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.