Cited by 144Sleep and related disordersObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchSleep and Work-Related Fatigue

Long-Term, Non-Nightly Administration of Zolpidem in the Treatment of Patients With Primary Insomnia

Perlis, Michael L., McCall, W. Vaughn, Krystal, Andrew D., Walsh, James K.·2004·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

Introduction While it is common practice that hypnotics are used on a non-nightly basis, few investigations have been undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of the intermittent dosing strategy. The present study was designed to further evaluate this issue within a large scale, double-blind, placebo-controlled, long-term trial. Method Patients who met DSM-IV criteria for primary insomnia participated in the study from January 2000 through October 2001. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups (zolpidem 10 mg or placebo) for a period of 12 weeks. Ten pills were provided in foil packs on an every-other-week basis, and patients were instructed to take no fewer than 3 and no more than 5 pills per week. Sleep was evaluated daily with sleep diaries. Pill use was recorded in the sleep diaries. Results 199 patients (mean +/- SD age = 41.0 +/- 12.8 years; 71% female) were randomly assigned to treatment. On mean, patients receiving zolpidem exhibited (vs. baseline) a 42% decrease in sleep latency, a 52% reduction in number of awakenings, a 55% decrease in wake time after sleep onset, and a 27% increase in total sleep time. These positive clinical gains did not diminish with time and were not associated with dose escalation. There was also no evidence of rebound insomnia. Conclusions Over a period of 12 weeks of intermittent treatment with zolpidem, sleep continuity was significantly improved, the clinical gains were sustained, and there was no evidence of subjective rebou…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.v65n0816

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
Perlis, M. L., McCall, W. V., Krystal, A. D., & Walsh, J. K.
Affiliations
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • Wake Forest University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Saint Louis University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2004-08-15
Volume
65
Issue
8
Pages
1128-1137
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1995438590
Cited by
144
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 5
FWCI
18.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Keywords
zolpidem, primary insomnia, intermittent dosing, hypnotics, long-term treatment, sleep latency, awakening, wake after sleep onset, total sleep time, rebound insomnia, dose escalation, sleep continuity
MeSH terms
Zolpidem, Adolescent, Adult, Double-Blind Method, Drug Administration Schedule, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Hypnotics and Sedatives, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Medical Records, Middle Aged, Placebos, Pyridines, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sleep, Treatment Outcome

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