 SEP 2008
© 2008 the Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 American Headache Society
Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain
Volume 49, Issue 5, pages 726–731, May 2009
How to Cite
Bevilaqua-Grossi, D., Pegoretti, K. S., Goncalves, M. C., Speciali, J. G., Bordini, C. A. and Bigal, M. E. (2009), Cervical Mobility in Women With Migraine. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, 49: 726–731. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2008.01233.x
- Issue online: 27 APR 2009
- Version of Record online: 9 SEP 2008
- Accepted for publication June 19, 2008.
- transformed migraine;
- cervical mobility;
- cervical range of motion
Objective.— To contrast the cervical range of motion (CROM) in women with episodic migraine (EM), transformed migraine (TM), and controls without migraine headaches.
Background.— Migraineurs often complain about neck pain. Furthermore, neck problems can worsen the headaches in individuals with migraine. Individuals with neck pain usually have reduced CROM. Nonetheless, studies assessing the CROM in migraineurs are scarce.
Methods.— Our sample was selected in an outpatient headache clinic, and consisted of 45 women aged 20-54 years old, 15 per group. Cervical mobility was evaluated in movements of flexion, extension, right lateral flexion, left lateral flexion, right rotation, and left rotation using the CROM technique, and was contrasted among the groups. Migraine clinical patterns were also evaluated (frequency, duration of migraine, pain in the moment of evaluation, pain in movement, and pain localization) as a function of CROM.
Results.— Compared with controls, individuals with TM had numerically inferior CROM in all parameters, and significant reduction in 3 of them: extension (59.3 vs 68.1, P = .02), left lateral flexion (44.5 vs 49.1, P = .03), and right rotation (62.2 vs 69.6, P = .02). Compared with individuals with migraine, the TM group presented significantly reduced mobility only for extension (59.3 vs 68.4, P = .02). Migraineurs also had numerically inferior ROM, contrasted to controls, in 5 of the 6 parameters, although significance was seen just for right rotation (60.8 vs 68.6 P < .01). There was no correlation between cervical mobility and migraine parameters. The CROM was not reduced for the symptomatic side of migraine, in cases of unilateral pain.
Conclusion.— Contrasted to controls, individuals with episodic and TM have decreased cervical range of motion.