Cited by 221Sleep and related disordersPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Treatment preference and patient satisfaction in chronic insomnia

Vincent, Norah, Lionberg, Carrie·2001·SLEEP

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to examine treatment preference and satisfaction with group treatment in individual with chronic insomnia. DESIGN: Correlational. SETTING: The study was conducted in an outpatient hospital setting. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 43 adult volunteers from the community. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Prior to treatment, participants were presented with descriptions of behavioral and pharmacological treatment for the problem of insomnia and asked to rate the acceptability, presumed effectiveness, and presumed side-effects of treatment. A sub-sample of these individuals (n = 37) participated in a 6-week cognitive behavioral treatment group for insomnia. Sleep diary and questionnaire data were collected prior to and following treatment. Results showed that cognitive-behavioral therapy was significantly preferred over pharmacological therapy at pre-treatment and that more favorable assessments of cognitive-behavioral therapy at pre-treatment were associated with better adherence but not improved outcome. Of treatment techniques, participants least liked sleep restriction and most liked sleep hygiene. Results indicated that more favorable ratings of the usefulness of sleep restriction were associated with improvements in sleep efficiency, sleep-related impairment, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Implications of these findings are that patient preference is important to assess prior to treating insomnia and that more work may be needed to increase patients' awareness of the benefits of sleep restriction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sleep/24.4.411

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vincent, N., & Lionberg, C.
Affiliations
University of Manitoba (CA)
Corresponding author
Vincent, Norah
Venue
SLEEP
Published
2001-06
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
411-417
ISSN
  • 0161-8105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-9109
OpenAlex
W2418847208
Cited by
221
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • SLEEP (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
chronic insomnia, treatment preferences, patient satisfaction, cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, group therapy, sleep restriction, sleep hygiene, pharmacotherapy, medication adherence, sleep efficiency, quality of life
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude to Health, Choice Behavior, Chronic Disease, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Middle Aged, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Patient Satisfaction

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