Comparing the Effects of Single- and Multiple-Component Therapies for Insomnia on Sleep Outcomes

Souraya Sidani, Dana Epstein, Mary Fox, Laura Collins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Single- and multiple-component therapies are recommended in professional guidelines for managing chronic insomnia. Systematic reviews point to insufficient evidence of the comparative effectiveness of these therapies, which is required for treatment decision making. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of three single-component and one multiple-component therapies on short-term sleep outcomes. Methods: The data were obtained from 517 persons with chronic insomnia, enrolled in a partially randomized preference trial. They were allocated to the single-component therapies: sleep education and hygiene (SEH), stimulus control therapy (SCT), and sleep restriction therapy (SRT), or the multiple-component therapy (MCT). The outcomes, perceived insomnia severity and sleep parameters, were assessed with established measures at pre and posttest. Repeated measure analysis of variance was used to compare the outcomes across therapy groups over time. The clinical relevance of the therapies’ effects was evaluated by examining the effect size and remission rate. Results: The four therapies differed in their effectiveness in reducing perceived insomnia severity and improving sleep outcomes. SEH was least effective. SCT, SRT, and MCT were moderately effective. SCT and SRT demonstrated slightly higher remission rates than MCT for perceived insomnia severity and some sleep parameters. Linking Evidence to Action: SCT and SRT are viable single-component therapies that produce clinical benefits. Single-component insomnia treatment may be more convenient to implement in the primary care setting due to the reduced number of treatment recommendations compared to MCT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)195-203
Number of pages9
JournalWorldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing
Volume16
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2019

Fingerprint

Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
Sleep
Therapeutics
Education

Keywords

  • behavioral therapy
  • clinical benefits
  • comparative effectiveness
  • insomnia
  • multicomponent therapy
  • perceived insomnia severity
  • sleep hygiene education
  • sleep outcomes
  • sleep restriction therapy
  • stimulus control therapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Comparing the Effects of Single- and Multiple-Component Therapies for Insomnia on Sleep Outcomes. / Sidani, Souraya; Epstein, Dana; Fox, Mary; Collins, Laura.

In: Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, Vol. 16, No. 3, 01.06.2019, p. 195-203.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{edb0879d6cd745438c5c661913c450b4,
title = "Comparing the Effects of Single- and Multiple-Component Therapies for Insomnia on Sleep Outcomes",
abstract = "Background: Single- and multiple-component therapies are recommended in professional guidelines for managing chronic insomnia. Systematic reviews point to insufficient evidence of the comparative effectiveness of these therapies, which is required for treatment decision making. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of three single-component and one multiple-component therapies on short-term sleep outcomes. Methods: The data were obtained from 517 persons with chronic insomnia, enrolled in a partially randomized preference trial. They were allocated to the single-component therapies: sleep education and hygiene (SEH), stimulus control therapy (SCT), and sleep restriction therapy (SRT), or the multiple-component therapy (MCT). The outcomes, perceived insomnia severity and sleep parameters, were assessed with established measures at pre and posttest. Repeated measure analysis of variance was used to compare the outcomes across therapy groups over time. The clinical relevance of the therapies’ effects was evaluated by examining the effect size and remission rate. Results: The four therapies differed in their effectiveness in reducing perceived insomnia severity and improving sleep outcomes. SEH was least effective. SCT, SRT, and MCT were moderately effective. SCT and SRT demonstrated slightly higher remission rates than MCT for perceived insomnia severity and some sleep parameters. Linking Evidence to Action: SCT and SRT are viable single-component therapies that produce clinical benefits. Single-component insomnia treatment may be more convenient to implement in the primary care setting due to the reduced number of treatment recommendations compared to MCT.",
keywords = "behavioral therapy, clinical benefits, comparative effectiveness, insomnia, multicomponent therapy, perceived insomnia severity, sleep hygiene education, sleep outcomes, sleep restriction therapy, stimulus control therapy",
author = "Souraya Sidani and Dana Epstein and Mary Fox and Laura Collins",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/wvn.12367",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "195--203",
journal = "Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing",
issn = "1545-102X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing the Effects of Single- and Multiple-Component Therapies for Insomnia on Sleep Outcomes

AU - Sidani, Souraya

AU - Epstein, Dana

AU - Fox, Mary

AU - Collins, Laura

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Background: Single- and multiple-component therapies are recommended in professional guidelines for managing chronic insomnia. Systematic reviews point to insufficient evidence of the comparative effectiveness of these therapies, which is required for treatment decision making. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of three single-component and one multiple-component therapies on short-term sleep outcomes. Methods: The data were obtained from 517 persons with chronic insomnia, enrolled in a partially randomized preference trial. They were allocated to the single-component therapies: sleep education and hygiene (SEH), stimulus control therapy (SCT), and sleep restriction therapy (SRT), or the multiple-component therapy (MCT). The outcomes, perceived insomnia severity and sleep parameters, were assessed with established measures at pre and posttest. Repeated measure analysis of variance was used to compare the outcomes across therapy groups over time. The clinical relevance of the therapies’ effects was evaluated by examining the effect size and remission rate. Results: The four therapies differed in their effectiveness in reducing perceived insomnia severity and improving sleep outcomes. SEH was least effective. SCT, SRT, and MCT were moderately effective. SCT and SRT demonstrated slightly higher remission rates than MCT for perceived insomnia severity and some sleep parameters. Linking Evidence to Action: SCT and SRT are viable single-component therapies that produce clinical benefits. Single-component insomnia treatment may be more convenient to implement in the primary care setting due to the reduced number of treatment recommendations compared to MCT.

AB - Background: Single- and multiple-component therapies are recommended in professional guidelines for managing chronic insomnia. Systematic reviews point to insufficient evidence of the comparative effectiveness of these therapies, which is required for treatment decision making. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of three single-component and one multiple-component therapies on short-term sleep outcomes. Methods: The data were obtained from 517 persons with chronic insomnia, enrolled in a partially randomized preference trial. They were allocated to the single-component therapies: sleep education and hygiene (SEH), stimulus control therapy (SCT), and sleep restriction therapy (SRT), or the multiple-component therapy (MCT). The outcomes, perceived insomnia severity and sleep parameters, were assessed with established measures at pre and posttest. Repeated measure analysis of variance was used to compare the outcomes across therapy groups over time. The clinical relevance of the therapies’ effects was evaluated by examining the effect size and remission rate. Results: The four therapies differed in their effectiveness in reducing perceived insomnia severity and improving sleep outcomes. SEH was least effective. SCT, SRT, and MCT were moderately effective. SCT and SRT demonstrated slightly higher remission rates than MCT for perceived insomnia severity and some sleep parameters. Linking Evidence to Action: SCT and SRT are viable single-component therapies that produce clinical benefits. Single-component insomnia treatment may be more convenient to implement in the primary care setting due to the reduced number of treatment recommendations compared to MCT.

KW - behavioral therapy

KW - clinical benefits

KW - comparative effectiveness

KW - insomnia

KW - multicomponent therapy

KW - perceived insomnia severity

KW - sleep hygiene education

KW - sleep outcomes

KW - sleep restriction therapy

KW - stimulus control therapy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066811576&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85066811576&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/wvn.12367

DO - 10.1111/wvn.12367

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 195

EP - 203

JO - Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing

JF - Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing

SN - 1545-102X

IS - 3

ER -