0039 The Clinical Utility of Dim Light Melatonin Onset in Treatment of Delayed Sleep-Wake Phase Disorder: Preliminary Findings

Introduction

Delayed sleep-wake phase disorder (DSWPD) is common, debilitating, and challenging to treat. In an ongoing randomized trial, we are comparing exogenous melatonin treatment outcomes in DSWPD participants for whom dim light melatonin onset (DLMO) is measured objectively vs. estimated.

Methods

Thus far, 13 participants (27±6 years old, 67% female) have completed a randomized, controlled, double-blind 4-week trial of 0.5 mg of exogenous melatonin timed to either 3 h before measured DLMO (M-DLMO, n = 6) or 3 h before DLMO estimated at 2 h before average sleep onset time based on at least 7 days of wrist actigraphy and sleep diary (E-DLMO, n = 7). All participants met International Classification of Sleep Disorders-3 diagnostic criteria for DSWPD and were otherwise healthy. Participants completed 4 weekly treatment sessions with a blinded psychologist; time of melatonin administration and bed-rise schedule were advanced up to 1 h/week. A validated home saliva collection kit measured DLMO in all participants. Between-group t-tests and Hedges’ g effect sizes (ES) were calculated at post-treatment for the following outcomes: DLMO; Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global score; Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ); and the actigraphy parameters sleep efficiency (SE) and clock time of sleep onset and offset. A paired-sample t-test compared the measured vs. estimated DLMO at baseline.

Results

The M-DLMO group had a 65±88 mins DLMO advance vs. 27±30 mins in the E-DLMO group (ES=0.51 p=.381). PSQI scores were similar between groups (M-DLMO=6.67±2.06, E-DLMO=7.1± 1.57, ES=-0.24, p=.646), as were MEQ scores (M-DLMO=43±4.98, E-DLMO=48±12.72, ES=-0.47, p=.387). Sleep onset time (M-DLMO=0:32±1:02, E-DLMO=0:31±1:38, ES=0.01, p=.98) and offset time (M-DLMO=8:05±1:03, E-DLMO=8:08±2:14, ES=-0.02, p=.968) were similar between the groups, although sleep was more efficient in M-DLMO vs. E-DLMO (84%±3% vs. 76%±10%, ES=0.94, p=.096). On average, baseline measured DLMO occurred 123±83 mins earlier than estimated DLMO (p=.001).

Conclusion

We are continuing to enroll participants in this trial. Preliminary results suggest some potential benefit of measuring the DLMO, but results will need to be clarified in a larger sample.

Support

American Sleep Medicine Foundation Strategic Research Award

0532 Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Delivered Via Telemedicine vs. Face-to-Face: Results from a Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial

Introduction

Telemedicine is increasingly an option for delivery of healthcare services, but its efficacy and acceptability for delivering CBT for insomnia has not been adequately tested. In a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, we compared face-to-face and telemedicine delivery (via the AASM SleepTM platform) of CBT for insomnia for improving sleep and daytime functioning at post-treatment and 12-week follow-up.

Methods

Sixty-five adults with chronic insomnia (46 women, mean age 47.2 ± 16.3 years) were recruited primarily from insomnia clinics and screened for disqualifying sleep, medical, and mental health disorders. Eligible participants were randomized to 6 sessions of CBT for insomnia delivered face-to-face (n=32) or via AASM SleepTM (n=33). Participants completed self-report measures of insomnia (Insomnia Severity Index, ISI) and daytime functioning (fatigue, depression, anxiety, and overall functioning) at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and 12-week follow-up. The ISI was the primary non-inferiority outcome.

Results

Telemedicine was non-inferior to face-to-face delivery of CBT for insomnia, based on a non-inferiority margin of 4 points on the ISI (β = -0.07, 95% CI -2.28 to 2.14). Compared to pre-treatment, ISI scores improved significantly at post-treatment (β = -9.02, 95% CI -10.56 to -7.47) and at 12-week follow-up (β = -9.34, 95% CI -10.89 to -7.79). Similarly, daytime functioning measures improved from pre- to post-treatment, with sustained improvements at 12-week follow-up. Scores on the fatigue scale were lower in the telemedicine group at both post-treatment (F=4.64, df=1,119, p<.03) and follow-up (F=5.79, df=1,119, p<.02).

Conclusion

Insomnia and daytime functioning improve similarly whether CBT for insomnia is delivered via telemedicine or face-to-face. Telemedicine delivery of CBT for insomnia should be implemented more systematically to improve access to this evidence-based treatment.

Support

American Sleep Medicine Foundation Grant # 168-SR-17 (JT Arnedt, PhD)