Charles M. Morin

BACKGROUND: Although insomnia is a prevalent complaint with significant morbidity, it often remains unrecognized and untreated. Brief and valid instruments are needed both for screening and outcome assessment. This study examined psychometric indices of the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) to detect cases of insomnia in a population-based sample and to evaluate treatment response in a clinical sample. METHODS: Participants were 959 individuals selected from the community for an epidemiological study of insomnia (Community sample) and 183 individuals evaluated for insomnia treatment and 62 controls without insomnia (Clinical sample). They completed the ISI and several measures of sleep quality, fatigue, psychological symptoms, and quality of life; those in the Clinical sample also completed sleep diaries, polysomnography, and interviews to validate their insomnia/good sleep status and assess treatment response. In addition to standard psychometric indices of reliability and validity, item response theory analyses were computed to examine ISI item response patterns. Receiver operating curves were used to derive optimal cutoff scores for case identification and to quantify the minimally important changes in relation to global improvement ratings obtained by an independent assessor. RESULTS: ISI internal consistency was excellent for both samples (Cronbach α of 0.90 and 0.91). Item response analyses revealed adequate discriminatory capacity for 5 of the 7 items. Convergent validity was supported by significant correlations between total ISI score and measures of fatigue, quality of life, anxiety, and depression. A cutoff score of 10 was optimal (86.1% sensitivity and 87.7% specificity) for detecting insomnia cases in the community sample. In the clinical sample, a change score of -8.4 points (95% CI: -7.1, -9.4) was associated with moderate improvement as rated by an independent assessor after treatment. CONCLUSION: These findings provide further evidence that the ISI is a reliable and valid instrument to detect cases of insomnia in the population and is sensitive to treatment response in clinical patients.

Originally published in Contemporary Psychology: APA Review of Books, 1996, Vol 41(6), 621. Insomnia affects from 20 to 40 percent of all adults, particularly women and the elderly, yet there is widespread belief that chronic insomnia is not really a medical problem and that it can be treated only w

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To present an expert consensus, standardized, patient-informed sleep diary. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sleep diaries from the original expert panel of 25 attendees of the Pittsburgh Assessment Conference(1) were collected and reviewed. A smaller subset of experts formed a committee and reviewed the compiled diaries. Items deemed essential were included in a Core sleep diary, and those deemed optional were retained for an expanded diary. Secondly, optional items would be available in other versions. A draft of the Core and optional versions along with a feedback questionnaire were sent to members of the Pittsburgh Assessment Conference. The feedback from the group was integrated and the diary drafts were subjected to 6 focus groups composed of good sleepers, people with insomnia, and people with sleep apnea. The data were summarized into themes and changes to the drafts were made in response to the focus groups. The resultant draft was evaluated by another focus group and subjected to lexile analyses. The lexile analyses suggested that the Core diary instructions are at a sixth-grade reading level and the Core diary was written at a third-grade reading level. CONCLUSIONS: The Consensus Sleep Diary was the result of collaborations with insomnia experts and potential users. The adoption of a standard sleep diary for insomnia will facilitate comparisons across studies and advance the field. The proposed diary is intended as a living document which still needs to be tested, refined, and validated.

BACKGROUND: Recognition that psychological and behavioral factors play an important role in insomnia has led to increased interest in therapies targeting these factors. A review paper published in 1999 summarized the evidence regarding the efficacy of psychological and behavioral treatments for persistent insomnia. The present review provides an update of the evidence published since the original paper. As with the original paper, this review was conducted by a task force commissioned by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine in order to update its practice parameters on psychological and behavioral therapies for insomnia. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted on 37 treatment studies (N = 2246 subjects/patients) published between 1998 and 2004 inclusively and identified through Psyclnfo and Medline searches. Each study was systematically reviewed with a standard coding sheet and the following information was extracted: Study design, sample (number of participants, age, gender), diagnosis, type of treatments and controls, primary and secondary outcome measures, and main findings. Criteria for inclusion of a study were as follows: (a) the main sleep diagnosis was insomnia (primary or comorbid), (b) at least 1 treatment condition was psychological or behavioral in content, (c) the study design was a randomized controlled trial, a nonrandomized group design, a clinical case series or a single subject experimental design with a minimum of 10 subjects, and (d) the study included at least 1 of the following as dependent variables: sleep onset latency, number and/or duration of awakenings, total sleep time, sleep efficiency, or sleep quality. RESULTS: Psychological and behavioral therapies produced reliable changes in several sleep parameters of individuals with either primary insomnia or insomnia associated with medical and psychiatric disorders. Nine studies documented the benefits of insomnia treatment in older adults or for facilitating discontinuation of medication among chronic hypnotic users. Sleep improvements achieved with treatment were well sustained over time; however, with the exception of reduced psychological symptoms/ distress, there was limited evidence that improved sleep led to clinically meaningful changes in other indices of morbidity (e.g., daytime fatigue). Five treatments met criteria for empirically-supported psychological treatments for insomnia: Stimulus control therapy, relaxation, paradoxical intention, sleep restriction, and cognitive-behavior therapy. DISCUSSION: These updated findings provide additional evidence in support of the original review's conclusions as to the efficacy and generalizability of psychological and behavioral therapies for persistent insomnia. Nonetheless, further research is needed to develop therapies that would optimize outcomes and reduce morbidity, as would studies of treatment mechanisms, mediators, and moderators of outcomes. Effectiveness studies are also needed to validate those therapies when implemented in clinical settings (primary care), by non-sleep specialists. There is also a need to disseminate more effectively the available evidence in support of psychological and behavioral interventions to health-care practitioners working on the front line.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To present expert consensus recommendations for a standard set of research assessments in insomnia, reporting standards for these assessments, and recommendations for future research. PARTICIPANTS: N/A. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. METHODS AND RESULTS: An expert panel of 25 researchers reviewed the available literature on insomnia research assessments. Preliminary recommendations were reviewed and discussed at a meeting on March 10-11, 2005. These recommendations were further refined during writing of the current paper. The resulting key recommendations for standard research assessment of insomnia disorders include definitions/diagnosis of insomnia and comorbid conditions; measures of sleep and insomnia, including qualitative insomnia measures, diary, polysomnography, and actigraphy; and measures of the waking correlates and consequences of insomnia disorders, such as fatigue, sleepiness, mood, performance, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of a standard research assessment of insomnia disorders will facilitate comparisons among different studies and advance the state of knowledge. These recommendations are not intended to be static but must be periodically revised to accommodate further developments and evidence in the field.