Controlled evaluation of the addition of cognitive strategies to a home-based relaxation protocol for tension headache

Authors

• Kenneth A. Appelbaum, State University of New York Albany
• Edward B. Blanchard, State University of New York Albany
• Nancy L. Nicholson, State University of New York Albany
• Cynthia Radnitz, State University of New York Albany
• Cynthia Kirsch, State University of New York Albany
• Denise Michultka, State University of New York Albany
• Virginia Attanasio, State University of New York Albany
• Frank Andrasik, State University of New York Albany
• Mark P. Dentinger, Albany Medical College

Abstract

Chronic tension headache sufferers were randomized in the approximate ratio of 2:2:1 to one of three regimens: (1) progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) training delivered as a largely home-based treatment; (2) PMR plus selected cognitive stress coping techniques, again delivered as a largely home-based treatment; or (3) a headache monitoring, wait-list control condition. All patients monitored headaches daily for at least 4 weeks before and after treatment. In general, the two active treatment groups were significantly improved relative to the wait-list control group on measures of reduction in headache activity and reduction in headache medication, derived from a daily headache diary, and on measures of clinically significant improvement. The two active treatment groups did not differ from each other on any measure. Thus, it appears that the addition of limited cognitive stress-coping techniques to PMR did not add significantly to treatment outcome utilizing the protocol described. © 1990 Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy. All rights reserved.

Publication Title

Behavior Therapy

Recommended Citation

Appelbaum, K., Blanchard, E., Nicholson, N., Radnitz, C., Kirsch, C., Michultka, D., Attanasio, V., Andrasik, F., & Dentinger, M. (1990). Controlled evaluation of the addition of cognitive strategies to a home-based relaxation protocol for tension headache. Behavior Therapy, 21 (3), 293-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80332-6