Comparative effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for insomnia: an overview of reviews

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorRios, Patricia
dc.contributor.authorCardoso, Roberta
dc.contributor.authorMorra, Deanna
dc.contributor.authorNincic, Vera
dc.contributor.authorGoodarzi, Zahra
dc.contributor.authorFarah, Bechara
dc.contributor.authorHarricharan, Sharada
dc.contributor.authorMorin, Charles M
dc.contributor.authorLeech, Judith
dc.contributor.authorStraus, Sharon E
dc.contributor.authorTricco, Andrea C
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-17T01:08:17Z
dc.date.available2019-11-17T01:08:17Z
dc.date.issued2019-11-15
dc.date.updated2019-11-17T01:08:17Z
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background This review aimed to assess the existing evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions in adults with insomnia and identify where research or policy development is needed. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library, and PubMed were searched from inception until June 14, 2017, along with relevant gray literature sites. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full-text articles, and a single reviewer with an independent verifier completed charting, data abstraction, and quality appraisal. Results A total of 64 systematic reviews (35 with meta-analysis) were included after screening 5024 titles and abstracts and 525 full-text articles. Eight of the included reviews were rated as high quality using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) tool, and over half of the included articles (nā€‰=ā€‰40) were rated as low or critically low quality. Consistent evidence of effectiveness across multiple outcomes based on more than one high- or moderate quality review with meta-analysis was found for zolpidem, suvorexant, doxepin, melatonin, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and evidence of effectiveness across multiple outcomes based on one high-quality review with meta-analysis was found for temazepam, triazolam, zopiclone, trazodone, and behavioral interventions. These interventions were mostly evaluated in the short term (<ā€‰16 weeks), and there was very little harms data available for the pharmacological interventions making it difficult to evaluate their risk-benefit ratio. Conclusions Assuming non-pharmacological interventions are preferable from a safety perspective CBT can be considered an effective first-line therapy for adults with insomnia followed by other behavioral interventions. Short courses of pharmacological interventions can be supplements to CBT or behavioral therapy; however, no evidence regarding the appropriate duration of pharmacological therapy is available from these reviews. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42017072527.
dc.identifier.citationSystematic Reviews. 2019 Nov 15;8(1):281
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1163-9
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1880/111227
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/44083
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).
dc.titleComparative effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for insomnia: an overview of reviews
dc.typeJournal Article
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
13643_2019_Article_1163.pdf
Size:
1.01 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
0 B
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Open Access Publications