Patrick H Finan1, Chung Jung Mun2, David H Epstein3, William J Kowalczyk3, Karran A Phillips3, Daniel Agage3, Michael T Smith2, Kenzie L Preston4. 1. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21224, United States. Electronic address: pfinan1@jhu.edu. 2. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21224, United States. 3. Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 251 Bayview Blvd., Suite 200, Baltimore, MD, 21224, United States. 4. Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 251 Bayview Blvd., Suite 200, Baltimore, MD, 21224, United States. Electronic address: kpreston@intra.nida.nih.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is common in patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) receiving medication for addiction treatment. Differences between patients on the two primary agonist medications-methadone and buprenorphine-are not well understood. METHODS: In patients receiving either methadone or buprenorphine treatment for OUD, we examined sleep continuity and architecture using ambulatory monitoring to gather both an objective measure (daily sleep EEG; M = 5.76 days, SD = 1.46) and a subjective measure (daily sleep diary; M = 54.10 days, SD = 25.10) of sleep. RESULTS: Patients treated with buprenorphine versus methadone did not differ on any measure of sleep continuity or architecture. Women had longer EEG-derived total sleep time than men (d = -0.68, 95 % CI -1.32 to -0.09), along with lower %N2 (d = 0.94, 95 % CI 0.34-1.64) and greater %N3 (d = -0.94, 95 % CI -1.61 to -0.32). Self-reported sleep differed from EEG-derived estimates: wake after sleep onset was greater by EEG than by diary (d = 2.58, 95 % CI 1.74-3.63), and total sleep time and sleep efficiency were lower by EEG than by diary (d for sleep time = 2.93, 95 % CI 2.06-4.14; d for efficiency = 1.69, 95 % CI 0.98-2.49). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with buprenorphine or methadone did not substantively differ in ambulatory measures of sleep. With both medications, there was a discrepancy between objective and subjective sleep measures. Further confirmatory evidence would inform the development of sleep-related recommendations for OUD patients undergoing agonist treatment. Published by Elsevier B.V.
BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is common in patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) receiving medication for addiction treatment. Differences between patients on the two primary agonist medications-methadone and buprenorphine-are not well understood. METHODS: In patients receiving either methadone or buprenorphine treatment for OUD, we examined sleep continuity and architecture using ambulatory monitoring to gather both an objective measure (daily sleep EEG; M = 5.76 days, SD = 1.46) and a subjective measure (daily sleep diary; M = 54.10 days, SD = 25.10) of sleep. RESULTS: Patients treated with buprenorphine versus methadone did not differ on any measure of sleep continuity or architecture. Women had longer EEG-derived total sleep time than men (d = -0.68, 95 % CI -1.32 to -0.09), along with lower %N2 (d = 0.94, 95 % CI 0.34-1.64) and greater %N3 (d = -0.94, 95 % CI -1.61 to -0.32). Self-reported sleep differed from EEG-derived estimates: wake after sleep onset was greater by EEG than by diary (d = 2.58, 95 % CI 1.74-3.63), and total sleep time and sleep efficiency were lower by EEG than by diary (d for sleep time = 2.93, 95 % CI 2.06-4.14; d for efficiency = 1.69, 95 % CI 0.98-2.49). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with buprenorphine or methadone did not substantively differ in ambulatory measures of sleep. With both medications, there was a discrepancy between objective and subjective sleep measures. Further confirmatory evidence would inform the development of sleep-related recommendations for OUD patients undergoing agonist treatment. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Entities:
Keywords:
Buprenorphine; Ecological momentary assessment; Methadone; Opioid use disorder; Sex differences; Sleep
Authors: Melody Furnari; David H Epstein; Karran A Phillips; Michelle L Jobes; William J Kowalczyk; Massoud Vahabzadeh; Jia-Ling Lin; Kenzie L Preston Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2015-07-09 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Patrick H Finan; Jessica M Richards; Charlene E Gamaldo; Dingfen Han; Jeannie Marie Leoutsakos; Rachel Salas; Michael R Irwin; Michael T Smith Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Patrick H Finan; Phillip J Quartana; Bethany Remeniuk; Eric L Garland; Jamie L Rhudy; Matthew Hand; Michael R Irwin; Michael T Smith Journal: Sleep Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Andrew Rosenblum; Herman Joseph; Chunki Fong; Steven Kipnis; Charles Cleland; Russell K Portenoy Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-05-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: David A Seminowicz; Bethany Remeniuk; Samuel R Krimmel; Michael T Smith; Frederick S Barrett; Andreas B Wulff; Andrew J Furman; Stephan Geuter; Martin A Lindquist; Michael R Irwin; Patrick H Finan Journal: Pain Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 7.926
Authors: Patrick H Finan; Janelle Letzen; David H Epstein; Chung Jung Mun; Samuel Stull; William J Kowalczyk; Daniel Agage; Karran A Phillips; Diego A Pizzagalli; Kenzie L Preston Journal: Pain Med Date: 2021-09-08 Impact factor: 3.750