Within mindfulness-based programs (MBPs), mixed results have been found for the role of childhood trauma as a moderator of depression outcomes. Furthermore, childhood trauma and PTSD symptoms have been identified as possible risk factors for the occurrence of meditation-related adverse effects (MRAE). The present research examined multiple forms of childhood trauma and PTSD symptoms as predictors of depression treatment outcomes and MRAEs. Various forms of childhood trauma (e.g., abuse and neglect) were examined as predictors of depression treatment outcomes and participant attrition using secondary analyses of two MBP clinical trials (N = 52 and 104, respectively). Study 2 also examined meditation-related side effects (MRSE) and MRAE as outcomes and current subclinical and past PTSD symptoms as predictors. Childhood trauma led to worse depression outcomes across both study 1 and study 2, such that total childhood trauma and childhood sexual abuse were significant predictors across both studies. Childhood sexual abuse predicted attrition in study 2. Finally, multiple forms of childhood trauma and PTSD symptoms predicted MRSE, while total childhood trauma, childhood emotional abuse, and subclinical PTSD symptoms predicted lasting MRAE. Childhood trauma and PTSD symptoms may lead to worse outcomes and a greater occurrence of adverse effects within MBPs for active depression. These results call for further trauma-sensitive modifications, safety monitoring, participant screening, and provider education when implementing these programs.

BACKGROUND:The Medicare Annual Wellness Visit (AWV) has high potential value depending on its implementation and clinical setting. We studied the perceived value of the AWV in a residency clinic providing care for underserved patients. METHODS:Qualitative interviews with both physicians and patients with deidentified transcription and immersion-crystallization analysis. RESULTS:Physicians and patients identified the following learning points: 1) preparing patients for the AWV; 2) aligning expectations and agenda; and 3) optimizing the value of the AWV given patients' competing demands. DISCUSSION:The Medicare AWV is a promising tool but needs thoughtful implementation to make it valuable in underserved trainee settings.

Background: Addressing health-related social needs (HRSNs) is a high-priority public health topic, but little is known about how HRSN and social care interventions relate to infant nutrition and obesity prevention.Methods: Conducted in-depth interviews in English or Spanish with parents of infants under age 2 years who completed HRSNs screening and providers-clinicians, health care staff, and community-based organization (CBO) representatives-engaged in social care interventions. A modified Chronic Care Model for Childhood Obesity served as the framework for the qualitative interview guide. We used immersion-crystallization during study team discussions, before and after coding, to conduct thematic analysis of the interview content.Results: All 20 interviewed parents were female, with a mean age of 31. Over half (60%) were born outside of the United States, and 70% identified as Hispanic/Latina. Among the 20 interviewed providers, seven were physicians, eight clinical staff members, and five CBO representatives. Participants recognized the connection between HRSNs and infant nutrition, linking HRSNs to food behaviors during infancy. Parents appreciated nutrition programs that allowed parental discretion when choosing food items and included nutritional education. Both groups stated that the end of COVID-19 pandemic relief policies heightened economic strain on parents, exacerbating HRSNs. CBOs were appreciated for providing services to families who might not qualify for federal programs.Conclusions: HRSNs interventions to mitigate childhood obesity risks should ensure that HRSNs are addressed with high-quality resources, expand parental choice in food programs, streamline documentation for social services enrollment, and liberalize income requirements for federal nutrition programs.

In 2018, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) established the original 19 Headache Centers of Excellence (HCoE) program, and an evaluation center. This study utilized a Veteran engagement group method to elicit input from Veteran patients living with chronic headache on daily needs, social determinants of health, and preferences and suggestions for headache programs, services, and research priorities. Four engagement groups were conducted between July 13 th and August 22 nd of 2022 with Veterans who experience headache and received care at a VHA HCoE. Engagement groups were audio-recorded, de-identified, transcribed, and analyzed using rapid qualitative content matrix analysis. Participants also completed a baseline survey on demographics, technology use, headache history, and health. Patients perceived care coordination, social support, gender specific preferences and access to complementary and integrative therapies to be important aspects of headache care delivered by HCoEs. Participants expressed strong interest in effective, interactive peer support groups to share and learn from each other's experiences with headaches and treatments. Findings underscore the demand for coordinated, interdisciplinary headache care integrating complementary health approaches and addressing gender-specific needs.

Sexual and gender minoritized (SGM) people, including but not limited to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) people assigned female at birth (AFAB), experience a greater burden of cervical cancer relative to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. However, they face pronounced systemic barriers to regular cervical cancer screening. Although evidence-based clinical guidelines play an integral role in the implementation of preventive measures, existing United States (U.S.) cervical cancer screening guidelines do not consider the specific experiences, needs, and contexts of SGM AFAB people concerning cervical cancer outcomes nor cervical cancer screening. Thus, it is imperative to determine how cervical cancer screening guidelines can be revised to better address the unique and specific cervical cancer prevention needs of SGM AFAB people in the U.S. We conducted virtual key informant interviews to elicit recommendations for advancing SGM health equity in developing and implementing cervical cancer screening guidelines from healthcare equity leaders (N = 18), including half with expertise in SGM AFAB people’s healthcare. Interviews were analyzed using a template-style thematic analysis approach to develop themes and sub-themes. Healthcare equity leaders provided three key recommendations for advancing SGM health equity in the development and implementation of U.S. cervical cancer screening guidelines. Healthcare equity leaders recommended prioritizing community and person-centered strategies, including engaging SGM communities in the development of the guidelines and using SGM-affirming approaches in their implementation. Revising language that (re)produces harmful normative and exclusionary assumptions about gender and sexuality in the context of cervical cancer screening guidelines was also recommended. Lastly, leaders recommended a range of strategies to mitigate systemic barriers to cervical cancer screening among SGM AFAB people, including collecting and utilizing representative data on SGM AFAB people’s needs, experiences, and contexts to develop the guidelines and ensure cultural responsiveness in the delivery of cervical cancer screening to SGM AFAB people across healthcare systems. This study's findings can contribute to improving and advancing health equity in cervical cancer screening for SGM AFAB populations through the community-centered development of inclusive, evidence-based guidelines and their person-centered implementation in clinical settings. Sexual and gender minoritized (SGM) people, including but not limited to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) people assigned female at birth (AFAB) experience a greater burden of cervical cancer relative to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts; yet, they face pronounced barriers to regular cervical cancer screening. Although clinical guidelines play an integral role in the implementation of preventive measures, including screening for cervical cancer, existing United States (U.S.) cervical cancer screening guidelines do not take into account the specific experiences, needs, and contexts of SGM AFAB people. Thus, it is imperative to determine how cervical cancer screening guidelines can be improved to better address the unique and specific cervical cancer prevention needs of SGM AFAB people in the U.S. We conducted virtual key informant interviews with healthcare equity leaders (N = 18) in medicine, public health research, and policy to learn more about the ways in which cervical cancer screening guidelines could better meet the needs of SGM AFAB people in the U.S. These healthcare equity leaders recommended (1) including the SGM AFAB community in the development of the guidelines (2), avoiding harmful assumptions about SGM people and cervical cancer risk in the guidelines and (3) implementing the guidelines in ways that reduce barriers and increase cultural responsiveness in cervical cancer screening among SGM AFAB people. These valuable insights from healthcare equity leaders provide actionable insights for improving SGM health equity in the development and implementation of U.S. cervical cancer screening guidelines.

PURPOSE Adoption has lifelong health implications for 7.8 million adopted people and their families in the United States. The majority of adoptees have limited family medical history (LFMH). Primary care physicians (PCPs) rarely receive training about adoptees including their mental health needs and increased suicide risk. The growing availability and popularity of direct-to-consumer genetic testing kits amplifies the need for PCPs to be prepared to address genetic testing for adoptees with LFMH. This study explores PCP training and approaches to adult adopted patients with LFMH. METHODS We used critical adoption studies as a theoretical framework for this study to understand how adoptive identity might shape clinical experiences. We recruited PCPs from Minnesota and Rhode Island via purposive, criteria-based, reputational sampling. We conducted hour-long semistructured qualitative interviews incorporating hypothetical clinical vignettes. Transcripts were coded via template organizing method and analyzed via Immersion-Crystallization. RESULTS We interviewed 23 PCPs. They reported receiving little training or resources on adult adoptees with LFMH and showed substantial knowledge gaps regarding mental health and genetic testing for this population. Many failed to adjust history-taking and primary care approaches, which they recognized as potentially resulting in inaccuracies, inappropriate clinical care, and microaggressions while inadvertently triggering anxiety, shame, and distrust among patients. A mismatch between adopted patients' and physicians' understandings of family medical history could strain the therapeutic relationship. Nearly all interviewees viewed additional training to care for adult adoptees with LFMH as beneficial. CONCLUSION Future research should expand education and training for PCPs on adult adoptees with LFMH.

Background Since headache specialists cannot treat all the patients with headache disorders, multidisciplinary teams that include health psychologists are becoming more prevalent. Health psychologists mainly use a form of cognitive -behavioral therapy (CBT), along with biofeedback on occasion, to effectively address patients' pain and headache disorders. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is one setting that routinely includes a health psychologist with advanced training in pain disorders in their pain care to its veterans. The VHA has established Headache Centers of Excellence (HCoE) around the country to provide multidisciplinary treatment for patients with headache disorders, which enables headache specialists to regularly interact with health psychologists. Objective The study's objective is to evaluate headache specialists' views of health psychologists in the treatment of patients with headache disorders. Method Semi -structured interviews were conducted with headache specialists in academic -based healthcare settings, the community, and VHA HCoE sites. The interviews were audio -recorded and de -identified so they could be transcribed and analyzed using content matrix analysis. Results Four themes emerged: headache specialists desired to work with health psychologists and included them as members of multidisciplinary teams; valued health psychologists because they provided nonpharmacological treatments, such as CBT and biofeedback; preferred in -person communication with health psychologists; and used multiple titles when referring to health psychologists. Conclusion Headache specialists valued health psychologists as providers of behavioral and non -pharmacological treatments and considered them essential members of multidisciplinary teams. Headache specialists should strive to work with a headache psychologist, not just a general health psychologist. By committing to this, headache specialists can foster changes in the quality of care, resource allocation, and training experiences related to health psychologists.

Phenomenon: Most medical schools in Indonesia have developed innovations to integrate public health content into the curricula. However, ensuring that all schools meet appropriate standards regarding the quality of subjects, content relevancy, and course delivery takes time and effort. Approach: This study employed a rapid assessment procedure to identify the current knowledge and competencies required to practice medicine effectively in underserved, border, and outer island areas of Indonesia. Ninety-three participants from six remote districts were involved in 12 focus group discussions. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis using the social determinants of health as a guiding framework. Findings: Under decentralized health system governance, the local socio-geographical context is critical to understanding the current public health landscape. Medical education with respect to public health must emphasize physicians' ability to advocate and encourage the coordination of healthcare services in responding to disasters, as well as community-based surveillance and other relevant data for synergistic disease control. As part of a healthcare facility management team, prospective doctors should be able to apply systems thinking and provide critical input to improve service delivery at local health facilities. Also, recognizing underlying factors is essential to realizing effective interprofessional collaboration practices and aligning them with leadership skills. Insights: This study outlines recommendations for medical schools and relevant colleges in formulating compulsory block or integrated public health curricula. It also provides a public health learning topic that may aid medical schools in training their students to be competent for practice in underserved, border, and outer island areas. Medical schools should offer initiatives for students to acquire the necessary public health competencies merited by the population's health needs.

BACKGROUND:Studies show interdisciplinary treatment is highly effective for addressing chronic pain syndromes, including headache disorders. Increasingly, advanced practice pharmacists work collaboratively with physicians to apply their unique skills to enhance patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE:This qualitative study aimed to elucidate the potential in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) for increased roles of clinical pharmacist practitioners (CPPs)-advanced practice pharmacists with a scope of practice-in collaborative, interdisciplinary headache care teams. Our research question was: How do CPPs integrate with interdisciplinary headache care teams in Headache Centers of Excellence (HCoE) and non-HCoE VHA facilities, and how can their roles be configured to optimize headache specialty care services? METHODS:This cross-sectional qualitative study used purposive sampling to recruit CPPs providing headache care within HCoEs and in non-HCoE VHA facilities for virtual, recorded, individual interviews. Multi-stage qualitative data analysis entailed: team discussions; immersion/crystallization for close reading of transcripts to identify emerging patterns of HCoE/non-HCoE comparison of CPPs' experiences; team data sorting using spreadsheets; and further immersion into sorted data for final identification of comparisons and interpretation of the data. RESULTS:A total of 15 CPPs involved in headache care were interviewed, with about half working in HCoEs and half in non-HCoE VHA facilities across the United States. CPPs' roles within and outside HCoEs have considerable overlap as both groups co-manage patients with headache with physicians. CPPs have independent and collaborative responsibilities as they extend headache specialists' services by providing direct patient care and referring to additional providers for headache treatment. When their roles differ within and outside HCoEs it is largely due to level of integration on interdisciplinary headache or pain teams. CPPs in HCoEs collaborate with headache neurologists and interdisciplinary teams; some outside HCoEs do as well, while others work with primary care. CPPs' weekly time dedicated specifically to headache tends to be greater in HCoEs. Nevertheless, most interviewees in both groups stated patient need exceeds CPP availability at their facilities for conducting detailed chart reviews, initial visits to understand the context of patients' headache, and scheduled follow-ups over time to monitor and adjust treatment. CPPs also consult with and educate physicians on headache pharmacy, particularly regarding appropriate use of non-formulary medications. CONCLUSION:Findings from this study suggest that CPPs' roles in headache care are valuable to clinical colleagues and their patients and should be leveraged and expanded within HCoEs and non-HCoE VHA facilities. When substantively integrated into interdisciplinary headache care teams, CPPs offer unique knowledge, headache management and patient behavior change skills, extend headache specialists' services, and provide both patient and physician education. These combined responsibilities contribute to enhancing patient outcomes and facilitating ongoing access to high quality, evidence-based headache care.

People assigned female at birth (AFAB) with minoritized racial/ethnic, sexual orientation, and gender identities experience notable barriers to high-quality sexual healthcare. In confronting these barriers, patient-provider communication can be a crucial factor, influencing patients' experiences and access to relevant sexual health information and services by determining the quality of care. However, research that investigates this communication among AFAB patients with minoritized social positions is scarce, indicating a research gap regarding the perspectives and roles of healthcare providers in addressing such barriers to care for minoritized patients. Thus, we conducted a qualitative research study, using individual in-depth interviews, to explore the multi-level factors that influence providers' attitudes, knowledge, and skills regarding sexual health communication with AFAB patients with minoritized racial/ethnic, sexual orientation, and gender identities. Interpreting study findings within frameworks of person-centered care, intersectionality, and structural competency, we identified three cross-cutting themes. We found that providers frequently drew on their prior professional training, personal lived experiences, and population-level health disparities data when engaging in sexual health communication with minoritized AFAB patients. Participants reported minimal explicit training in anti-racist and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+)-competent care as a significant barrier to engaging in equitable sexual health communication with minoritized AFAB patients, which was exacerbated by many providers’ lack of shared social positions and lived experiences with these patients. Providers also frequently applied population-level data to individual patients when formulating counseling and recommendations, which may undermine person-centered sexual health communication. Our findings suggest that critical anti-racist and LGBTQ+-competent provider training is urgently needed, and that health professional education and institutions must be transformed to better reflect and consider the experiences of patients with minoritized racial/ethnic, sexual orientation, and gender identities.

Purpose To gather and leverage the voices of students to drive creation of required, integrated palliative care curricula within undergraduate medical education in Massachusetts, which is lacking in a majority of U.S. medical schools. Method The study was conducted by the Massachusetts Medical Schools' Collaborative, a working group committed to ensuring all medical students in Massachusetts receive foundational training in serious illness communication (SIC) and palliative care. Eight focus groups (2 per participating medical school) were conducted during January-May 2021 and included a total of 50 students from Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Tufts University School of Medicine, and the UMass Chan Medical School. Data collected from focus groups were discussed and coded. Themes were identified using the immersion/crystallization qualitative data analysis approach. Results Six key themes emerged. Students viewed SIC as essential to high-quality medical practice regardless of specialty, and believed training in SIC skills and palliative care should be required in medical school curricula. Students preferred to learn and practice these skills using frameworks, particularly in real-world situations. Students recognized the expertise of palliative care specialists and described them as a scarce, often misunderstood resource in health care. Students reported it was mostly "luck" if they were included in family meetings and observed good role models. Finally, students desired practice in debriefing after difficult and emotional situations. Conclusions This study confirms long-standing themes on students' experiences with SIC and palliative care topics, including feeling inadequately prepared to care for seriously ill patients as future physicians. Our study collected students' perspectives as actionable data to develop recommendations for curricular change. Collaborative faculty also created recommendations based on the focus group data for immediate and ongoing SIC and palliative care curricular change in Massachusetts, which can apply to medical schools nationwide.

Abstract Background In the United States (U.S.), racially minoritized people have higher rates of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality compared to white individuals as a result of racialized structural, social, economic, and health care inequities. However, cervical cancer screening guidelines are based on studies of predominately white individuals and do not substantially discuss or address racialized cervical cancer inequities and their social determinants, including racism. Methods We conducted in-depth interviews with health care providers (N = 30) and key informants with expertise in health equity (N = 18). We utilized semi-structured interview guides that addressed providers’ views and experiences delivering cervical cancer screening to racially minoritized individuals and key informants’ recommendations for advancing racial equity in the development and implementation of cervical cancer screening guidelines. Interviews were analyzed using a template style thematic analysis approach involving deductive and inductive coding, memo writing, and matrix analysis for theme development. Results Most health care providers adopted a universal, one-size-fits-all approach to cervical cancer screening with the stated goal of ensuring racial equality. Despite frequently acknowledging the existence of racialized cervical cancer inequities, few providers recognized the role of social inequities in influencing them, and none discussed the impact of racism. In contrast, key informants overwhelmingly recommended that providers adopt an approach to cervical cancer screening and follow-up care that recognizes the role of racism in shaping racialized cervical cancer and related social inequities, is developed in partnership with racially minoritized communities, and involves person-centered, structurally-competent, and trauma-informed practices that address racially minoritized peoples' unique lived experiences in historical and social context. This racism-conscious approach is not to be confused with race-based medicine, which is an essentialist and racist approach to health care that treats race as a biological variable rather than as a social and political construct. Conclusions Developers and implementers of cervical cancer screening guidelines should explicitly recognize and address the impact of racism on cervical cancer screening, follow-up care, and outcomes, meaningfully incorporate racially minoritized communities' perspectives and experiences, and facilitate provider- and institutional-level practices that foster racial equity in cervical cancer.

Undocumented monolingual Spanish-speaking immigrants are one of the most vulnerable and marginalized groups to experience intimate partner violence (IPV) in the United States. This paper explores the barriers that prevent IPV disclosure in healthcare settings. Qualitative interviews (n = 14) were conducted with previously undocumented Spanish-speaking legal clients of a community domestic violence agency. The major barriers expressed by the interviewees regarding IPV screening and disclosure include limited opportunities for IPV screening, misinformation about legal rights from abusers, fear of deportation and separation from children, and lack of knowledge about resources.

Patients living with headache diseases often have difficulty accessing evidence-based care. Authors conducted a qualitative research study with 20 patients receiving headache care at seven Headache Centers of Excellence within the Veterans Health Administration to examine their experiences navigating headache care. This study employed thematic qualitative analysis and conducted cross-case comparisons. Several key findings emerged. 1) Most patients saw multiple healthcare providers over numerous years before reaching a headache specialist to manage chronic headaches. 2) Receipt of high-quality and comprehensive headache specialty care was associated with high satisfaction. 3) Patients with headache diseases reported oftentimes they experienced an arduous journey across multiple healthcare systems and between several healthcare providers before receiving evidence-based headache treatment that they found acceptable. Results demonstrate that most patients were satisfied with their current specialty headache care in the Veterans Health Administration. Authors discuss implications for future studies and highlight ways to improve patient satisfaction and timely access to appropriate headache care.

We examined the perspectives of expert headache psychologists to inform best practices for integrating headache psychologists into the care of children and adults with headache disorders within medical settings. Headache disorders are prevalent, chronic, and disabling neurological conditions. As clinical providers trained in evidence-based behavior change interventions with expertise in headache disorders, headache psychologists are uniquely positioned to provide behavioral headache treatment. In 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of expert headache psychologists working across the United States. Open–ended questions focused on their roles, clinical flow, and treatment content. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, de-identified, and analyzed using a rapid qualitative analysis method. We interviewed seven expert headache psychologists who have worked for an average of 18 years in outpatient settings with pediatric (n = 4) and adult (n = 3) patients with headache. The themes that emerged across the clinical workflow related to key components of behavioral headache treatment, effective behavioral treatment referral practices, and barriers to patient engagement. The expert headache psychologists offered evidence-based behavioral headache interventions such as biofeedback, relaxation training, and cognitive behavioral therapy emphasizing lifestyle modification as standalone options or concurrently with pharmacological treatment and were of brief duration. Participants reported many of their patients appeared reluctant to seek behavioral treatment for headache. Participants believed referrals were most effective when the referring provider explained to the patient the rationale for behavioral treatment, treatment content, and positive impact on headache activity, functioning, and quality of life. Barriers cited by participants to integrating headache psychology into headache care included the paucity of psychologists with specialized headache training, lack of insurance reimbursement, limited patient time to seek behavioral treatment, and inadequate patient knowledge of what behavioral treatment entails. Headache psychologists are often core members of multidisciplinary headache teams offering short-term, evidence-based behavioral interventions, both as a standalone treatment or in conjunction with pharmacotherapy. However, barriers to care persist. Enhancing referring providers’ familiarity with psychologists’ role in headache care may aid successful referrals for behavioral interventions for headache.

This article reports findings from a qualitative study of New York City faith leaders' efforts to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on their communities during the first two years of the pandemic. Faith leaders were recruited via reputational case sampling to participate in individual, key informant interviews. This study used a social-contextual approach to health promotion by exploring the influence of faith leaders and religious communities on health behaviors. Results suggest that engaged faith leaders worked individually and collaboratively to support the changing physical, emotional, and spiritual needs of their religious communities and those in the surrounding area. This study highlights the importance of faith leaders as supporters, communicators, and advocates, and provides directions for future research on the impact of faith leaders on individuals' experiences and health behaviors during a pandemic.

Primary care clinicians have an important role in the management of dementia and have expressed interest in continuing education. The authors describe a model they used for providing dementia education in primary care, Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes), and an overview of its major features. A partnership including academic institutions and a national healthcare association is then outlined, including the unique features of the ECHO model developed through this partnership. A mixed-methods methodology was used for programmatic evaluation. This use of mixed methods adds vital new knowledge and learner perspectives that are key to planning subsequent ECHO courses related to dementia and primary care. The discussion includes an exploration of the significance of these findings for understanding the motivations of primary care providers for participation in the educational program, as well as the limitations of the current study. A final section explores the next steps in the continued development of the model and its implications for geriatrics education in dementia care, especially the supportive role that ECHO courses can play in meeting the challenges of dementia care.

Background and Objective Comprehensive headache care involves numerous specialties and components that have not been well documented or standardized. This study aimed to elicit best practices and characterize important elements of care to be provided in multidisciplinary headache centers. Methods Qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of headache neurology specialists from across the US, using open-ended questions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Coded data were further analyzed using immersion/crystallization techniques for final interpretation. Results Mean years providing headache care was 17.7 (SD = 10.6). Twelve of the 13 participants held United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties headache certification. Six described their practice site as providing multidisciplinary headache care. Participants explained most of their patients had seen multiple doctors over many years, and had tried numerous unsuccessful treatments. They noted patients with chronic headache frequently present with comorbidities and become stigmatized. All participants asserted successful care depends on taking time to talk with and listen to patients, gain understanding, and earn trust. All participants believed multidisciplinary care is essential within a comprehensive headache center, along with staffing enough headache specialists, implementing detailed headache intake and follow-up protocols, and providing the newest medications, neuromodulation devices, botulinum toxin injections, monoclonal antibodies, nerve blocks and infusions, and treatment from a health psychologist. Other essential services for a headache center are other behavioral health practitioners providing cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness, biofeedback and pain management; and autonomic neurology, neuropsychology, vestibular audiology, sleep medicine, physical therapy, occupational therapy, exercise physiology, speech therapy, nutrition, complementary integrative health modalities, and highly trained support staff. Conclusion While headache neurology specialists form the backbone of headache care, experts interviewed for this study maintained their specialty is just one of many types of care needed to adequately treat patients with chronic headache, and this is best provided in a comprehensive, multidisciplinary center.