Decision‐making impairment under ambiguity but not under risk may underlie medication overuse in patients with chronic migraine

Author:

Lau Chi Ieong12345ORCID,Chen Wei‐Hung16,Wang Han‐Cheng17,Walsh Vincent2

Affiliation:

1. Dementia Center, Department of Neurology Shin Kong Wu Ho‐Su Memorial Hospital Taipei Taiwan

2. Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Group Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London London UK

3. Institute of Biophotonics National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University Taipei Taiwan

4. College of Medicine Fu‐Jen Catholic University New Taipei City Taiwan

5. Department of Medicine University Hospital Taipa Macau

6. College of Medicine Taipei Medical University Taipei Taiwan

7. College of Medicine National Taiwan University Taipei Taiwan

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo explore whether patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse headache (CM + MOH) present with decision‐making deficit.BackgroundFactors underlying MOH in patients with CM remain unclear. Whether the process of decision‐making plays a role in MOH is still controversial. Decision‐making varies in the degree of uncertainty: under ambiguity where the probability of outcome is unknown, and under risk where probabilities are known.MethodsDecisions under ambiguity and risk were assessed with the Iowa Gambling Task and the Cambridge Gambling Task, respectively, whereas executive function was assessed by the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test.ResultsA total of 75 participants: 25 patients with CM + MOH, 25 with CM, and 25 age‐ and sex‐similar healthy controls (HCs), completed this cross‐sectional study. There was no significant difference in headache profiles except for more frequent analgesic use (mean ± SD: 23.5 ± 7.6 vs. 6.8 ± 3.4 days; p < 0.001) and higher Severity of Dependence Scores (median [25th−75th percentile]: 8 [5–11] vs. 1 [0–4]; p < 0.001) in patients with CM + MOH compared to CM. Total net score (mean ± SD) on the Iowa Gambling Task in patients with CM + MOH, CM, and HCs were − 8.1 ± 28.7, 10.9 ± 29.6, and 14.2 ± 28.8, respectively. There was a significant difference between the three groups (F(2, 72) = 4.28, p = 0.017), with patients with CM + MOH making significantly more disadvantageous decisions than patients with CM (p = 0.024) and HCs (p = 0.008), while the CM and HC groups did not differ (p = 0.690). By contrast, there was no significant difference between the groups in the Cambridge Gambling Task and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Furthermore, performance on the Iowa Gambling Task was inversely correlated with analgesic consumption (r = −0.41, p = 0.003), suggesting that decision‐making under ambiguity may be related to MOH.ConclusionsOur data suggest that patients with CM + MOH had impaired decisions under ambiguous, but not risky situations. This dissociation indicates disrupted emotional feedback processing rather than executive dysfunction, which may underlie the pathogenesis of MOH.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Neurology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3