Objective: To compare various exercise modalities’ efficacy on migraine frequency, intensity, duration, and disability. Background: Exercise has been shown to be an effective intervention to reduce migraine symptoms and disability; however, no clear evidence exists regarding the most effective exercise modalities for migraine treatment. Methods: A systematic review was performed in PubMed, PEDro, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Clinical trials that analyzed the efficacy of various exercise modalities in addressing the frequency, intensity, duration, and disability of patients with migraine were included. Eight network meta‐analyses based on frequentist (F) and Bayesian (B) models were developed to estimate the direct and indirect evidence of various exercise modalities. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence (CI) and credible intervals (CrI) were calculated for each treatment effect based on Hedge's g and p scores to rank the modalities. Results: We included 28 studies with 1501 migraine participants. Yoga (F: SMD −1.30; 95% CI −2.09, −0.51; B: SMD −1.33; 95% CrI −2.21, −0.45), high‐intensity aerobic exercise (F: SMD −1.30; 95% CI −2.21, −0.39; B: SMD −1.17; 95% CrI −2.20, −0.20) and moderate‐intensity continuous aerobic exercise (F: SMD −1.01; 95% CI −1.63, −0.39; B: SMD −1.06; 95% CrI −1.74, −0.38) were significantly superior to pharmacological treatment alone for decreasing migraine frequency based on both models. Only yoga (F: SMD −1.40; 95% CI −2.41, −0.39; B: SMD −1.41; 95% CrI −2.54, −0.27) was significantly superior to pharmacological treatment alone for reducing migraine intensity. For diminishing migraine duration, high‐intensity aerobic exercise (F: SMD −1.64; 95% CI −2.43, −0.85; B: SMD −1.56; 95% CrI −2.59, −0.63) and moderate‐intensity continuous aerobic exercise (SMD −0.96; 95% CI −1.50, −0.41; B: SMD −1.00; 95% CrI −1.71, −0.31) were superior to pharmacological treatment alone. Conclusion: Very low‐quality evidence showed that yoga, high‐ and moderate‐intensity aerobic exercises were the best interventions for reducing migraine frequency and intensity; high‐ and moderate‐intensity aerobic exercises were best for decreasing migraine duration; and moderate‐intensity aerobic exercise was best for diminishing disability.

Frailty is a key concept in geriatric care; yet its definition and assessment remain debated. Since the early 2000s, two main models have emerged: the Fried frailty phenotype, focusing on physical deficits, and the Mitnitski frailty index, which incorporates broader health factors. These divergent approaches have led to over 50 frailty instruments, reflecting the absence of a unified framework. This review explores the content, weighting, and scoring methods of frailty instruments, identifying potential concerns derived from this. This review exposes the overlap of frailty with other constructs including function, disability, morbidity, and sarcopenia. Many instruments lack content validity, and detect highly heterogeneous samples within and between scales, all labeled under the “frail” tag. This poses challenges to interpreting instrument responsiveness. In addition, frailty should not be considered a clinical entity with a unique etiology. This review discusses how the broad nature of frailty conflicts with modern paradigms of individualization and precision. They may be useful in primary care, but lack the specificity for secondary care evaluations. This article also discusses how the predictive validity of frailty should be interpreted with caution. Finally, we summarize our findings and propose a new definition of frailty, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the construct. The identified inconsistencies should serve as a guide for refining the concept of frailty, both in research and in its application to geriatric care.

The main objective was to perform a description of the potential biobehavioral factors that influence disability in patients with migraines and develop a multimodal physiotherapy treatment proposal incorporating therapeutic education and exercise prescription, applying a biobehavioral approach. This manuscript highlights the complex interplay between migraines and physical activity, with many migraine sufferers performing reduced physical activity, even during headache-free intervals. The kinesiophobia present in a significant portion of patients with migraine exacerbates functional disability and compromises quality of life. Psychological elements, especially pain catastrophizing, depression, and self-efficacy, further compound migraine-related disability. Addressing these issues requires a multidisciplinary approach that integrates physical activity and behavioral interventions. We propose a therapeutic education model of motor behavior that emphasizes the enhancement of therapeutic exercise outcomes. This model consists of the four following phases: (1) biobehavioral analysis of movement; (2) goal setting; (3) education about exercise benefits; and (4) movement education. A notable feature is the incorporation of motivational interviewing, a communication strategy that amplifies intrinsic motivation for change. Recent clinical guidelines have advocated for specific exercise modalities to ameliorate migraine symptoms. However, we highlight the importance of a tailored exercise prescription to maximize the benefits of exercise and reduce the possible adverse effects. The integration of exercise with other lifestyle recommendations, such as maintaining consistent sleep patterns and employing stress management techniques, is pivotal for improving outcomes in patients with migraine. Although evidence supports the benefits of these interventions in various painful conditions, further research is needed to establish their efficacy specifically for migraine management.

Objective: The goal of this study was to reach consensus about the best exercise prescription parameters, the most relevant considerations, and other recommendations that could be useful for prescribing exercise to patients with migraine. Methods: This was an international study conducted between April 9, 2022 and June 30, 2022. An expert panel of health care and exercise professionals was assembled, and a 3-round Delphi survey was performed. Consensus was reached for each item if an Aiken V Validity Index ≥ 0.7 was obtained. Results: The study included 14 experts who reached consensus on 42 items by the third round. The most approved prescription parameters were 30 to 60 minutes of exercise per session, 3 days per week of moderate-intensity continuous aerobic exercise, and relaxation and breathing exercises for 5 to 20 minutes every day. When considering an exercise prescription, initial exercise supervision should progress to patient self-regulation; catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, headache-related disability, anxiety, depression, physical activity baseline level, and self-efficacy could influence the patients’ exercise participation and efficacy; and gradual exposure to exercise could help improve these psychological variables and increase exercise efficacy. Yoga and concurrent exercise were also included as recommended interventions. Conclusion: From the experts in the study, exercise prescriptions should be adapted to patients with migraine considering different exercise modalities, such as moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, relaxation, yoga, and concurrent exercise, based on the patients’ preferences and psychological considerations, level of physical activity, and possible adverse effects. Impact: The consensus reached by the experts can help prescribe exercise accurately to patients with migraine. Offering various exercise modalities can improve exercise participation in this population. The evaluation of the patients’ psychological and physical status can also facilitate the adaptation of the exercise prescription to their abilities and diminish the risk of adverse events.

Background and Objectives: Exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) is a topic of interest in the scientific community. This umbrella review aimed to analyze EIH research and compare it with public dissemination on X. Materials and Methods: We selected relevant EIH reviews that included a healthy population or patients with pain and studied exercise interventions. A systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed, Web of Science, SciELO, PEDro, and Google Scholar, employing the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome strategy. Data were extracted and summarized, and methodological quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment Scale for Systematic Reviews, and risk of bias with the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool. The Physical Activity Guidelines Advisor Committee was employed for evidence synthesis. Simultaneously, advanced X website searches gathered EIH-related content for analysis. Information from posts on X was qualitatively analyzed and contrasted with evidence in the literature. Results: We included nine systematic reviews and 17 narrative reviews. Systematic reviews presented high methodological quality. However, half had low risk of bias, while the other half presented high risk of bias. The EIH in healthy participants was controversial for some exercise modalities, such as aerobic exercise, and the influence of psychological variables. Modalities, such as isotonic resistance exercise, showed favorable effects on hypoalgesia. However, in patients with musculoskeletal pain, different exercise modalities did not generate EIH. X analysis unveiled a considerable representation of science-related content, although with prevalent misinterpretations of scientific evidence. Conclusions: EIH has been extensively studied, yet the certainty of evidence remains limited. While some exercise modalities demonstrate hypoalgesic effects in asymptomatic individuals, these effects remain unverified in patients with musculoskeletal pain. Moreover, the analysis of social media content highlights frequent misinterpretations of scientific evidence, particularly conflating hypoalgesia with analgesia. This underscores the need for more precise, evidence-based communication on social media platforms.

Previous research has focused on the possibility of cervical dysfunction in migraine patients, similar to what is observed in patients with tension-type headaches. However, there is no evidence concerning the physical function of other body regions, even though lower levels of physical activity have been reported among migraine patients. The aim of this study was to compare cervical and extra-cervical range of motion, muscular strength, and endurance, as well as overall levels of physical activity, between patients with chronic migraine (CM) and asymptomatic participants. The secondary objective included the analysis of associations between CM-related disability and various physical and psychological variables. A total of 90 participants were included in this cross-sectional study: 30 asymptomatic participants (AG) and 60 patients with CM. Cervical and lumbar range of motion, strength and endurance, as well as handgrip strength were measured. Headache-related disability, kinesiophobia, pain behaviors, physical activity level and headache frequency were assessed through a self-report. Lower values were found in CM vs AG for cervical and lumbar ranges of motion (p < 0.05; effect sizes ranging from 0.57 to 1.44). Also, for neck extension strength (p = 0.013; d = - 0.66), lumbar strength (p < 0.001; d = - 1.91) and handgrip strength (p < 0.001; d = - 0.98), neck endurance (p < 0.001; d = - 1.81) and lumbar endurance (p < 0.001; d = - 2.11). Significant differences were found for physical activity levels (p = 0.01; d = - 0.85) and kinesiophobia (p < 0.001; d = - 0.93) between CM and AG. Headache-related disability was strongly associated with headache frequency, activity avoidance, and rest, which together explained 41% of the variance. The main findings of this study suggest that patients with CM have a generalized fitness deficit and not specifically cervical dysfunction. These findings support the hypothesis that migraine patients have not only neck-related issues but also general body conditions.