Headaches in over 12s: diagnosis and management

New evidence

We found 28 new studies in a search for RCT and SRs published between 26 March 2014 and 18 May 2016. A further 2 studies were identified through post-publication communications.

Evidence identified in previous Evidence Update and surveillance 2 years after publication of the guideline was also considered. This included 14 studies identified by search.

From all sources, 44 studies were considered to be relevant to the guideline.

We also checked for relevant ongoing research, which will be evaluated again at the next surveillance review of the guideline.

See appendix A: summary of new evidence from surveillance and references for all new evidence considered.

Views of topic experts

We considered the views of topic experts, including those who helped to develop the guideline.

Views of stakeholders

Stakeholders are consulted only if we decide not to update the guideline following checks at 4 and 8 years after publication.

Stakeholders commented on the decision not to update the guideline. Overall, 7 stakeholders commented. See appendix B for stakeholders' comments and our responses.

Seven stakeholders commented on the proposal not to update the guideline. Three agreed or had no comments on the decision and four disagreed. Of the four who disagreed, one provided comments which were unclear and one did not provide details as to why they did not agree with the proposal not to update. One stakeholder requested an additional reference to TA260 which is currently linked to within the recommendations and the pathway. The final stakeholder queried one conclusion of the surveillance report around verum acupuncture for migraines, however the evidence identified in the surveillance review was for cluster headaches and therefore support current guideline recommendations. No new ongoing or published studies were identified by the consultees. One stakeholder disagreed with the decision to remove the research recommendation relating to pizotifen from the NICE version of the guideline and NICE research database; therefore this recommendation will be retained. One stakeholder disagreed with the proposal to remove four research recommendations and commented on the scope of the guideline and equality issues but did not give a clear reason as to their disagreement.

See ensuring that published guidelines are current and accurate in 'Developing NICE guidelines: the manual' for more details on our consultation processes.

NICE Surveillance programme project team

Sarah Willett
Associate Director

Philip Alderson
Consultant Clinical Adviser

Katrina Sparrow
Technical Adviser

Andrea Juliana Sanabria
Technical Analyst

The NICE project team would like to thank the topic experts who participated in the surveillance process.

ISBN: 978-1-4731-2158-4