Richard R. Bootzin

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.

Insomnia is a highly prevalent, often debilitating, and economically burdensome form of sleep disturbance caused by various situational, medical, emotional, environmental and behavioral factors. Although several consensually-derived nosologies have described numerous insomnia phenotypes, research concerning these phenotypes has been greatly hampered by a lack of widely accepted operational research diagnostic criteria (RDC) for their definition. The lack of RDC has, in turn, led to inconsistent research findings for most phenotypes largely due to the variable definitions used for their ascertainment. Given this problem, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) commissioned a Work Group (WG) to review the literature and identify those insomnia phenotypes that appear most valid and tenable. In addition, this WG was asked to derive standardized RDC for these phenotypes and recommend assessment procedures for their ascertainment. This report outlines the WG's findings, the insomnia RDC derived, and research assessment procedures the WG recommends for identifying study participants who meet these RDC.

This paper reviews the evidence regarding the efficacy of nonpharmacological treatments for primary chronic insomnia. It is based on a review of 48 clinical trials and two meta-analyses conducted by a task force appointed by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine to develop practice parameters on non-drug therapies for the clinical management of insomnia. The findings indicate that nonpharmacological therapies produce reliable and durable changes in several sleep parameters of chronic insomnia sufferers. The data indicate that between 70% and 80% of patients treated with nonpharmacological interventions benefit from treatment. For the typical patient with persistent primary insomnia, treatment is likely to reduce the main target symptoms of sleep onset latency and/or wake time after sleep onset below or near the 30-min criterion initially used to define insomnia severity. Sleep duration is also increased by a modest 30 minutes and sleep quality and patient's satisfaction with sleep patterns are significantly enhanced. Sleep improvements achieved with these behavioral interventions are sustained for at least 6 months after treatment completion. However, there is no clear evidence that improved sleep leads to meaningful changes in daytime well-being or performance. Three treatments meet the American Psychological Association (APA) criteria for empirically-supported psychological treatments for insomnia: Stimulus control, progressive muscle relaxation, and paradoxical intention; and three additional treatments meet APA criteria for probably efficacious treatments: Sleep restriction, biofeedback, and multifaceted cognitive-behavior therapy. Additional outcome research is needed to examine the effectiveness of treatment when it is implemented in clinical settings (primary care, family practice), by non-sleep specialists, and with insomnia patients presenting medical or psychiatric comorbidity.

A number of paradoxes are apparent in the assessment and treatment of psychophysiological insomnia and sleep state misperception. Three of these paradoxes exist as discrepancies between polysomnographic (PSG) measures and the subjective impressions regarding sleep quality and quantity. The remaining incongruity exists largely within the objective domain. In the case of subjective-objective discrepancies, patients with insomnia: (1) frequently identify themselves as having been awake when awakened from PSG defined sleep; (2) tend to overestimate sleep latency and underestimate total sleep time as compared with PSG measures; (3) appear to derive more benefit from pharmacotherapy that can be explained by objective gains. The remaining paradox pertains to the observation that hypnotic medications, by and large, do not normalize sleep architecture or produce a more 'sleep-like' EEG. In this paper, we review possible explanations for these various paradoxes, introduce a new perspective and suggest possible research avenues. The model introduced is based on the observation that beta and/or gamma activity (which have been found to be associated with cognitive processes) is enhanced in insomnia at or around sleep onset. We propose that this kind of high frequency EEG activity may interfere with the normal establishment of sleep onset-related mesograde amnesia. As a result, the patient with insomnia maintains a level of information and/or memory processing that blurs the phenomenological distinction between sleep and wakefulness and influences retrospective judgments about sleep initiation and duration.