Patient Self-Guided Interventions to Reduce Sedative Use and Improve Sleep
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Direct-to-patient interventions enabling transitions from long-term benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA) use to cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTI) by older adults has the potential to reduce BZRA use and related harms while improving sleep outcomes without requiring prearranged clinician involvement. Objective: To compare 2 direct-to-patient behavior change interventions with treatment as usual (TAU) on BZRA use, sleep, and other health outcomes, and uptake of CBTI techniques. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Your Answers When Needing Sleep in New Brunswick (YAWNS NB) study was a 3-arm, pragmatic, open-label, minimum-contact, randomized clinical trial. The study began November 2020 and ended June 2022. Participants were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 groups, including 2 different mailed behavior change interventions or no intervention (TAU). Participants were from communities across the province of New Brunswick, Canada, and included adults 65 years and older living independently with long-term use of BZRAs and current or past insomnia. Interventions: The Sleepwell package (YAWNS-1) consisted of a cover letter and 2 booklets ("How to Stop Sleeping Pills" and "How to Get Your Sleep Back"). The other package (YAWNS-2) included updated versions of the 2 booklets ("You May Be at Risk" and "How to Get a Good Night's Sleep Without Medication") used in the Eliminating Medications Through Patient Ownership of End Results (EMPOWER) study. Main Outcomes and Measures: BZRA use at 6 months was the primary measure. Secondary measures included CBTI use, sleep, insomnia, daytime sleepiness, safety, anxiety, frailty, and quality of life. Results: A total of 1295 individuals expressed interest in the study, and 565 (43.6%) completed a baseline assessment. Participants had a mean (SD) age of 72.1 (5.7) years, a mean (SD) BZRA use duration of 11.4 (9.1) years, and 362 (64.1%) were female. Discontinuations and dose reductions of 25% or greater were highest with YAWNS-1 (50 of 191 [26.2%]; 39 of 191 [20.4%]; total, 46.6%) compared with YAWNS-2 (38 of 187 [20.3%]; 27 of 187 [14.4%]; total, 34.8%, P = .02) and TAU (14 of 187 [7.5%]; 24 of 187 [12.8%]; total, 20.3%, P < .001). YAWNS-1 also demonstrated better uptake of CBTI techniques and sleep outcomes compared with YAWNS-2 (new CBTI techniques: 3.1 vs 2.4; P =.03; sleep efficiency change: 4.1% vs -1.7%; P =.001) and reduced insomnia severity and daytime sleepiness compared with TAU (insomnia severity index change: -2.0 vs 0.3; P <.001; Epworth Sleepiness Scale change: -0.8 vs 0.3; P =.001). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of the YAWNS NB randomized clinical trial show that, as a simple, scalable, direct-to-patient intervention, YAWNS-1 substantially reduced BZRA use and improved sleep outcomes. It could be implemented to transform insomnia care for older adults at the population level. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04406103.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».