Introduction
Migraine has been an insufficiently researched issue for a while, hence the lack of clarity in the present approaches toward treating it. Although there is a tendency to medicalize patients with migraine, there are indications that other solutions for managing chronic pain could produce even better results in the long term, preventing patients from developing dependency (Andersson, Persson, & Kjellgren, 2017; Skarstein, Lagerløv, Kvarme, & Helseth, 2016). In their articles, Lee, Choi, Choi, and Chung (2016) and Voicu et al. (2019) study the problem of chronic pain, namely, back pain and migraine, from the quantitative perspective. Although both studies employ the quantitative approach toward the research of pain, they manage to scrutinize the issue from different angles by posing unique questions and using specific analytical tools.
Critical Appraisal
Study Background
Despite sharing a common theme, the papers under analysis have unique backgrounds, which makes each a unique way of looking at chronic pain management. The problem at hand has been discussed quite many times from an array of viewpoints, yet only a few case-specific solutions have been located so far, which opens a plethora of areas to examine. Lee et al. (2016) explore the effects of caffeine on the alleviation of chronic pain in the back,
Compared to the problem that Lee et al. (2016) studies, the paper by Voicu et al. (2019) provide a different perspective on the issue of pain management. Namely, the authors outline the lack of research on the effects that the new treatment approach involving a combination of acetylsalicylic acid, caffeine, and acetaminophen produces on patients with chronic pain (Voicu et al., 2019). However, since both articles analyze the impact of a specific treatment on pain, their research problems could be seen as very similar. Likewise, the questions that they pose (“What effects do acetylsalicylic acid, caffeine, and acetaminophen have on pain management?” for Voicu et al. (2019) and “How caffeine affects the management of migraine?” (Lee et al., 2016)) seek to prove the same ideas. Moreover, the purpose and objectives of the studies, which are to analyze the effects of the proposed treatment on pain management, align fully. Finally, the significance of both papers is relatively high since they offer an opportunity to improve patients’ quality of life substantially.
Relation to PICOT
The current PICOT question can be stated in the following way: “What are the effects of caffeine on the performance of the analgesic drugs in adolescents subject to migraines?” Therefore, each of the articles mentioned above contributes to uniquely answering the PICOT question. For example, the research by Voicu et al. (2019) contributes to the analysis by providing information about managing pain with the help of a combination of specific medications. In turn, the results of Lee et al.’s (2016) analysis will provide the basis for answering the PICOT question more directly. Namely, the impact of caffeine on the management of migraine will be discussed in detail by using Lee et al.’s (2016) paper and the results of their analysis.
However, notably, the interventions and especially the target groups mentioned in the studies are quite different from each other. Specifically, Lee et al. (2016) center patients with migraine, who have opted for an increased caffeine intake in their research, which is the exact demographic mentioned in the PICOT question. In turn, Voicu et al. (2019) introduce an elaborate treatment approach while focusing on the needs of patients with chronic back pain, which does not align with the PICOT question for the most part. Thus, the target demographic of these studies is quite far from each other, only one of them resembling the participants mentioned in this PICOT question.
Method of Study
The methods used in the two articles are profound and effective for answering the research questions and proving the hypotheses. Namely, both the paper by Lee et al. (2016) and the one by Voicu et al. (2019) utilize the randomized controlled trial (RCT) as the method of comparing the proposed treatments. The use of the quantitative research method aligns with the nature of each study perfectly. The application of an RCT has several critical advantages, one of which involves the applicability of research results in any setting. The described characteristic of an RCT is developed due to the randomization of results. However, an RCT is also very demanding regarding time and resources.
Results of Study
Both articles have provided significant conclusions to consider when managing the issue of migraine or chronic pain, in general. The study conducted by Voicu et al. (2019) has shown that the suggested treatment based on ALG leads to effective management of pain in patients. Likewise, the research by Lee et al. (2016) explains that the discontinuation of caffeine intake causes a drop in painful experiences. The implications of the results stated above include the opportunities for alleviating pain in patients with migraine.
Outcomes Comparison
The PICOT for this study presently sets the anticipated outcomes of caffeine impeding the effective performance of pain management medications in adolescents with migraine. In the context of the PICOT question mentioned above, the studies under analysis provide enough evidence to suggest that the PICOT question should return results indicating the negative impact of caffeine. Specifically, the research results delivered by Lee et al. (2016) point to the problems with the increased caffeine intake and the management of chronic pain. Furthermore, the paper by Voicu et al. (2019) has provided the evidence that will offer the basis for evaluating the effects of caffeine on pain management. Namely, the research will allow analyzing the impact that the chemical constituents of caffeine produce on the patients’ ability to experience pain (Voicu et al., 2017). Overall, both articles are likely to have a significant role in answering the PICOT question above.
Conclusion
Although the studies under analysis arrive at similar results when being viewed through the lens of the problem of migraine and chronic pain, in general, they manage to deploy different analytical tools to introduce a new perspective to the issue. Both articles indicate that the inclusion of medications is essential for reducing the extent and frequency of pain experienced by patients, while also pointing to the harmful effects of their overuse. Moreover, the articles at hand suggest a new angle from which the management of pain can be viewed; namely, the inclusion of a new element into the treatment is recommended. Thus, both articles provide solutions to the issue of pain management despite
References
Andersson, M., Persson, M., & Kjellgren, A. (2017). Psychoactive substances as a last resort – A qualitative study of self-treatment of migraine and cluster headaches. Harm Reduction Journal, 14(1), 1-10. Web.
Lee, M. J., Choi, H. A., Choi, H., & Chung, C. (2016). Caffeine discontinuation improves acute migraine treatment: A prospective clinic-based study. The Journal of Headache and Pain, 17(1), 1-6. Web.
Skarstein, S., Lagerløv, P., Kvarme, L. G., & Helseth, S. (2016). High use of over-the-counter analgesic; possible warnings of reduced quality of life in adolescents – A qualitative study. BMC Nursing, 15(1), 1-11. Web.
Voicu, V. A., Mircioiu, C., Plesa, C., Jinga, M., Balaban, V., Sandulovici, R.,… Mircioiu, I. (2019). Effect of a new synergistic combination of low doses of acetylsalicylic acid, caffeine, acetaminophen, and chlorpheniramine in acute low back pain. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 10. Web.
Voicu, V. A., Mircioiu, I., Sandulovici, R., Mircioiu, C., Plesa, C., Velescu, B. S., & Anuta, V. (2017). Chlorpheniramine potentiates the analgesic effect in migraine of usual caffeine, acetaminophen, and acetylsalicylic acid combination. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 8(758), 1-11. Web.