Cited by 10Sleep and related disordersPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

Pilot RCT Testing A Mailing About Sleeping Pills and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia: Impact on Benzodiazepines and Z-Drugs

Open access
Mak, Selene S., Alessi, Cathy A., Kaufmann, Christopher N., Martin, Jennifer L., Mitchell, Michael N., Ulmer, Christi, Lum, Hillary D., McCarthy, Michaela S. +2 more·2024·Clinical Gerontologist

Abstract

Objectives The aim is to pilot a low-touch program for reducing benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA; benzodiazepines, z-drugs) prescriptions among older veterans.Methods Pilot randomized controlled trial consists of 2,009 veterans aged ≥ 65 years who received BZRA prescriptions from a Veterans Health Administration pharmacy (Colorado or Montana) during the prior 18 months. Active: Arm 1 was a mailed brochure about BZRA risks that also included information about a free, online cognitive behavioral therapy for the insomnia (CBTI) program. Arm 2 was a mailed brochure (same as arm 1) and telephone reinforcement call. Control: Arm 3 was a mailed brochure without insomnia treatment information. Active BZRA prescriptions at follow-up (6 and 12 months) were measured.Results In logistic regression analyses, the odds of BZRA prescription at 6- and 12-month follow-ups were not significantly different for arm 1 or 2 (active) versus arm 3 (control), including models adjusted for demographics and prescription characteristics (p-values >0.36).Conclusions Although we observed no differences in active BZRA prescriptions, this pilot study provides guidance for conducting a future study, indicating a need for a more potent intervention. A full-scale trial testing an optimized program would provide conclusive results.Clinical Implications Mailing information about BZRA risks and CBTI did not affect BZRA prescriptions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07317115.2022.2130849

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Online CBT-I, evaluated in a single study involving an older adult population, did not prove effective in facilitating Z-drug discontinuation compared to controls after 6 to 12 months of follow-up.

    “However, online CBT-I, evaluated in a single study 76 involving an older adult population, did not prove effective in facilitating Z-drug discontinuation compared to the controls after 6 to 12 months of follow-up.”

    From Z-drug abuse and dependence: Clinical guideline of the Brazilian Academy of Neurology for diagnosis and management (2025) · cites this paper as [76]

    The Conclusions (page unavailable) report no significant reduction in active BZRA prescriptions at 6 or 12 months compared with controls; the study included z-drugs. But the intervention was a mailed brochure with information about accessing online CBT-I, not online CBT-I itself, and the outcome was active BZRA prescriptions rather than Z-drug discontinuation specifically. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Ulmer C, Farrell-Carnahan L, & Hughes J (2017). Improve Your Sleep: A Self-Guided Approach for Veterans with Insomnia (Tatum J, Ed.). VA Mid Atlantic MIRECC.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mak, S. S., Alessi, C. A., Kaufmann, C. N., Martin, J. L., Mitchell, M. N., Ulmer, C., Lum, H. D., McCarthy, M. S., Smith, J. P., & Fung, C. H.
Affiliations
  • VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Florida Health (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • Denver VA Medical Center (US)
  • VA Rocky Mountain Network (US)
Corresponding author
Mak, Selene S.
Venue
Clinical Gerontologist
Published
2022-10-06
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
452-463
ISSN
  • 0731-7115 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-2301
OpenAlex
W4302290764
Cited by
10
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3
FWCI
1.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Gerontologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging
  • Veterans Health Affairs Office of Rural Health
  • U.S. department of veterans affairs
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
benzodiazepine receptor agonists, benzodiazepines, Z-drugs, cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, older veterans, drug risks
MeSH terms
Sleep Aids, Pharmaceutical, Aged, Benzodiazepines, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Pilot Projects, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review