The burden of headache disorders in North India: methodology, and validation of a Hindi version of the HARDSHIP questionnaire, for a community-based survey in Delhi and national capital territory region

Ashish Duggal, Debashish Chowdhury, Anand Krishnan, Ritvik Amarchand, Timothy J. Steiner
{"title":"The burden of headache disorders in North India: methodology, and validation of a Hindi version of the HARDSHIP questionnaire, for a community-based survey in Delhi and national capital territory region","authors":"Ashish Duggal, Debashish Chowdhury, Anand Krishnan, Ritvik Amarchand, Timothy J. Steiner","doi":"10.1186/s10194-024-01746-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Knowledge of the prevalence and attributable burden of headache disorders in India is sparse, with only two recent population-based studies from South and East India. These produced conflicting results. A study in North India is needed. We report the methodology of such a study using, and validating, a Hindi translation of the Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap, and Impaired Participation (HARDSHIP) questionnaire developed by Lifting The Burden (LTB). Almost half of the Indian population speak Hindi or one of its dialects. The study adopted LTB’s standardized protocol for population-based studies in a cross-sectional survey using multistage random sampling conducted in urban Delhi and a surrounding rural area. Trained interviewers visited households unannounced, randomly selected one adult member from each and applied the Hindi version of HARDSHIP in face-to-face interviews. The most bothersome headache reported by participants was classified algorithmically into headache on ≥ 15 days/month (H15 +), migraine (including definite and probable) or tension-type headache (including definite and probable). These diagnoses were mutually exclusive. All participants diagnosed with H15 + and a 10% subsample of all others were additionally assessed by headache specialists and classified as above. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of HARDSHIP diagnoses by comparison with the specialists’ diagnoses. From 3,040 eligible households, 2,066 participants were interviewed. The participating proportions were 98.3% in rural areas but 52.9% in urban Delhi. In the validation subsample of 291 participants (149 rural, 142 urban), 61 did not report any headache (seven of those assessed by HARDSHIP, eight by headache specialists and 46 by both) [kappa = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.74-0.91]. In the remaining 230 participants who reported headache in the preceding year, sensitivity, specificity and kappa with (95% CI) were 0.73 (0.65-0.79), 0.80 (0.67-0.90) and 0.43 (0.34-0.58) for migraine; 0.71 (0.56-0.83), 0.80 (0.730.85) and 0.43 (0.37-0.62) for TTH and 0.75 (0.47-0.94), 0.93 (0.89-0.96) and 0.46 (0.34-0.58) for H15 + respectively. This study validates the Hindi version of HARDSHIP, finding its performance similar to those of other versions. It can be used to conduct population surveys in other Hindi-speaking regions of India.","PeriodicalId":501630,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Headache and Pain","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Headache and Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s10194-024-01746-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Knowledge of the prevalence and attributable burden of headache disorders in India is sparse, with only two recent population-based studies from South and East India. These produced conflicting results. A study in North India is needed. We report the methodology of such a study using, and validating, a Hindi translation of the Headache-Attributed Restriction, Disability, Social Handicap, and Impaired Participation (HARDSHIP) questionnaire developed by Lifting The Burden (LTB). Almost half of the Indian population speak Hindi or one of its dialects. The study adopted LTB’s standardized protocol for population-based studies in a cross-sectional survey using multistage random sampling conducted in urban Delhi and a surrounding rural area. Trained interviewers visited households unannounced, randomly selected one adult member from each and applied the Hindi version of HARDSHIP in face-to-face interviews. The most bothersome headache reported by participants was classified algorithmically into headache on ≥ 15 days/month (H15 +), migraine (including definite and probable) or tension-type headache (including definite and probable). These diagnoses were mutually exclusive. All participants diagnosed with H15 + and a 10% subsample of all others were additionally assessed by headache specialists and classified as above. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of HARDSHIP diagnoses by comparison with the specialists’ diagnoses. From 3,040 eligible households, 2,066 participants were interviewed. The participating proportions were 98.3% in rural areas but 52.9% in urban Delhi. In the validation subsample of 291 participants (149 rural, 142 urban), 61 did not report any headache (seven of those assessed by HARDSHIP, eight by headache specialists and 46 by both) [kappa = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.74-0.91]. In the remaining 230 participants who reported headache in the preceding year, sensitivity, specificity and kappa with (95% CI) were 0.73 (0.65-0.79), 0.80 (0.67-0.90) and 0.43 (0.34-0.58) for migraine; 0.71 (0.56-0.83), 0.80 (0.730.85) and 0.43 (0.37-0.62) for TTH and 0.75 (0.47-0.94), 0.93 (0.89-0.96) and 0.46 (0.34-0.58) for H15 + respectively. This study validates the Hindi version of HARDSHIP, finding its performance similar to those of other versions. It can be used to conduct population surveys in other Hindi-speaking regions of India.
北印度头痛疾病的负担:在德里和国家首都地区开展社区调查的方法以及 HARDSHIP 问卷印地语版本的验证
有关印度头痛疾病的发病率和可归因负担的知识十分匮乏,最近仅在南印度和东印度开展了两项基于人口的研究。这些研究的结果相互矛盾。我们需要对北印度进行研究。我们报告了这项研究的方法,该方法使用了由 "减轻负担"(LTB)开发的 "头痛导致的限制、残疾、社会障碍和参与障碍(HARDSHIP)"问卷的印地语译文,并对其进行了验证。印度几乎有一半人口讲印地语或其中一种方言。该研究采用了 LTB 基于人口研究的标准化方案,在德里市区和周边农村地区进行了一次横断面调查,采用多阶段随机抽样。训练有素的访问员在不事先通知的情况下走访住户,从每个住户中随机抽取一名成年成员,采用印地语版 HARDSHIP 进行面对面访问。根据算法,将参与者报告的最令人烦恼的头痛分为每月≥15 天的头痛(H15 +)、偏头痛(包括明确和可能)或紧张型头痛(包括明确和可能)。这些诊断是相互排斥的。所有被诊断为 H15 + 的参与者以及所有其他参与者中 10% 的子样本均由头痛专家进行了额外评估,并进行了上述分类。我们将 HARDSHIP 诊断结果与专家诊断结果进行比较,从而估算出 HARDSHIP 诊断结果的敏感性和特异性。在 3,040 个符合条件的家庭中,有 2,066 人接受了访谈。农村地区的参与比例为 98.3%,而德里市区的参与比例为 52.9%。在 291 名参与者(149 名农村参与者,142 名城市参与者)的验证子样本中,有 61 人未报告任何头痛(其中 7 人由 HARDSHIP 评估,8 人由头痛专家评估,46 人同时由 HARDSHIP 和头痛专家评估)[kappa = 0.83;95% CI:0.74-0.91]。在剩余的 230 名报告在上一年出现过头痛的参与者中,敏感性、特异性和 kappa 值(95% CI)分别为 0.73(0.65-0.79)、0.80(0.67-0.90)和 0.73(0.74-0.91)[kappa = 0.83;95% CI:0.74-0.91]。偏头痛为 0.73(0.65-0.79)、0.80(0.67-0.90)和 0.43(0.34-0.58);TTH 为 0.71(0.56-0.83)、0.80(0.730.85)和 0.43(0.37-0.62);H15 + 为 0.75(0.47-0.94)、0.93(0.89-0.96)和 0.46(0.34-0.58)。本研究验证了印地语版 HARDSHIP,发现其性能与其他版本相似。它可用于在印度其他印地语地区进行人口调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信