Background: Three successive editions of the International Classification of Headache Disorders and multiple guideline papers on headache care have described evidence based diagnosis and treatment of headache disorders. It remains unknown, however, to which extent this has improved the diagnosis and management of headache. That was the aim of our study in which we also analysed differences between three social groups in Russia. Methods: We studied 1042 students (719 females, 323 males, mean age 20.6, age range 17-40), 1075 workers (146 females, 929 males, mean age 40.4, age range 21-67) and 1007 blood donors (484 females, 523 males, mean age 34.1, age range 18-64). We conducted a semi-structured, validated, face-to-face professional interview. Data on prevalence and associated factors have previously been published. A section of the interview focused on previous diagnosis and treatment, the topic of this paper. Results: Only 496 of 2110 participants (23%) with headache in Russia had consulted because of headache. Students consulted more frequently (35%), workers and blood donors less often (13% and 14%). Only 12% of the patients with ICHD-3beta diagnosis of migraine and 11.7% with ICHD-3beta diagnosis of tension-type headache (TTH) had previously been correctly diagnosed. Triptans were used by only 6% of migraine patients. Only 0.4% of migraine patients and no TTH patients had received prophylactic treatment. Conclusion: Despite existing guidelines about diagnosis and treatment, both remain poor in Russia. According to the literature this is only slightly better in Europe and America. Dissemination of existing knowledge should have higher priority in the future.