Dominique Valade

Bio: Dominique Valade is an academic researcher from French Institute of Health and Medical Research. The author has contributed to research in topics: Migraine & Trigeminal neuralgia. The author has an hindex of 19, co-authored 46 publications receiving 2952 citations.

Comparison of pain syndromes associated with nervous or somatic lesions and development of a new neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire (DN4)

Abstract: Few studies have directly compared the clinical features of neuropathic and non-neuropathic pains. For this purpose, the French Neuropathic Pain Group developed a clinician-administered questionnaire named DN4 consisting of both sensory descriptors and signs related to bedside sensory examination. This questionnaire was used in a prospective study of 160 patients presenting with pain associated with a definite neurological or somatic lesion. The most common aetiologies of nervous lesions (n=89) were traumatic nerve injury, post herpetic neuralgia and post stroke pain. Non-neurological lesions (n=71) were represented by osteoarthritis, inflammatory arthropathies and mechanical low back pain. Each patient was seen independently by two experts in order to confirm the diagnosis of neuropathic or non-neuropathic pain. The prevalence of pain descriptors and sensory dysfunctions were systematically compared in the two groups of patients. The analysis of the psychometric properties of the DN4 questionnaire included: face validity, inter-rater reliability, factor analysis and logistic regression to identify the discriminant properties of items or combinations of items for the diagnosis of neuropathic pain. We found that a relatively small number of items are sufficient to discriminate neuropathic pain. The 10-item questionnaire developed in the present study constitutes a new diagnostic instrument, which might be helpful both in clinical research and daily practice.

Suboccipital steroid injections for transitional treatment of patients with more than two cluster headache attacks per day: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Abstract: Summary Background Suboccipital steroid injections can be used for preventive treatment of cluster headache but few data are available for the efficacy of this approach in clinical trials. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of repeated suboccipital injections with cortivazol compared with placebo as add-on therapy in patients having frequent daily attacks. Methods In our randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at the Emergency Headache Centre in Paris, France, we enrolled adults aged 18–65 years with more than two cluster headache attacks per day. We randomly allocated patients to receive three suboccipital injections (48–72 h apart) of cortivazol 3·75 mg or placebo, as add-on treatment to oral verapamil in patients with episodic cluster headache and as add-on prophylaxis for those with chronic cluster headache, on the basis of a computer-generated list (blocks of four for each stratum). Injections were done by physicians who were aware of treatment allocation, but patients and the evaluating physician were masked to allocation. The primary outcome was reduction of the number of daily attacks to a mean of two or fewer in the 72 h period 2–4 days after the third injection. We assessed all patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the intention-to-treat analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00804895. Findings Between November, 2008, and July, 2009, we randomly allocated 43 patients (15 with chronic and 28 with episodic cluster headache) to receive cortivazol or placebo. 20 of 21 patients who received cortivazol had a mean of two or fewer daily attacks after injections compared with 12 of 22 controls (odds ratio 14·5, 95% CI 1·8–116·9; p=0·012). Patients who received cortivazol also had fewer attacks (mean 10·6, 95% CI 1·4–19·9) in the first 15 days of study than did controls (30·3, 21·4–39·3; mean difference 19·7, 6·8–32·6; p=0·004). We noted no serious adverse events, and 32 (74%) of 43 patients had other adverse events (18 of 21 patients who received cortivazol and 14 of 22 controls; p=0·162); the most common adverse events were injection-site neck pain and non-cluster headache. Interpretation Suboccipital cortivazol injections can relieve cluster headaches rapidly in patients having frequent daily attacks, irrespective of type (chronic or episodic). Safety and tolerability need to be confirmed in larger studies. Funding None.

Recommendations for headache service organisation and delivery in Europe

Abstract: Headache disorders are a major public-health priority, and there is pressing need for effective solutions to them. Better health care for headache—and ready access to it—are central to these solutions; therefore, the organisation of headache-related services within the health systems of Europe becomes an important focus. These recommendations are the result of collaboration between the European Headache Federation and Lifting The Burden: the Global Campaign against Headache. The process of development included wide consultation. To meet the very high level of need for headache care both effectively and efficiently, the recommendations formulate a basic three-level model of health-care organisation rationally spread across primary and secondary health-care sectors, taking account of the different skills and expertise in these sectors. They recognise that health services are differently structured in countries throughout Europe, and not always adequately resourced. Therefore, they aim to be adaptable to suit these differences. They are set out in five sections: needs assessment, description of the model, adaptation, standards and educational implications.

Recognition and Therapeutic Management of Migraine in 2004, in France: Results of FRAMIG 3, a French Nationwide Population‐Based Survey

Abstract: Objective.—To evaluate the proportion of migraineurs who are self-aware of their disease in France, to determine the factors (disability, quality of life, psychiatric comorbidities, and medical consultation) that may promote self-awareness of migraine, and to assess the influence of these factors on migraine attacks. Background.—New recommendations for migraine diagnosis and medical management were released in 2003 by the French medicoeconomic evaluation service (ANAES). In addition, the revised classification of headache disorders recently issued by the International Headache Society includes probable migraine as a form of migraine. However, strict and probable migraine now appear to be part of the same spectrum of disease. Methods.—Subjects with migraine (strict or probable) according to the revised classification were identified by a postal questionnaire from a large representative sample of the French adult population. Migraine-related disability was assessed using the MIDAS questionnaire, anxiety and depression by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) by the 8 concepts of the Short-Form 12 (SF-12) questionnaire. Migraine management was assessed according to the use of recommended or nonrecommended treatments, and treatment efficacy according to the set of 4 questions designed by the ANAES. Results.—Of the 10,532 subjects interviewed, 1,179 subjects (21.3%) were identified as migraineurs. Sixty percent of all migraine subjects were not self-aware that they had migraine. Medical consultation, duration of migraine history, severe intensity of attacks, impact on daily living, and female gender promoted self-awareness of migraine. On the other hand, HRQoL and anxiety and depression scores were not different between subjects self-aware or not self-aware of migraine. Only 20% of all migraine subjects were medically followed-up. Quality of the first medical consultation appears determinant for continued consulting. Subjects self-aware of migraine more frequently used recommended acute treatments of migraine, which proved more effective than nonrecommended treatments as assessed according to the ANAES set of questions. Conclusions.—Migraine medical diagnosis and follow-up remain low in France. Careful medical consultation is a prime factor for migraine subject self-awareness of migraine, continued consultation, and use of recommended medications for the treatment of migraine attacks.

Neuropathic pain Redefinition and a grading system for clinical and research purposes

Abstract: Pain usually results from activation of nociceptive afferents by actually or potentially tissue-damaging stimuli. Pain may also arise by activity generated within the nervous system without adequate stimulation of its peripheral sensory endings. For this type of pain, the International Association for the Study of Pain introduced the term neuropathic pain, defined as "pain initiated or caused by a primary lesion or dysfunction in the nervous system." While this definition has been useful in distinguishing some characteristics of neuropathic and nociceptive types of pain, it lacks defined boundaries. Since the sensitivity of the nociceptive system is modulated by its adequate activation (e.g., by central sensitization), it has been difficult to distinguish neuropathic dysfunction from physiologic neuroplasticity. We present a more precise definition developed by a group of experts from the neurologic and pain community: pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system. This revised definition fits into the nosology of neurologic disorders. The reference to the somatosensory system was derived from a wide range of neuropathic pain conditions ranging from painful neuropathy to central poststroke pain. Because of the lack of a specific diagnostic tool for neuropathic pain, a grading system of definite, probable, and possible neuropathic pain is proposed. The grade possible can only be regarded as a working hypothesis, which does not exclude but does not diagnose neuropathic pain. The grades probable and definite require confirmatory evidence from a neurologic examination. This grading system is proposed for clinical and research purposes.

painDETECT: a new screening questionnaire to identify neuropathic components in patients with back pain

Abstract: Objective: Nociceptive and neuropathic components both contribute to pain. Since these components require different pain management strategies, correct pain diagnosis before and during treatment is highly desirable. As low back pain (LBP) patients constitute an important subgroup of chronic pain patients, we addressed the following issues: (i) to establish a simple, validated screening tool to detect neuropathic pain (NeP) components in chronic LBP patients, (ii) to determine the prevalence of neuropathic pain components in LBP in a large-scale survey, and (iii) to determine whether LBP patients with an NeP component suffer from worse, or different, co-morbidities.Methods: In co-operation with the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain we developed and validated the painDETECT questionnaire (PD‐Q) in a prospective, multicentre study and subsequently applied it to approximately 8000 LBP patients.Results: The PD‐Q is a reliable screening tool with high sensitivity, specificity and positive pred...

Prevalence of chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics in the general population

Abstract: We conducted a large nationwide postal survey to estimate the prevalence of chronic pain with or without neuropathic characteristics in the French general population. A questionnaire aimed at identifying chronic pain (defined as daily pain for at least 3 months), evaluating its intensity, duration and body locations, was sent to a representative sample of 30,155 subjects. The DN4 questionnaire was used to identify neuropathic characteristics. Of the questionnaires, 24,497 (81.2%) were returned and 23,712 (96.8%) could be assessed. Seven thousand five hundred and twenty-two respondents reported chronic pain (prevalence=31.7%; [95%CI: 31.1-32.3]) and 4709 said the pain intensity was moderate to severe (prevalence=19.9%; [95%CI: 19.5-20.4]). Neuropathic characteristics were reported by 1631 respondents with chronic pain (prevalence=6.9%; [95%CI: 6.6-7.2]), which was moderate to severe in 1209 (prevalence=5.1% [95%CI: 4.8-5.4]). A higher prevalence of chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics was associated with middle age (50-64 years), manual professions and those living in rural areas. It was more frequently located in the lower limbs and its intensity and duration were higher in comparison with chronic pain without neuropathic characteristics. This large national population-based study indicates that a significant proportion of chronic pain patients report neuropathic characteristics. We identified distinctive socio-demographic profile and clinical features indicating that chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics is a specific health problem.