CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 90Migraine and Headache StudiesTemporomandibular Joint DisordersTraumatic Brain Injury Research

Efficacy of Biofeedback in the Treatment of Migraine and Tension Type Headaches

Mullally, William J.·2009·Pain Physician
DOI 10.36076/ppj.2009/12/1005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Biofeedback is an established non-pharmacologic technique commonly used in the treatment of migraine and tension type headaches. Multiple published studies have suggested that biofeedback is effective in reducing the frequency and severity of headaches, often allowing patients to decrease their dependence on medication. Studies have also suggested that biofeedback may effect a decrease in medical utilization. Objective: Assess the efficacy of biofeedback in reducing the frequency and severity of migraine and tension type headaches. Design: Randomized, prospective, single blind, single center controlled trial. Methods: Sixty-four patients with migraine with or without aura and/or tension type headaches, by ICHD-1 criteria, age 18 to 55, who had suffered from headaches for more than one year, were entered into the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive biofeedback in addition to the basic relaxation instruction or relaxation techniques alone. All patients received instruction in pain theory. Biofeedback training consisted of 10 50-minute sessions utilizing standard EMG feedback from the frontalis and trapezius muscles and temperature from the third finger of the dominant hand. Visual and auditory feedback was provided. Thirty-three patients were assigned to receive biofeedback plus the relaxation techniques and 31, the relaxation techniques alone. All patients were asked to respond to periodic questionnaires for 36 months. The primary analysis was an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The subsidiary analyses were not and the 11 subjects (7 in the relaxation alone and 4 in the biofeedback group) who received no treatment at all were analyzed and the results were qualitatively the same. Results: Patients who completed the program with education in pain theory and relaxation techniques showed a statistically significant decrease in the frequency and severity of the headaches in the first 12 months that continued to 36 months. Biofeedback provided no additional benefit, specifically no change in the frequency or severity of the headaches. After 3 months 48% of those in the relaxation group reported fewer severe headaches, while 35% of those in the biofeedback group reported fewer severe headaches; after 6 months, 52% of those in the relaxation group reported fewer severe headaches as compared with 57% reporting fewer severe headaches in the biofeedback group. The number of medications used by the patients and the utilization of medical care decreased in both groups over 36 months suggesting a regression to the mean. Limitations: Compliance was an issue throughout the study. Patients dropped out from the outset and that increased over time. Recovery of questionnaires was difficult and fewer were completed at each 3-month interval. Lack of a large control group who did not receive biofeedback or instruction in relaxation techniques. Conclusion: Biofeedback is an extremely costly and time-consuming treatment modality that, in our study, provided no additional benefit when compared to simple relaxation techniques alone, in the treatment of migraine and tension type headaches in adults. Key words: Biofeedback, relaxation techniques, tension type headache, migraine, pain program, non-pharmacologic treatment of headache

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.36076/ppj.2009/12/1005

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mullally, W. J.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Mullally, William J.
ORCID
Mullally, William J.
Venue
Pain Physician
Publisher
American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians
Published
2009-12-14
Volume
6;12
Issue
6;12
Pages
1005-1011
ISSN
  • 1533-3159 (ISSN-L)
  • 2150-1149
DOI
10.36076/ppj.2009/12/1005
OpenAlex
W2341749395
Cited by
90
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain Physician (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Migraine and Headache Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Complementary and Manual Therapy › Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
biofeedback, migraine, tension-type headache, relaxation techniques, EMG biofeedback, headache frequency, headache severity, medication use, health care utilization, regression to the mean, medication adherence, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Biofeedback, Psychology, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Migraine Disorders, Pain Measurement, Prospective Studies, Relaxation Therapy, Time Factors, Single-Blind Method, Tension-Type Headache, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review