Table 1

Expert statements on outcome measures

Outcome measureExpert statementRanking after final round
MIDAS
  • Useful tool for measuring disability (2)

  • Difficult to use it for non-pharmacological interventions (3)

  • Should be simplified (1)

1
HIT-6
  • Short and simple to complete (1)

  • Disease-specific and includes functional and emotional disability (1)

  • Criticised for ‘its ability to identify the complexity of impact with which headache has on individuals’ (2)

  • In clinical practise this questionnaire is the most representative for change in headache frequency related to impact on daily life (1)

2
Headache frequency
  • Difference to diaries? (1)

  • Primary efficacy outcome measurement in the first, second and third IHS clinical trial guideline, thus, it is highly relevant (1)

3
NPRS
  • Very important measurement (1)

  • Not useful (for headache) (3)

  • Unlikely to capture the overall impact of headache (1)

  • Depends on self-report (1)

4
PDI
  • Not specific for headache (4)

  • Too general and too broad (1)

  • There is not cut-off point on what is defined as disability (1)

4
Headache diary
  • Number 1 in research for chronic (migraine) headache (1)

  • Headache diaries are extremely effective in monitoring headache and migraine patients in terms of efficacy outcomes. (1)

4
HDI
  • Time consuming (2)

  • Good tool for measuring (perception) of disability (2)

  • Poorly validated (1)

5
SF-36
  • Most useful tool for measuring general disability (4)

  • Not specific for headache/migraine (5)

  • Takes time to fill out (1)

6
FKMS
  • Unknown (2)

  • Probably not an outcome scale (1)

7
CF-PDI
  • Not familiar (1)

  • Specific for craniomandibular dysfunction not for headaches (2)

7
Dolo-test
  • The DoloTest has been tested on headache patients with regards to measuring pain and quality of life and was found to be valuable. The questionnaire also contains clear measuring with visual analogue scale (VAS) for each of the 8-items (1)

  • However, there seem to be a financial interest behind the technological constructions and interpretation which leads to question the applicability (1)

  • Also, the items probably only duplicate other validated tests for pain and quality of life (1)

7
Migraine specific quality of life
  • Important questionnaire to measure impact of migraine on daily life (2)

8
VR 12
  • Not a specific headache related questionnaire, but shows an insight in general health and well-being (3)

8
SF-MPQ
  • Not useful in headache/migraine (5)

  • Takes a lot of time and explanations (1)

  • Does not identify disability or the impact of headache on daily life (1)

8
FDI
  • Not useful for chronic migraine, because it is focused on problems related to cranio-mandibular dysfunction (3)

8
RoKoKo
  • Could not locate the English version (1)

8
BPI
  • Could be useful for patients with chronic migraine (1)

  • This questionnaire was developed for patients with cancer- the psychometric properties are not known for headache (1)

  • Not all questions are relevant to headache (1)

  • Not migraine-specific although it contains a few relevant questions (1)

8
  • Numbers behind statements indicate the number of experts expressing this opinion.

  • BPI, Brief Pain Inventory; CF_PDI, Craniofacial Pain and Disability Inventory; FDI, Functional Disability Inventory; FKMS, Fragebogen zu Kopfschmerzmanagement und Selbstwirksamkeit; HDI, Henry Ford Disability Index; HIT-6, Headache Impact Test; IHS, International Headache Society; McGill, McGill Pain Questionnaire; MIDAS, Migraine Disability Assessment Scale; MSQ, Migraine Specific Quality of Life; NPRS, Numerical Pain Rating Scale; NRS, Numerical rating Scale; PDI, Pain Disability Index; RoKoKo, Rostocker Kopfschmerz-Fragenkomplex; SF-36, Short Form 36; VAS, Visual Analog Scale; VR-12, Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey.