CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 166Sleep and related disordersObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Psychological treatment for insomnia in the regulation of long-term hypnotic drug use

Open access
Morgan, K, Dixon, S, Mathers, N, Thompson, J, Tomeny, M·2004·Health Technology Assessment
DOI 10.3310/hta8080
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical and cost impact of providing, in routine general practice settings, a cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) package for insomnia to long-term hypnotic drug users with chronic sleep difficulties; and to identify factors associated with variations in clinical outcomes. DESIGN: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with two treatment arms (a CBT-treated 'sleep clinic' group, and a 'no additional treatment' control group), with post-treatment assessments starting at 3, 6 and 12 months. SETTING: Twenty-three general practices in Sheffield, UK. PARTICIPANTS: In total, 209 patients (aged 31-92 years) with chronic sleep problems who had been receiving repeat hypnotic drug prescriptions for at least 1 month (mean = 13.4 years) were recruited into the trial. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention consisted of six 50-minute sessions as follows: introduction and sleep assessment, basic sleep hygiene, stimulus control and sleep restriction procedures, progressive relaxation, cognitive treatments, and review and discharge. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: These included: global sleep quality [as measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)], frequency of hypnotic drug use, mean dose of hypnotics consumed, health-related quality of life [as measured by the Short-Form 36 (SF-36)], NHS service costs and overall cost utility. RESULTS: At 3- and 6-month follow-ups, patients treated with CBT showed improved global PSQI scores as well as improvements in the SF-36 dimensions of vitality at 3 months and physical functioning and mental health at 6 months. CBT-treated patients also reported reductions in the frequency of hypnotic drug use compared with the control group, with many CBT-treated patients reporting zero drug use at the follow-up assessments. Clinical improvements were maintained within the CBT group at the 12-month follow-up, with PSQI scores and the frequency of hypnotic drug use continuing to show significant reductions relative to the control group. Multiple regression analyses of PSQI scores within the sleep clinic group alone indicated that the magnitude of pre- to post-treatment change in overall sleep quality was closely related to Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression scores at 3-, 6-and 12-month follow-ups. In each model higher depression scores at baseline were associated with poorer treatment outcomes. No significant relationship was found between the patient's age and PSQI outcomes in any of these analyses. Within the sleep clinic group, reductions in drug use showed no significant association with the hypnotic product consumed. At the 3-month follow-up low-frequency drug use was reported by 22.9% (8/35) of temazepam users, 33.3% (5/15) of nitrazepam users and 38.9% (7/18) of zopiclone users. The total cost of service provision was GBP154.40 per patient (1999/2000 prices). The mean incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at 6 months was GBP3418; this figure was insensitive to changes in costs. A simple model also showed that extending the evaluation period beyond 6 months may improve the cost-effectiveness of CBT. The incorporation of hidden costs associated with hypnotic drug treatment (e.g. accidents) also reduces the cost per QALY ratio, although to a much lesser degree. CONCLUSIONS: In routine general practice settings, psychological treatment for insomnia can improve sleep quality, reduce hypnotic drug use, and improve health-related quality of life at a favourable cost among long-term hypnotic users with chronic sleep difficulties. These positive outcomes appear robust over time, persisting for at least 1 year among the more treatment-adherent patients. While these benefits may be reduced among those patients presenting with higher levels of psychological distress, the present study clearly indicates that older age per se presents no barrier to successful treatment outcomes. Further research should assess the long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of psychological treatments for insomnia among non-hypnotic-using patients, and establish the minimum psychological treatment input required.

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 · 10.3310/hta8080

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • The effect sizes for improvements in sleep duration and subjective sleep quality in this study were similar to or greater than those reported for cognitive behavioral intervention and other physical activity studies.

    “The effect size for the improvements in sleep duration and subjective sleep quality in this study were similar or even greater than that reported for cognitive behavioral intervention and other physical activity studies [18, 30, 36-38].”

    From Aerobic exercise improves self-reported sleep and quality of life in older adults with insomnia (2010) · cites this paper as [37]

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: 8

  1. Jacquinet-Salord MC, Lang T, Fouriaud C, Nicoulet I, Bingham A. Sleeping tablet consumption, self reported quality of sleep, and working conditions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1993;47:64-8.
  2. Leger D. The cost of sleep related road accidents. Sleep 1994;17:84-93.
  3. Morin CM, Hauri PJ, Espie CA, Spielman AJ, Buysse DJ, Bootzin RR. Nonpharmacologic treatment of chronic insomnia. Sleep 1999;22:1134-56.
  4. Buysse DJ, Reynolds CF III, Monk TH, Berman SR, Kupfer DJ. The Pittsburgh sleep quality index for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res 1989;28:193-213.
  5. McHorney CA, Ware JE, Lu JFR, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) III. Test of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care 1994;32:40-66.
  6. Brenner PM, Wolf B, Rechlin T, Kauert G, Ruther E, Hippius H. Benzodiazepine dependence: detoxification under standard conditions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 1991;29:195-204.
  7. Harvey I, Nelson SJ, Lyons RA, et al. A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of counselling in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 1998;48:1043-8.
  8. Neutel CI, Hirdes JP, Maxwell CJ, Patten SB. New evidence of benzodiazepine use and falls: the time factors. Age Ageing 1996;25:273-8.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Morgan, K., Dixon, S., Mathers, N., Thompson, J., & Tomeny, M.
Affiliations
  • Loughborough University (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Health Technology Assessment
Publisher
National Institute for Health and Care Research
Published
2004-02
Volume
8
Issue
8
Pages
iii-iv, 1
ISSN
  • 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
  • 2046-4924
DOI
10.3310/hta8080
OpenAlex
W2027904579
Cited by
166
References
67
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 8
FWCI
8.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Health Technology Assessment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Health Technology Assessment programme (95/30/02)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
insomnia, cognitive behavioral therapy, hypnotic drug use, sleep clinic, general practice, sleep quality, health-related quality of life, cost-utility analysis, depression, sleep hygiene, stimulus control, sleep restriction, progressive muscle relaxation, treatment outcomes, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Chronic Disease, Family Practice, Female, United Kingdom, Health Services Research, Humans, Hypnotics and Sedatives, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Male, Middle Aged, State Medicine, Quality-Adjusted Life Years

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