Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Insomnia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Submit a Comment
Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest. Comments are moderated. Please see our information for authorsregarding comments on an Annals publication.
Abstract
Background:
Purpose:
Data Sources:
Study Selection:
Data Extraction:
Data Synthesis:
Limitation:
Conclusion:
Primary Funding Source:
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Supplemental Material
References
Comments
Sign In to Submit A CommentInformation & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Keywords
Copyright
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. For an editable text file, please select Medlars format which will download as a .txt file. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Insomnia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med.2015;163:191-204. [Epub 4 August 2015]. doi:10.7326/M14-2841
View More
Get Access
Login Options:
Purchase
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.
Create your Free Account
You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.
Author's Response
In relation to insomnia definition and duration, the terms that we accepted as indicating chronic insomnia are listed in the Supplemental Appendix and Table 1 presents the texts referenced by individual studies for their definitions. The two studies with insomnia definitions listed as “author-defined” required a duration of one month (Waters) and six months (Lovato), and both DSM-IV and RDC criteria require a duration of at least one month (1, 2). Therefore, the minimum duration of insomnia required for entry into any of the studies of our review would have been one month. Nine of the studies reported a mean duration of insomnia among participants, which ranged from 9.5 to 14.3 months, with the exception of the one study which did not contribute data to pooled estimates (Guilleminault), for which the duration was 4.1 months.
Publication bias and loss to follow up are universal concerns in meta-analyses of clinical trials. Our search strategy returned a number of trial protocols, including studies currently underway and yet to report results. We also found no statistical evidence of publication bias. Risk of bias due to incomplete follow up is presented in Table 2 and our approach to assessing this domain is described in the Study Quality section of the manuscript. Only one study had greater than 10% loss to follow up at post-treatment (14% of the treatment cohort) and did not describe a statistical technique to account for these drop outs (Espie 2001), although risk was unclear for a further three.
As van den Noort and colleagues also point out, our results at late follow up did not achieve statistical significance using a Knapp-Hartung method for random effect meta-analyses. Although we believe this statistical approach is the most appropriate approach and accords with Annals policy, it is not as commonly used as the standard Laird-Dersimonian method (3). Under the Laird-Dersimonian approach, all outcomes except SOL (i.e. TST, SE% and WASO) were statistically significant at both early and late follow up, but borderline using the Knapp-Hartung method. Moreover, as the point estimates for outcomes remained virtually unchanged over time, we believe our findings are consistent with patients maintaining their skills over time and that the wording “seems to be well-maintained” is justified. Our statement that CBT-i “results in significant alleviation of symptoms” refers to the statistically significant secondary outcome results at post-treatment.
James M Trauer and David Cunnington
1. Diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders, text revision (DSM-IV-TR). 4th ed. ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1997.
2. Edinger JD, Bonnet MH, Bootzin RR, Doghramji K, Dorsey CM, Espie CA, et al. Derivation of research diagnostic criteria for insomnia: report of an American Academy of Sleep Medicine Work Group. Sleep. 2004;27:1567-96.
3. Cornell JE, Mulrow CD, Localio R, Stack CB, Meibohm AR, Guallar E, et al. Random-effects meta-analysis of inconsistent effects: a time for change. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:267-70.
Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in the Treatment of Chronic Insomnia
Although we agree with Trauer et al. (1) and Morin (2) that cognitive behavioral therapy seems to be a promising treatment for chronic insomnia, there are three issues that did not receive enough attention, therefore, the conclusions that were drawn by Trauer and colleagues (1) are premature. First, Trauer et al. (1) do not give any information on how “chronic” was defined in their meta-analysis and whether those studies included in their study, use the same criterion for chronic insomnia?
Secondly, there is a bias in the data because, naturally, only published studies are included in the present meta-analysis, leading to higher efficacy scores, because studies that do not find any significant (positive) results probably will not get published. This over-estimation of treatment efficacy is a common problem in meta-analyses (3) and can be better accounted for by including all collected data of registered clinical trials instead of only the published ones (3). However, even more important, with respect to the bias in their data, how did the studies, included in the present meta-analysis; deal with drop-out? This is particularly of importance, because previous research has revealed that cognitive behavioral therapy suffers from high drop-out rates, up to even 34% (4, 5).
Finally, Trauer et al. (1) state that “Its efficacy seems to be well-maintained over time and results in significant alleviation of symptoms” (on page 201). However, if we take a closer look at their data (see page 197-200), we see that they base their statement solely on either 4 or 5 studies at early follow-up and on either 3 or 4 studies at late follow-up, which is a very low number of studies, and even more astonishing is the fact that the authors on the same page state “the improvements at the late follow-up time point were also not statistically significant”. Therefore, to date, it is simply too premature to claim that its efficacy seems to be well-maintained over time; more future studies on the long-term effects of cognitive behavioral therapy in chronic insomnia are required.
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflict of interest.
References
1. Trauer JM, Qian MY, Doyle JS, Rajaratnam SM, Cunnington D. Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic insomnia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:191-204. [PMID: 26054060] doi:10.7326/M14-2841
2. Morin CM. Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic insomnia: State of the science versus current clinical practices. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:236-7. [PMID: 26052868] doi:10.7326/M15-1246
3. Schmucker C, Bluemle A, Briel M, Portalupi S, Lang B, Motschall E, et al. A protocol for a systematic review on the impact of unpublished studies and studies published in the gray