Dataset Information

Effectiveness of Sequential Psychological and Medication Therapies for Insomnia Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Despite evidence of efficacious psychological and pharmacologic therapies for insomnia, there is little information about what first-line treatment should be and how best to proceed when initial treatment fails.

Objective

To evaluate the comparative efficacy of 4 treatment sequences involving psychological and medication therapies for insomnia and examine the moderating effect of psychiatric disorders on insomnia outcomes.

Design, setting, and participants

In a sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial, patients were assigned to first-stage therapy involving either behavioral therapy (BT; n = 104) or zolpidem (zolpidem; n = 107), and patients who did not remit received a second treatment involving either medication (zolpidem or trazodone) or psychological therapy (BT or cognitive therapy [CT]). The study took place at Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Québec, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada, and at National Jewish Health, Denver, Colorado, and enrollment of patients took place from August 2012 through July 2017.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary end points were the treatment response and remission rates, defined by the Insomnia Severity Index total score.

Results

Patients included 211 adults (132 women; mean [SD] age, 45.6 [14.9] years) with a chronic insomnia disorder, including 74 patients with a comorbid anxiety or mood disorder. First-stage therapy with BT or zolpidem produced equivalent weighted percentages of responders (BT, 45.5%; zolpidem, 49.7%; OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.60-2.33) and remitters (BT, 38.03%; zolpidem, 30.3%; OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.75-2.65). Second-stage therapy produced significant increases in responders for the 2 conditions, starting with BT (BT to zolpidem, 40.6% to 62.7%; OR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.14-5.30; BT to CT, 50.1% to 68.2%; OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.01-4.35) but no significant change following zolpidem treatment. Significant increase in percentage of remitters was observed in 2 of 4 therapy sequences (BT to zolpidem, 38.1% to 55.9%; OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.04-4.11; zolpidem to trazodone, 31.4% to 49.4%; OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 0.91-5.00). Although response/remission rates were lower among patients with psychiatric comorbidity, treatment sequences that involved BT followed by CT or zolpidem followed by trazodone yielded better outcomes for patients with comorbid insomnia. Response and remission rates were well sustained through the 12-month follow-up.

Conclusions and relevance

Behavioral therapy and zolpidem medication produced equivalent response and remission rates. Adding a second treatment produced an added value for those whose insomnia failed to remit with initial therapies.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01651442.

SUBMITTER: Morin CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7344835 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Chronic insomnia is a prevalent disorder associated with significant psychosocial, health, and economic impacts. Cognitive behavioral therapies (CBTs) and benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BzRA) medications are the most widely supported therapeutic approaches for insomnia management. However, few investigations have directly compared their relative and combined benefits, and even fewer have tested the benefits of sequential treatment for those who do not respond to initial insomnia therapy. Moreover, insomnia treatment studies have been limited by small, highly screened study samples, fixed-dose, and fixed-agent pharmacotherapy strategies that do not represent usual clinical practices. This study will address these limitations.This is a two-site randomized controlled trial, which will enroll 224 adults who meet the criteria for a chronic insomnia disorder with or without comorbid psychiatric disorders. Prospective participants will complete clinical assessments and polysomnography and then will be randomly assigned to first-stage therapy involving either behavioral therapy (BT) or zolpidem. Treatment outcomes will be assessed after 6 weeks, and treatment remitters will be followed for the next 12 months on maintenance therapy. Those not achieving remission will be offered randomization to a second, 6-week treatment, again involving either pharmacotherapy (zolpidem or trazodone) or psychological therapy (BT or cognitive therapy (CT)). All participants will be re-evaluated 12 weeks after the protocol initiation and at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-ups. Insomnia remission, defined categorically as a score < 8 on the Insomnia Severity Index, a patient-reported outcome, will serve as the primary endpoint for treatment comparisons. Secondary outcomes will include sleep parameters derived from daily sleep diaries and from polysomnography, subjective measures of fatigue, mood, quality of life, and functional impairments; and measures of adverse events; dropout rates; and treatment acceptability. Centrally trained therapists will administer therapies according to manualized, albeit flexible, treatment algorithms.This clinical trial will provide new information about optimal treatment sequencing and will have direct implication for the development of clinical guidelines for managing chronic insomnia with and without comorbid psychiatric conditions.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01651442 , Protocol version 4, 20 April 2011, registered 26 June 2012.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This review aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of psychological interventions for schizophrenia/bipolar disorder (BD), to determine the robustness of current evidence and identify gaps in the available evidence. METHODS:Electronic searches (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase) identified economic evaluations relating incremental cost to outcomes in the form of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio published in English since 2000. Searches were concluded in November 2018. Inclusion criteria were: adults with schizophrenia/BD; any psychological/psychosocial intervention (e.g., psychological therapy and integrated/collaborative care); probability of cost-effectiveness at explicitly defined thresholds reported. Comparators could be routine practice, no intervention, or alternative psychological therapies. Screening, data extraction, and critical appraisal were performed using pre-specified criteria and forms. Results were summarized qualitatively. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42017056579). RESULTS:Of 3,864 studies identified, 12 met the criteria for data extraction. All were integrated clinical and economic randomized controlled trials. The most common intervention was cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT, 6/12 studies). The most common measure of health benefit was the quality-adjusted life-year (6/12). Follow-up ranged from 6 months to 5 years. Interventions were found to be cost-effective in most studies (9/12): the probability of cost-effectiveness ranged from 35-99.5 percent. All studies had limitations and demonstrated uncertainty (particularly related to incremental costs). CONCLUSIONS:Most studies concluded psychological interventions for schizophrenia/BD are cost-effective, including CBT, although there was notable uncertainty. Heterogeneity across studies makes it difficult to reach strong conclusions. There is a particular need for more evidence in the population with BD and for longer-term evidence across both populations.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The innovative treatment model Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) and its Norwegian adaptation, Prompt Mental Health Care (PMHC), have been evaluated by cohort studies only. Albeit yielding promising results, the extent to which these are attributable to the treatment thus remains unsettled. OBJECTIVE:To investigate the effectiveness of the PMHC treatment compared to treatment as usual (TAU) at 6-month follow-up. METHODS:A randomized controlled trial with parallel assignment was performed in two PMHC sites (Sandnes and Kristiansand) and enrolled clients between November 9, 2015 and August 31, 2017. Participants were 681 adults (aged ?18 years) considered for admission to PMHC due to anxiety and/or mild to moderate depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]/Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7] scores above cutoff). These were randomly assigned (70:30 ratio; n = 463 to PMHC, n = 218 to TAU) with simple randomization within each site with no further constraints. The main outcomes were recovery rates and changes in symptoms of depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) between baseline and follow-up. Primary outcome data were available for 73/67% in PMHC/TAU. Sensitivity analyses based on observed patterns of missingness were also conducted. Secondary outcomes were work participation, functional status, health-related quality of life, and mental well-being. RESULTS:A reliable recovery rate of 58.5% was observed in the PMHC group and of 31.9% in the TAU group, equaling a between-group effect size of 0.61 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.85, p < 0.001). The differences in degree of improvement between PMHC and TAU yielded an effect size of -0.88 (95% CI -1.23 to -0.43, p < 0.001) for PHQ-9 and -0.60 (95% CI -0.90 to -0.30, p < 0.001) for GAD-7 in favor of PMHC. All sensitivity analyses pointed in the same direction, with small variations in point estimates. Findings were slightly more robust for depressive than anxiety symptoms. PMHC was also more effective than TAU in improving all secondary outcomes, except for work participation (z = 0.415, p = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS:The PMHC treatment was substantially more effective than TAU in alleviating the burden of anxiety and depression. This adaptation of IAPT is considered a viable supplement to existing health services to increase access to effective treatment for adults who suffer from anxiety and mild to moderate depression. A potential effect on work participation needs further examination.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) treated with hemodialysis (HD) experience many distressing symptoms. One frequently reported symptom is insomnia. There are unique issues about HD treatments and schedules that disrupt regular sleep/wake routines and possibly contribute to the high severity of insomnia. Despite evidence for broad-ranging health effects of insomnia, very few clinical trials have tested the efficacy of treatments for HD patients. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is a recommended first-line therapy but largely inaccessible to HD patients in the United States, partly because they commit considerable amounts of time to thrice-weekly dialysis treatments. Another important reason could be the logistical and reimbursement challenges associated with providing behavioral health care at the dialysis center. CBT-I delivered by telehealth can overcome barriers to access, but its efficacy has never been rigorously tested for these patients. Pharmacotherapy is the most widely used treatment for insomnia; however, some drugs presently used are unsafe as they are associated with a higher risk for death for HD patients (benzodiazepines and zolpidem-like drugs). The efficacy and safety of other medications (trazodone) for the treatment of insomnia has never been tested for patients treated with HD.MethodsThis trial tests the short- and long-term comparative effectiveness of 6-week treatment with telehealth CBT-I, trazodone, or medication placebo. This will be accomplished with a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in which 126 participants treated with HD in community-based dialysis facilities with chronic insomnia will be assigned 1:1:1 to telehealth CBT-I, trazodone, or medication placebo, respectively; short-term effectiveness of each treatment arm will be determined at the end of 6-weeks of treatment and long-term effectiveness at 25-weeks. The primary and secondary patient-reported outcomes will be assessed with computer-based telephone interviewing by research scientists blinded to treatment assignment; additional secondary outcomes will be assessed by participant interview and actigraphy.DiscussionThis clinical RCT will provide the first evidence for the comparative effectiveness of two distinct approaches for treating chronic insomnia and other patient-reported outcomes for patients receiving maintenance HD.Trial registrationNCT03534284 May 23, 2018. SLEEP-HD Protocol Version: 1.3.4 (7/22/2020).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Primary insomnia (PI) is characterized by difficulties in initiating sleep or maintaining sleep, which lead to many serious diseases. Acupuncture for PI has drawn attention with its effectiveness and safety. However, the operation of choosing acupoints lacks scientific suggestion. Our trial aims to provide reference and scientific basis for the selection of acupoints and to explore its possible mechanism. METHODS:A patient-assessor-blinded, randomized and sham controlled trial was designed to compare the efficacy of 5-weeks acupuncture at a single acupoint, the combination of multi-acupoints, and a sham point. The Pittsburgh sleep quality index and Athens Insomnia Scale questionnaire were used for the primary clinical outcomes, while polysomnography was performed for the secondary clinical outcomes. The resting state functional MRI was employed to detect the cerebral responses to acupuncture. The brain activity in resting state was measured by calculating the fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (fALFF), which reflected the idiopathic activity level of neurons in the resting state. These results were analyzed by two factorial ANOVA test and post-hoc t-tests. RESULTS:The clinical outcomes suggest that acupuncture could improve clinical symptoms, and the combination of multi-acupoints might lead to a better clinical efficacy. The rs-fMRI results suggested that the brain activity of certain regions was related to the sleep experience, and acupuncture could regulate the activity of these regions. Furthermore, the combination of multi-acupoints could impact more regions which were influenced by the sleep experience. CONCLUSIONS:Acupuncture has been proven to be beneficial for PI patients, and the combination of multi-acupoints might improve its efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial has been registered on the U.S. National Library of Medicine (https://clinicaltrials.gov) ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02448602 . Registered date: 14/04/2015.