Skip to main content

Table 3 Studies comparing CBT-I to pharmacological therapies: follow-up results

From: Comparative effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia: a systematic review

Study Group Sleep latency Total sleep time Total wake time Efficiency Other Notes
CBT-I vs. zopiclone       SWS  
Sievertsen 2006 [29] CBT-I: 18 Not reported –5.0 min –60.7 min +8.7% +21.1 min  
Zopiclone :16 –56.2 min –9.9 min –0.4% –17.6 min
6 months   p = NS p = 0.01 p = 0.008 p = 0.001
Polysomnography
Sleep diary CBT-I: 18 Not reported +42.4 min –73.3 min +14.2%  
Zopiclone :16 +40.5 min –42.2 min +10.7%
  p = NS p = 0.03 p = NS
CBT-I vs. zolpidem
Jacobs 2004 [30] CBT-I: 8       No long-term follow-up for zolpidem group
12 months Zolpidem: none
Sleep diary
CBT-I vs. temazepam WASO  
Wu 2006 [31] CBT-I: 19 –32.8 min +30.3 min Not reported +10.2%   p values based on post-intervention differences
8 months Temazepam: 17 –17.2 min –13.0 min –1.9%
Polysomnography   p < 0.004 p < 0.05 p < 0.01
Sleep diary CBT-I: 19 –41.8 min 45.5 min Not reported +16.8%
Temazepam: 17 –20.5 min –6.0 min +3.9%
  p < 0.003 p < 0.01 p < 0.05
Morin 1999 [31] CBT-I: 13 Not reported +65.2 min Not reported +16.4% –16.5 min All measurements in temazepam group significantly worsened from end of treatment to end of follow-up.
24 months
Sleep diary Temazepam: 12 +11.5 min +2.9% –4.6 min
  p = NR p = NR p = NR
CBT-I vs. triazolam
McCluskey 1991 [33] CBT-I: 15 –45 min +51 min Not reported Not reported   
8 weeks Triazolam :15 –21 min +14 min
Sleep diary   p < 0.01 p = NR
  1. SWS Slow wave sleep, WASO Wake after sleep onset.