Cited by 199Sleep and related disordersCircadian rhythm and melatoninObstructive Sleep Apnea Research

Doxepin in the Treatment of Primary Insomnia: A Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Polysomnographic Study

Hajak, Goran, Rodenbeck, Andrea, Voderholzer, Ulrich, Riemann, Dieter, Cohrs, Stefan, Hohagen, Fritz, Berger, Mathias, Ruther, Eckart·2001·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Over recent years, the use of antidepressants for the symptomatic treatment of insomnia has grown substantially, but controlled studies are still lacking. Our study is the first investigation to prove objective efficacy and tolerability of low doses of a sedating antidepressant in a randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled manner in patients with primary insomnia. Method Forty-seven drug-free patients meeting DSM-IV criteria for primary insomnia (mean +/- SD duration of complaints = 11.2+/-9.7 years) received either 25-50 mg of the tricyclic antidepressant doxepin or placebo for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks of placebo withdrawal. Sleep was measured by polysomnography at baseline and the first night of application, at 4 weeks of treatment and the first to third night of withdrawal, and after 2 weeks of withdrawal. Results In the doxepin-treated patients who completed the study (N = 20, 47.6+/-11.3), medication significantly increased sleep efficiency after acute (night 1, p Conclusion The results support the effectiveness of low doses of doxepin to improve sleep and working ability in chronic primary insomniacs, although subjective effects were light to moderate, and in some patients, rebound insomnia and specific side effects have to be considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.v62n0609

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?

  • Evidence for efficacy of sedating low-dose antidepressants when used alone is relatively weak.

    “Evidence for their efficacy when used alone is relatively weak 38-42 and no specific agent within this group is recommended as preferable to the others in this group.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hajak, G., Rodenbeck, A., Voderholzer, U., Riemann, D., Cohrs, S., Hohagen, F., Berger, M., & Ruther, E.
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2001-06-15
Volume
62
Issue
6
Pages
453-463
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060370838
Cited by
199
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 8
FWCI
9.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Regensburg Publication Server (University of Regensburg) (acceptedVersion)
  • FreiDok plus (Universitätsbibliothek Freiburg) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Keywords
doxepin, primary insomnia, tricyclic antidepressants, sedating antidepressants, sleep efficiency, rebound insomnia, sleep quality, work ability, drug tolerability, chronic insomnia
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic, Chronic Disease, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Doxepin, Drug Administration Schedule, Female, Health Status, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Dropouts, Placebos, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Severity of Illness Index, Sleep, Treatment Outcome, Polysomnography

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