Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorKallestad, Håvard
dc.contributor.authorScott, Jan
dc.contributor.authorVedaa, Øystein
dc.contributor.authorLydersen, Stian
dc.contributor.authorVethe, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorMorken, Gunnar
dc.contributor.authorStiles, Tore C
dc.contributor.authorSivertsen, Børge
dc.contributor.authorLangsrud, Knut
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-16T07:31:28Z
dc.date.available2022-02-16T07:31:28Z
dc.date.created2021-11-29T12:55:45Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationSleep. 2021, 1-12.
dc.identifier.issn0161-8105
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2979232
dc.description.abstractStudy Objectives: Digital Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (dCBT-I) has demonstrated efficacy in reducing insomnia severity in self-referred and community samples. It is unknown, however, how dCBT-I compares to individual face-to-face (FtF) CBT-I for individuals referred to clinical secondary services. We undertook a randomized controlled trial to test whether fully automated dCBT-I is non-inferior to individual FtF CBT-I in reducing insomnia severity. Methods: Eligible participants were adult patients with a diagnosis of insomnia disorder recruited from a sleep clinic provided via public mental health services in Norway. The Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) was the primary outcome measure. The non-inferiority margin was defined a priori as 2.0 points on the ISI at week 33. Results: Individuals were randomized to FtF CBT-I (n = 52) or dCBT-I (n = 49); mean baseline ISI scores were 18.4 (SD 3.7) and 19.4 (SD 4.1), respectively. At week 33, the mean scores were 8.9 (SD 6.0) and 12.3 (SD 6.9), respectively. There was a significant time effect for both interventions (p < 0.001); and the mean difference in ISI at week 33 was −2.8 (95% CI: −4.8 to −0.8; p = 0.007, Cohen’s d = 0.7), and −4.6 at week 9 (95% CI −6.6 to −2.7; p < 0.001), Cohen’s d = 1.2. Conclusions: At the primary endpoint at week 33, the 95% CI of the estimated treatment difference included the non-inferiority margin and was wholly to the left of zero. Thus, this result is inconclusive regarding the possible inferiority or non-inferiority of dCBT-I over FtF CBT-I, but dCBT-I performed significantly worse than FtF CBT-I. At week 9, dCBT-I was inferior to FtF CBT-I as the 95% CI was fully outside the non-inferiority margin. These findings highlight the need for more clinical research to clarify the optimal application, dissemination, and implementation of dCBT-I. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02044263
dc.language.isoeng
dc.titleMode of delivery of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial of digital and face-to-face therapy
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.description.versionpublishedVersion
dc.source.pagenumber1-12
dc.source.journalSleep
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/sleep/zsab185
dc.identifier.cristin1960826
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel