OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and applicability of a behavioural treatment for insomnia that can be administered by family physicians in various clinical settings. DESIGN: Efficacy of the treatment was evaluated by single-case experimental designs (multiple baseline across subjects). Applicability was assessed through semistructured interviews with physicians. SETTING: Two private offices, two offices in community health centres, and one office in a family medicine unit. PARTICIPANTS: Six general practitioners and 24 chronic insomniac patients recruited through media advertisements and from physicians' practices. Of an initial 38 subjects screened, six were excluded for sleep-onset latency less than 30 minutes, five for psychological conditions, one for physical handicaps, and two for other reasons. INTERVENTIONS: Physicians used stimulus-control treatment during individual therapeutic sessions. Patients using hypnotics were encouraged to taper off their medications after treatment was initiated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time it took patients to get to sleep (sleep-onset latency), amount of hypnotic use, and practitioners' evaluation of the treatment. RESULTS: Fifteen patients completed the treatment; 80% of them reduced their sleep-onset latency. Six of the seven patients using hypnotics at the beginning of the study reduced or stopped their medications. All therapeutic gains were maintained at 3 and 6 months. Physicians thought stimulus-control treatment could be used in medical practice, but specified that it was most useful for highly motivated patients. CONCLUSION: Family physicians can use stimulus-control treatment effectively for patients with chronic insomnia. This nonpharmacologic approach could help motivated patients reduce their use of hypnotics.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and applicability of a behavioural treatment for insomnia that can be administered by family physicians in various clinical settings. DESIGN: Efficacy of the treatment was evaluated by single-case experimental designs (multiple baseline across subjects). Applicability was assessed through semistructured interviews with physicians. SETTING: Two private offices, two offices in community health centres, and one office in a family medicine unit. PARTICIPANTS: Six general practitioners and 24 chronic insomniac patients recruited through media advertisements and from physicians' practices. Of an initial 38 subjects screened, six were excluded for sleep-onset latency less than 30 minutes, five for psychological conditions, one for physical handicaps, and two for other reasons. INTERVENTIONS: Physicians used stimulus-control treatment during individual therapeutic sessions. Patients using hypnotics were encouraged to taper off their medications after treatment was initiated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time it took patients to get to sleep (sleep-onset latency), amount of hypnotic use, and practitioners' evaluation of the treatment. RESULTS: Fifteen patients completed the treatment; 80% of them reduced their sleep-onset latency. Six of the seven patients using hypnotics at the beginning of the study reduced or stopped their medications. All therapeutic gains were maintained at 3 and 6 months. Physicians thought stimulus-control treatment could be used in medical practice, but specified that it was most useful for highly motivated patients. CONCLUSION: Family physicians can use stimulus-control treatment effectively for patients with chronic insomnia. This nonpharmacologic approach could help motivated patients reduce their use of hypnotics.
Authors: F Hohagen; K Rink; C Käppler; E Schramm; D Riemann; S Weyerer; M Berger Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 1993 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: C M Rademaker; A P Sips; H M Beumer; I M Hoepelman; B P Overbeek; M J Möllers; M Rozenberg-Arska; J Verhoef Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 1990-11 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Colleen E Carney; Jack D Edinger; Maragatha Kuchibhatla; Angela M Lachowski; Olya Bogouslavsky; Andrew D Krystal; Colin M Shapiro Journal: Sleep Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Daniel J Buysse; Yu Cheng; Anne Germain; Douglas E Moul; Peter L Franzen; Mary Fletcher; Timothy H Monk Journal: Sleep Med Date: 2009-12-04 Impact factor: 3.492