Reporting of adverse events in cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia: A systematic examination of randomised controlled trials

Smartphone application-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia with telephone support for insomnia disorder compared to a waitlist control: a randomised clinical trial

Although there have been promising findings for smartphone application (app)-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), previous trials have not screened participants rigorously for insomnia disorder and used therapist support. Based on the above, we aimed to examine the effects of smartphone app-delivered CBT-I with telephone support against a waitlist (WL) in a sample with insomnia disorder. A total of 64 participants with insomnia disorder were randomised to smartphone app-delivered CBT-I (n = 32) or a WL (n = 32). Smartphone app-delivered CBT-I consisted of six weekly smartphone app modules with 15 min of telephone support per week. At pre- and post-treatment, and the 3-month follow-up, we assessed insomnia symptoms and associated correlates and consequences. At post-treatment, we also assessed measures related to adherence (therapist support, exercise/module completion), self-rated perception of treatment content, activity, and adverse events. CBT-I significantly outperformed the WL with large effects on the primary outcome (d = 2.26) and was significantly different on most of the secondary outcomes with medium to large effects. CBT-I also resulted in a significantly larger proportion of treatment remitters (CBT-I: 64.5-77.4%, WL: 6.5-6.9%) and responders (CBT-I: 77.4-90.3%, WL: 19.4-24.1%) at post-treatment and follow-up, compared to the WL. Treatment was associated with high satisfaction, high adherence, low attrition, and few treatment-impeding adverse events. Based on the medium to large effects of smartphone app-delivered CBT-I with telephone support, this trial highlights the potential of delivering CBT-I exclusively through an app with therapist telephone support for high efficacy, satisfaction, and adherence.

Integrating the Memory Support Intervention into the Transdiagnostic Intervention for Sleep and Circadian Dysfunction (TranS-C): can improving memory for treatment in midlife and older adults improve patient outcomes? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Poor memory for treatment is associated with poorer treatment adherence and poorer patient outcomes. The memory support intervention (MSI) was developed to improve patient memory for treatment with the goal of improving patient outcomes. The aim of this study protocol is to conduct a confirmatory efficacy trial to test whether a new, streamlined, and potent version of the MSI improves outcomes for midlife and older adults. This streamlined MSI is comprised of constructive memory supports that will be applied to a broader range of treatment content. The platform for this study is the Transdiagnostic Intervention for Sleep and Circadian Dysfunction (TranS-C). We will focus on midlife and older adults who are low income and experiencing mobility impairments.

METHODS

Participants (N = 178) will be randomly allocated to TranS-C + MSI or TranS-C alone. Both intervention arms include eight 50-min weekly sessions. Assessments will be conducted at pre-treatment, post-treatment, 6-, and 12-month follow-up (6FU and 12FU). Aim 1 will compare the effects of TranS-C + MSI versus TranS-C alone on sleep and circadian functioning, daytime functioning, well-being, and patient memory. Aim 2 will test whether patient memory for treatment mediates the relationship between treatment condition and patient outcomes. Aim 3 will evaluate if previously reported poor treatment response subgroups will moderate the relationship between treatment condition and (a) patient memory for treatment and (b) treatment outcome. Exploratory analyses will compare treatment condition on (a) patient adherence, patient-rated treatment credibility, and patient utilization of treatment contents, and (b) provider-rated acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility.

DISCUSSION

This study has the potential to provide evidence for (a) the efficacy of a new simplified version of the MSI for maintaining health, well-being, and functioning, (b) the wider application of the MSI for midlife and older adults and to the treatment of sleep and circadian problems, and (c) the efficacy of the MSI for sub-groups who are likely to benefit from the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05986604. Registered on 2 August 2023.

Effectiveness of digital Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy for Insomnia in patients with musculoskeletal complaints and insomnia in primary care physiotherapy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Insomnia is prevalent among patients visiting physiotherapists due to musculoskeletal complaints and associated with poorer pain prognosis. Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) may be effective for improving sleep quality and pain-related outcomes in these patients, but its availability and utility are limited in daily physiotherapy practice. The aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to evaluate the effectiveness of digital CBT-I in addition to usual treatment in patients with chronic musculoskeletal complaints and insomnia, compared with usual treatment only.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this RCT, eligible and consenting participants will be randomised (1:1 ratio) to one of two interventions: (1) digital CBT-I adjunct to physiotherapy treatment or (2) usual physiotherapy treatment. Patients with musculoskeletal complaints and insomnia visiting a physiotherapist in Norway will be invited to participate in the study. We aim to include 188 participants to detect a difference in the primary outcome. Outcome variables will be assessed at baseline (prior to randomisation) and at 6-week, 3-month, 6-month and 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome is between-group difference in insomnia severity, assessed with the Insomnia Severity Index (0-28 points) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include between-group differences in pain intensity, physical function, work ability, health-related quality of life, mental distress, and self-reported use of sleep and pain medication. Exploratory analyses will identify patient characteristics influencing the effect of the digital intervention.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial is approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Central Norway (Ref. 2023/533381). The results of the trial will be published in peer-review journals and disseminated at national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN91221906.

Systematic review of the safety of mindfulness-based interventions for psychosis

Harmful outcomes of psychological interventions are under-researched, including in mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) for psychosis. This systematic review summarizes reporting and prevalence of 8 harm indices (death, adverse events, hospitalisation, study drop out, noncompletion of therapy, side effects of therapy, symptom deterioration and crisis service use) in Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) of MBIs for psychosis. Meta-analyses of risk differences were also calculated for each harm index. The review included 39 studies, with a total n of 2684 participants across studies. The percentage of studies reporting on each index of harm, and the prevalence of harm, varied greatly across each index. 0% of studies reported on side effects of interventions compared to 92% of studies reporting on study dropout. Meta-analyses of risk differences (RD) found a higher risk of hospitalisation (RD (95% CI) = -0.136 (-0.23 to -0.05), p = 0.003) and crisis service use (RD (95% CI) = -0.160 (-0.299, -0.024), p = 0.02) in control arms compared to intervention arms, and no significant difference in adverse events, death, symptom deterioration, noncompletion of therapy, drop out and side effects of therapy. Overall, reporting of harm was inconsistent across studies and the quality of data collection and reporting varied. MBIs for psychosis appear to be safe and may reduce the risk of hospitalisation and use of crisis services. However, the absence of thorough reporting on harm precludes a balanced analysis of benefits versus harms. Future research into the effectiveness of MBIs should consistently operationalise, monitor and report data on harm.

Nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy to improve insomnia disorder in primary care: the HABIT RCT

Background

Insomnia is a prevalent and distressing sleep disorder. Multicomponent cognitive-behavioural therapy is the recommended first-line treatment, but access remains extremely limited, particularly in primary care where insomnia is managed. One principal component of cognitive-behavioural therapy is a behavioural treatment called sleep restriction therapy, which could potentially be delivered as a brief single-component intervention by generalists in primary care.

Objectives

The primary objective of the Health-professional Administered Brief Insomnia Therapy trial was to establish whether nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy in primary care improves insomnia relative to sleep hygiene. Secondary objectives were to establish whether nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy was cost-effective, and to undertake a process evaluation to understand intervention delivery, fidelity and acceptability.

Design

Pragmatic, multicentre, individually randomised, parallel-group, superiority trial with embedded process evaluation.

Setting

National Health Service general practice in three regions of England.

Participants

Adults aged ≥ 18 years with insomnia disorder were randomised using a validated web-based randomisation programme.

Interventions

Participants in the intervention group were offered a brief four-session nurse-delivered behavioural treatment involving two in-person sessions and two by phone. Participants were supported to follow a prescribed sleep schedule with the aim of restricting and standardising time in bed. Participants were also provided with a sleep hygiene leaflet. The control group received the same sleep hygiene leaflet by e-mail or post. There was no restriction on usual care.

Main outcome measures

Outcomes were assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months. Participants were included in the primary analysis if they contributed at least one post-randomisation outcome. The primary end point was self-reported insomnia severity with the Insomnia Severity Index at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were health-related and sleep-related quality of life, depressive symptoms, work productivity and activity impairment, self-reported and actigraphy-defined sleep, and hypnotic medication use. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year. For the process evaluation, semistructured interviews were carried out with participants, nurses and practice managers or general practitioners. Due to the nature of the intervention, both participants and nurses were aware of group allocation.

Results

We recruited 642 participants (n = 321 for sleep restriction therapy; n = 321 for sleep hygiene) between 29 August 2018 and 23 March 2020. Five hundred and eighty participants (90.3%) provided data at a minimum of one follow-up time point; 257 (80.1%) participants in the sleep restriction therapy arm and 291 (90.7%) participants in the sleep hygiene arm provided primary outcome data at 6 months. The estimated adjusted mean difference on the Insomnia Severity Index was -3.05 (95% confidence interval -3.83 to -2.28; p < 0.001, Cohen's d = -0.74), indicating that participants in the sleep restriction therapy arm [mean (standard deviation) Insomnia Severity Index = 10.9 (5.5)] reported lower insomnia severity compared to sleep hygiene [mean (standard deviation) Insomnia Severity Index = 13.9 (5.2)]. Large treatment effects were also found at 3 (d = -0.95) and 12 months (d = -0.72). Superiority of sleep restriction therapy over sleep hygiene was evident at 3, 6 and 12 months for self-reported sleep, mental health-related quality of life, depressive symptoms, work productivity impairment and sleep-related quality of life. Eight participants in each group experienced serious adverse events but none were judged to be related to the intervention. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was £2075.71, giving a 95.3% probability that the intervention is cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000. The process evaluation found that sleep restriction therapy was acceptable to both nurses and patients, and delivered with high fidelity.

Limitations

While we recruited a clinical sample, 97% were of white ethnic background and 50% had a university degree, which may limit generalisability to the insomnia population in England.

Conclusions

Brief nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy in primary care is clinically effective for insomnia disorder, safe, and likely to be cost-effective.

Future work

Future work should examine the place of sleep restriction therapy in the insomnia treatment pathway, assess generalisability across diverse primary care patients with insomnia, and consider additional methods to enhance patient engagement with treatment.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN42499563.

Funding

The award was funded by the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/84/01) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 36. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Effects of cognitive behavioural therapy and bright light therapy for insomnia in youths with eveningness: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Insomnia and eveningness are common and often comorbid conditions in youths. While cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) has been suggested as a promising intervention, it remains unclear whether it is sufficient to also address circadian issues in youths. In addition, despite that light has been shown to be effective in phase-shifting one's circadian rhythm, there has been limited data on the effects of bright light therapy and its combination with CBT-I on sleep and circadian outcomes in youths. The current protocol outlines a randomised controlled trial that examines the efficacy of CBT-I and CBT-I plus bright light therapy (BLT) in reducing insomnia severity, improving mood symptoms and daytime functioning (e.g. sleepiness, fatigue, cognitive function), and improving subjective and objective sleep and circadian measures compared to a waitlist control group.

METHODS

We will carry out a randomised controlled trial (RCT) with 150 youths aged 12-24 who meet the criteria of insomnia and eveningness. Participants will be randomised into one of three groups: CBT-I with bright light therapy, CBT-I with placebo light, and waitlist control. Six sessions of CBT-I will be delivered in a group format, while participants will be currently asked to use a portable light device for 30 min daily immediately after awakening throughout the intervention period for bright light therapy. The CBT-I with light therapy group will receive bright constant green light (506 lx) while the CBT-I with placebo light group will receive the modified light device with the LEDs emitting less than 10 lx. All participants will be assessed at baseline and post-treatment, while the two active treatment groups will be additionally followed up at 1 month and 6 months post-intervention. The primary outcome will be insomnia severity, as measured by the Insomnia Severity Index. Secondary outcomes include self-reported mood, circadian, daytime functioning, and quality of life measures, as well as sleep parameters derived from actigraphy and sleep diary and neurocognitive assessments. Objective measures of the circadian phase using dim-light melatonin onset assessment and sleep parameters using polysomnography will also be included as the secondary outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This study will be the first RCT to directly compare the effects of CBT-I and BLT in youths with insomnia and eveningness. Findings from the study will provide evidence to inform the clinical management of insomnia problems and eveningness in youths.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04256915. Registered on 5 February 2020.

Integration of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia in Best-Practice Care for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis and Insomnia: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol

OBJECTIVE

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common musculoskeletal problem worldwide and its key symptom is pain. Guidelines recommend incorporating comorbidity-specific therapies into patient-centered care. Patients diagnosed with KOA frequently have insomnia, which is associated with higher-pain severity. For this reason, this study protocol outlines the methodology of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTi) combined with best-practice KOA care (BPC) compared to best-practice KOA care and lifestyle education.

METHODS

A 2-arm RCT in patients with KOA and insomnia is conducted, in which a total of 128 patients are randomly allocated to an intervention or control group. The experimental intervention consists of 12 sessions of physical therapist-led BPC with an additional 6 sessions of CBTi. The control intervention also receives BPC, which is supplemented with 6 general lifestyle information sessions. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in change in pain severity at 6 months after intervention. Secondary outcomes are pain-related outcomes, sleep-related outcomes, symptoms of anxiety and depression, level of physical activity and function, perceived global improvement, biomarkers of inflammation, and health-related quality of life. Assessments are conducted at baseline, immediately after intervention, and 3, 6, and 12 months after intervention. Furthermore, a cost-utility analysis for the proposed intervention will be performed alongside the RCT.

IMPACT

This is the first RCT investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a physical therapist-led intervention integrating CBTi into BPC in patients with KOA and insomnia. The results of this trial will add to the growing body of evidence on the effectiveness of individualized and comorbidity-specific KOA care, which can inform clinical decision-making and assist policymakers and other relevant stakeholders in optimizing the care pathway for patients with KOA.

Improving sleep after stroke: A randomised controlled trial of digital cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia

Stroke is frequently accompanied by long-term sleep disruption. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy of digital cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia to improve sleep after stroke. A parallel group randomised controlled trial was conducted remotely in participant's homes/online. Randomisation was online with minimisation of between-group differences in age and baseline Sleep Condition Indicator-8 score. In total, 86 community-dwelling stroke survivors consented, of whom 84 completed baseline assessments (39 female, mean 5.5 years post-stroke, mean 59 years old), and were randomised to digital cognitive behavioural therapy or control (sleep hygiene information). Follow-up was at post-intervention (mean 75 days after baseline) and 8 weeks later. The primary outcome was self-reported insomnia symptoms, as per the Sleep Condition Indicator-8 (range 0-32, lower numbers indicate more severe insomnia, reliable change 7 points) at post-intervention. There were significant improvements in Sleep Condition Indicator-8 for digital cognitive behavioural therapy compared with control (intention-to-treat, digital cognitive behavioural therapy n = 48, control n = 36, 5 imputed datasets, effect of group p ≤ 0.02,η p 2  = 0.07-0.12 [medium size effect], pooled mean difference = -3.35). Additionally, secondary outcomes showed shorter self-reported sleep-onset latencies and better mood for the digital cognitive behavioural therapy group, but no significant differences for self-efficacy, quality of life or actigraphy-derived sleep parameters. Cost-effectiveness analysis found that digital cognitive behavioural therapy dominates over control (non-significant cost savings and higher quality-adjusted life years). No related serious adverse events were reported to the researchers. Overall, digital cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia effectively improves sleep after stroke. Future research is needed to assess earlier stages post-stroke, with a longer follow-up period to determine whether it should be included as part of routine post-stroke care. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04272892.

The Sleepio After Cancer (SAC) study. Digital cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (dCBT-I) in women cancer patients - Trial protocol of a randomised controlled trial

AIMS

This study will assess the efficacy of digital CBT for insomnia (dCBT-I) compared to sleep hygiene education (SHE) for the management of insomnia in women with cancer.

BACKGROUND

30% of patients with cancer meet insomnia diagnostic criteria and this can be detrimental to health outcomes. Insomnia disorder comprises a dissatisfaction with sleep quantity or quality characterized by difficulty initiating sleep, frequent awakenings, or early morning wakening without the ability to return to sleep, at least 3 nights per week, for at least 3 months, causing significant impairment or distress in areas of functioning.

METHODS

We will recruit 308 women with a current or prior cancer diagnosis who are currently experiencing insomnia; defined as a score of 16 or less on the Sleep Condition Indicator (SCI). Participants will be randomised to dCBT-I or SHE. dCBT-I will be delivered online via 6 sessions. SHE will be provided in an online format. Assessments of sleep and other related parameters, through validated questionnaires, will be taken at 12 and 24 weeks following intervention. Once 24 week assessments are completed, participants will crossover to the alternate arm (either SHE or dCBT-I) and undergo a final assessment at week 36.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome will be the mean continuous change in SCI score in the intervention arm compared to the control arm at 24 weeks. Additionally, the proportion of women with an SCI > 16 at 24 weeks will be assessed. Secondary outcomes include fatigue, sleep related quality of life, depression, anxiety, and hot flush interference.

REGISTRATION

This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT05816460.

The European Insomnia Guideline: An update on the diagnosis and treatment of insomnia 2023

Progress in the field of insomnia since 2017 necessitated this update of the European Insomnia Guideline. Recommendations for the diagnostic procedure for insomnia and its comorbidities are: clinical interview (encompassing sleep and medical history); the use of sleep questionnaires and diaries (and physical examination and additional measures where indicated) (A). Actigraphy is not recommended for the routine evaluation of insomnia (C), but may be useful for differential-diagnostic purposes (A). Polysomnography should be used to evaluate other sleep disorders if suspected (i.e. periodic limb movement disorder, sleep-related breathing disorders, etc.), treatment-resistant insomnia (A) and for other indications (B). Cognitive-behavioural therapy for insomnia is recommended as the first-line treatment for chronic insomnia in adults of any age (including patients with comorbidities), either applied in-person or digitally (A). When cognitive-behavioural therapy for insomnia is not sufficiently effective, a pharmacological intervention can be offered (A). Benzodiazepines (A), benzodiazepine receptor agonists (A), daridorexant (A) and low-dose sedating antidepressants (B) can be used for the short-term treatment of insomnia (≤ 4 weeks). Longer-term treatment with these substances may be initiated in some cases, considering advantages and disadvantages (B). Orexin receptor antagonists can be used for periods of up to 3 months or longer in some cases (A). Prolonged-release melatonin can be used for up to 3 months in patients ≥ 55 years (B). Antihistaminergic drugs, antipsychotics, fast-release melatonin, ramelteon and phytotherapeutics are not recommended for insomnia treatment (A). Light therapy and exercise interventions may be useful as adjunct therapies to cognitive-behavioural therapy for insomnia (B).

Examining outcomes for service users accessing the Breaking Free Online computer-assisted therapy program for substance use disorders via a 'telehealth' approach: protocol for a two arm, parallel group randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Breaking Free Online (BFO), a computer-assisted therapy (CAT) program for substance use disorders (SUD), has been available across UK treatment services for the past decade and has demonstrated efficacy. The Covid-19 pandemic has contributed to digital and 'telehealth' approaches to healthcare delivery becoming more common and accepted, and has in parallel, increased numbers of referrals to SUD services because of the impact pandemic-related stress has had on substance using habits in the general population. Digital and telehealth approaches, such as BFO, have the potential to support the treatment system to meet this increased demand for SUD services.

METHODS

Parallel-group randomized controlled trial of eight-week BFO as an adjunct to standard treatment for SUD, in comparison to standard treatment only, at a National Health Service (NHS) Mental Health Trust in North-West England. Participants will be service users aged 18 years and over with demonstrable SUD for at least 12-months. Interventional and control groups will be compared on multiple measures from baseline to post-treatment assessment at eight-weeks, and then three and six-months follow-up. Primary outcome will be self-reported substance use, with secondary outcomes being standardized assessments of substance dependence, mental health, biopsychosocial functioning and quality of life.

DISCUSSION

This study will examine whether BFO and telehealth support, when delivered as an adjunct to standard SUD interventions, improves outcomes for services users receiving NHS SUD treatment. Findings from the study will be used to inform both developments to the BFO program and guidance around augmenting the delivery of CAT programs via telehealth. Trial registration registered with ISRCTN on 25th May 2021-registration number: 13694016.

PROTOCOL VERSION

3.0 05th April 2022.

TRIAL STATUS

This trial is currently open to recruitment-estimated to be completed in May 2023.

Changing Agendas on Sleep, Treatment and Learning in Epilepsy (CASTLE) Sleep-E: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing an online behavioural sleep intervention with standard care in children with Rolandic epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Sleep and epilepsy have an established bidirectional relationship yet only one randomised controlled clinical trial has assessed the effectiveness of behavioural sleep interventions for children with epilepsy. The intervention was successful, but was delivered via face-to-face educational sessions with parents, which are costly and non-scalable to population level. The Changing Agendas on Sleep, Treatment and Learning in Epilepsy (CASTLE) Sleep-E trial addresses this problem by comparing clinical and cost-effectiveness in children with Rolandic epilepsy between standard care (SC) and SC augmented with a novel, tailored parent-led CASTLE Online Sleep Intervention (COSI) that incorporates evidence-based behavioural components.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

CASTLE Sleep-E is a UK-based, multicentre, open-label, active concurrent control, randomised, parallel-group, pragmatic superiority trial. A total of 110 children with Rolandic epilepsy will be recruited in outpatient clinics and allocated 1:1 to SC or SC augmented with COSI (SC+COSI). Primary clinical outcome is parent-reported sleep problem score (Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire). Primary health economic outcome is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective, Child Health Utility 9D Instrument). Parents and children (≥7 years) can opt into qualitative interviews and activities to share their experiences and perceptions of trial participation and managing sleep with Rolandic epilepsy.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The CASTLE Sleep-E protocol was approved by the Health Research Authority East Midlands (HRA)-Nottingham 1 Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/EM/0205). Trial results will be disseminated to scientific audiences, families, professional groups, managers, commissioners and policymakers. Pseudo-anonymised individual patient data will be made available after dissemination on reasonable request.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13202325.

Comparative efficacy of onsite, digital, and other settings for cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Given the limited availability and accessibility of onsite cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), other CBT-I settings, such as internet-delivered CBT-I (iCBT-I), have been proposed. The primary aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of available CBT-I settings on insomnia severity. A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of available CBT-I settings was performed. PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, PubMed, and CINAHL were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating any CBT-I settings in adults with insomnia disorder. The systematic literature search (3851 references) resulted in 52 RCTs. For the primary outcome insomnia severity, all examined CBT-I settings except smartphone-delivered CBT-I yielded significant effects when compared to WL. Large standardized mean differences were found for individual onsite CBT-I (- 1.27;95%CI - 1.70, - 0.84), group-delivered CBT-I (- 1.00;95%CI - 1.42. - 0.59), telehealth (- 1.28;95%CI - 2.06, - 0.50), and guided bibliotherapy (- 0.99;95%CI - 1.67, - 0.32). Both guided iCBT-I (- 0.71;95%CI - 1.18, - 0.24) and unguided iCBT-I (- 0.78;95%CI - 1.18, - 0.38) yielded medium effect sizes. The results underline that health care systems should intensify their efforts to provide synchronously-delivered CBT-I (individual onsite, group-delivered, and telehealth), and particularly individual onsite CBT-I, given its solid evidence base. Medium to large effect sizes for iCBT-I and guided bibliotherapy indicate that self-help settings may be a viable alternative when synchronously-delivered CBT-I is not available.

Data reproducibility issues and their potential impact on conclusions from evidence syntheses of randomized controlled trials in sleep medicine

In this study, we examined the data reproducibility issues in systematic reviews in sleep medicine. We searched for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials published in sleep medicine journals. The metadata in meta-analyses among the eligible systematic reviews were collected. The original sources of the data were reviewed to see if the components used in the meta-analyses were correctly extracted or estimated. The impacts of the data reproducibility issues were investigated. We identified 48 systematic reviews with 244 meta-analyses of continuous outcomes and 54 of binary outcomes. Our results suggest that for continuous outcomes, 20.03% of the data used in meta-analyses cannot be reproduced at the trial level, and 43.44% of the data cannot be reproduced at the meta-analysis level. For binary outcomes, the proportions were 14.14% and 40.74%. In total, 83.33% of the data cannot be reproduced at the systematic review level. Our further analysis suggested that these reproducibility issues would lead to as much as 6.52% of the available meta-analyses changing the direction of the effects, and 9.78% changing the significance of the P-values. Sleep medicine systematic reviews and meta-analyses face serious issues in terms of data reproducibility, and further efforts are urgently needed to improve this situation.

Treating sleep and circadian problems to promote mental health: perspectives on comorbidity, implementation science and behavior change

Insufficient sleep and mistimed sleep are prominent, yet under-appreciated and understudied, contributors to poor mental health and to mental disorders. The evidence that improving sleep and circadian functioning is an important pathway to mental health continues to mount. The goal of this paper is to highlight three major challenges ahead. Challenge 1 points to the possibility that comorbidity is the norm not the exception for the sleep and circadian disorders that are associated with mental disorders. Hence, the sleep and circadian problems experienced by people diagnosed with a mental disorder may not fit into the neat diagnostic categories of existing nosologies nor be adequately treated with single disorder approaches. The Sleep Health Framework and the Transdiagnostic Intervention for Sleep and Circadian Dysfunction (TranS-C) are discussed as alternative approaches. Challenge 2 points to the large time lag between the development of a treatment and the availability of that treatment in routine clinical practice. This is a key reason for the emergence of implementation science, which is a flourishing, well-developed, and quickly moving field. There is an urgent need for more applications of implementation science within sleep and circadian science. Challenge 3 describes one of the greatest puzzles of our time-the need to unlock the fundamental elements of behavior change. There is potential to harness the science of behavior change to encourage widespread engagement in sleep health behavior and thereby reduce the staggering burden of sleep and circadian problems and the associated mental health problems.

Collaborative community mental health and aged care services with peer support to prevent late-life depression: study protocol for a non-randomised controlled trial

Background

Late-life depression is common, modifiable, yet under-treated. Service silos and human resources shortage contribute to insufficient prevention and intervention. We describe an implementation research protocol of collaborative stepped care and peer support model that integrates community mental health and aged care services to address service fragmentation, using productive ageing and recovery principles to involve older people as peer supporters to address human resource issue.

Methods/design

This is a non-randomised controlled trial examining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the “Jockey Club Holistic Support Project for Elderly Mental Wellness” (JC JoyAge) model versus care as usual (CAU) in community aged care and community mental health service units in 12 months. Older people aged 60 years and over with mild to moderate depressive symptoms or risk factors for developing depression will be included. JoyAge service users will receive group-based activities and psychoeducation, low-intensity psychotherapy, or high-intensity psychotherapy according to the stepped care protocol in addition to usual community mental health or aged care, with support from an older peer supporter. The primary clinical outcome, depressive symptoms, and secondary outcomes, self-harm risk, anxiety symptoms, and loneliness, will be measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Self-Harm Inventory, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7), and UCLA Loneliness 3-item scale (UCLA-3) respectively. Cost-effectiveness analysis will assess health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D-5L and service utilisation using the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI). We use multilevel linear mixed models to compare outcomes change between groups and calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in terms of quality-adjusted life years.

Discussion

This study will provide evidence about outcomes for older persons with mental health needs receiving collaborative stepped care service without silos and with trained young-old volunteers to support engagement, treatment, and transitions. Cost-effectiveness findings from this study will inform resource allocation in this under-treated population.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03593889. Registered on 20 July 2018.

Methodological quality for systematic reviews of adverse events with surgical interventions: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of systematic reviews assessed the safety of surgical interventions over time. How well these systematic reviews were designed and conducted determines the reliability of evidence. In this study, we aimed to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews on the safety of surgical interventions.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for systematic reviews of surgical interventions with safety as the exclusive outcome from 1st-Jan, 2015 to 1st-Jan, 2020. The methodological quality of eligible systematic reviews was evaluated according to the AMSTAR 2.0 instrument. The primary outcomes were the number of methodological weaknesses and the global methodological quality. The proportion of each methodological weakness among eligible systematic reviews was compared by three pre-defined stratification variables. The absolute difference of the proportion (PD) was used as the effect estimator, with the two-tailed z-test for the significance.

RESULTS

We identified 127 systematic reviews from 18,636 records. None (n = 0, 0.00%) of them could be rated as "high" in terms of the global methodological quality; in contrast, they were either rated as "low" (n = 18, 14.17%) or as "critically low" (n = 109, 85.83%). The median number of methodological weaknesses of these systematic reviews was 8 (interquartile range, IQR: 6 to 9), in which 4 (IQR: 2 to 4) were critical weaknesses. Systematic reviews that used any reporting guideline (e.g., domain 13, PD = -0.22, 95% CI: - 0.39, - 0.06; p = 0.01) and developed a protocol in advance (e.g., domain 6, PD = -0.20, 95% CI: - 0.39, - 0.01; p = 0.04) were less likely to have methodological weakness in some domains but not for the rest (e.g., domain 8, PD = 0.04, 95% CI: - 0.14, 0.21; p = 0.68; with protocol vs. without).

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological quality of current systematic reviews of adverse events with surgical interventions was poor. Further efforts, for example, encouraging researchers to develop a protocol in advance, are needed to enhance the methodological quality of these systematic reviews.