探讨数据驱动型失眠障碍合并轻度焦虑或/和抑郁症状与认知行为疗法治疗失眠的疗效之间的关系

IF 5.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Dongbin Lyu , Ruiyi Qian , Fangmei Ge , Yang Wang , Hongyan Wang , Yating Zhao , Hui Han , Ruyun Liu , Yutong Liu , Yiling Chen , Caojun Ji , Xin Luo , Tianhong Zhang , Yue Leng , Jie Zhang , Chengmei Yuan , Zeping Xiao
{"title":"探讨数据驱动型失眠障碍合并轻度焦虑或/和抑郁症状与认知行为疗法治疗失眠的疗效之间的关系","authors":"Dongbin Lyu ,&nbsp;Ruiyi Qian ,&nbsp;Fangmei Ge ,&nbsp;Yang Wang ,&nbsp;Hongyan Wang ,&nbsp;Yating Zhao ,&nbsp;Hui Han ,&nbsp;Ruyun Liu ,&nbsp;Yutong Liu ,&nbsp;Yiling Chen ,&nbsp;Caojun Ji ,&nbsp;Xin Luo ,&nbsp;Tianhong Zhang ,&nbsp;Yue Leng ,&nbsp;Jie Zhang ,&nbsp;Chengmei Yuan ,&nbsp;Zeping Xiao","doi":"10.1016/j.ijchp.2025.100562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The endophenotype of insomnia disorder is complex and the treatment is not targeted. The data-driven typing method might provide some bases for precise treatment. The present study was based on a post hoc analysis, aiming to explore the association between subtypes of insomnia disorder and the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The present study was conducted on data of 118 patients with chronic insomnia disorder combined mild anxiety or/and depressive symptoms, who had completed an 8-week randomized controlled trial of CBT-I vs CBT-I plus (CBT-I combined with modules targeting anxiety and depressive symptoms). The silhouette coefficient determined the optimal number of clusters, and a K-means clustering analysis was performed. T-tests were conducted to assess baseline differences at eight weeks, and the changes in self-reported total sleep time (sTST), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD-17), and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores in order to explore the impact of subtypes and treatment approaches (CBT-I and CBT-I plus) on insomnia and emotional symptoms.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The analysis revealed no significant demographic differences between the two clusters. Subtype 2 was characterized by significantly poorer baseline sleep quality (PSQI: 16.59 vs 12.74, <em>t</em> = -9.90, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), higher depressive (HRSD: 18.47 vs 13.21, <em>t</em> = -8.37, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), and anxiety levels (HAMA: 17.47 vs 13.46, <em>t</em> = -6.23, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), and shorter sTST (4.67 vs 6.09 h, <em>t</em> = 8.31, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) compared to Subtype 1. Post-treatment analyses showed significant improvements in both subtypes, with Subtype 2 experiencing a larger increase in sleep duration (csTST: 0.58 vs 1.77 h, <em>t</em> = -7.18, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) and more pronounced improvements in sleep quality (cPSQI: 6.92 vs 8.88, <em>t</em> = -3.57, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), depression (cHRSD: 8.07 vs 10.59, <em>t</em> = -2.71, <em>p</em> = 0.008), and anxiety (cHAMA: 9.28 vs 11.22, <em>t</em> = -2.56, <em>p</em> = 0.012). Despite these improvements, Subtype 1 maintained significantly better outcomes in sleep quality (PSQI: 5.81 vs 7.71, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), depression (HRSD: 5.14 vs 7.89, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), and anxiety (HAMA: 4.18 vs 6.25, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) at 8 weeks. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were found between treatment groups within subtypes, indicating homogeneity. Within Cluster 1, CBT-I plus was more effective in reducing depressive symptoms (cHRSD: <em>t</em> = -2.48, <em>p</em> = 0.016), whereas CBT-I was superior in enhancing sTST in Cluster 2 (<em>t</em> = 2.01, <em>p</em> = 0.049), with no significant differences in other measures.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The study underscores the heterogeneity within ID subtypes and the differential response of sleep quality and depressive symptoms to CBT-I and CBT-I plus, highlighting the importance of personalized treatment strategies based on insomnia subtypes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47673,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology","volume":"25 1","pages":"Article 100562"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the associations between data-driven insomnia disorder combined with mild anxiety or/and depressive symptoms and the efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for insomnia\",\"authors\":\"Dongbin Lyu ,&nbsp;Ruiyi Qian ,&nbsp;Fangmei Ge ,&nbsp;Yang Wang ,&nbsp;Hongyan Wang ,&nbsp;Yating Zhao ,&nbsp;Hui Han ,&nbsp;Ruyun Liu ,&nbsp;Yutong Liu ,&nbsp;Yiling Chen ,&nbsp;Caojun Ji ,&nbsp;Xin Luo ,&nbsp;Tianhong Zhang ,&nbsp;Yue Leng ,&nbsp;Jie Zhang ,&nbsp;Chengmei Yuan ,&nbsp;Zeping Xiao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijchp.2025.100562\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The endophenotype of insomnia disorder is complex and the treatment is not targeted. The data-driven typing method might provide some bases for precise treatment. The present study was based on a post hoc analysis, aiming to explore the association between subtypes of insomnia disorder and the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The present study was conducted on data of 118 patients with chronic insomnia disorder combined mild anxiety or/and depressive symptoms, who had completed an 8-week randomized controlled trial of CBT-I vs CBT-I plus (CBT-I combined with modules targeting anxiety and depressive symptoms). The silhouette coefficient determined the optimal number of clusters, and a K-means clustering analysis was performed. T-tests were conducted to assess baseline differences at eight weeks, and the changes in self-reported total sleep time (sTST), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD-17), and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores in order to explore the impact of subtypes and treatment approaches (CBT-I and CBT-I plus) on insomnia and emotional symptoms.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The analysis revealed no significant demographic differences between the two clusters. Subtype 2 was characterized by significantly poorer baseline sleep quality (PSQI: 16.59 vs 12.74, <em>t</em> = -9.90, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), higher depressive (HRSD: 18.47 vs 13.21, <em>t</em> = -8.37, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), and anxiety levels (HAMA: 17.47 vs 13.46, <em>t</em> = -6.23, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), and shorter sTST (4.67 vs 6.09 h, <em>t</em> = 8.31, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) compared to Subtype 1. Post-treatment analyses showed significant improvements in both subtypes, with Subtype 2 experiencing a larger increase in sleep duration (csTST: 0.58 vs 1.77 h, <em>t</em> = -7.18, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) and more pronounced improvements in sleep quality (cPSQI: 6.92 vs 8.88, <em>t</em> = -3.57, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), depression (cHRSD: 8.07 vs 10.59, <em>t</em> = -2.71, <em>p</em> = 0.008), and anxiety (cHAMA: 9.28 vs 11.22, <em>t</em> = -2.56, <em>p</em> = 0.012). Despite these improvements, Subtype 1 maintained significantly better outcomes in sleep quality (PSQI: 5.81 vs 7.71, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), depression (HRSD: 5.14 vs 7.89, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01), and anxiety (HAMA: 4.18 vs 6.25, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) at 8 weeks. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were found between treatment groups within subtypes, indicating homogeneity. Within Cluster 1, CBT-I plus was more effective in reducing depressive symptoms (cHRSD: <em>t</em> = -2.48, <em>p</em> = 0.016), whereas CBT-I was superior in enhancing sTST in Cluster 2 (<em>t</em> = 2.01, <em>p</em> = 0.049), with no significant differences in other measures.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The study underscores the heterogeneity within ID subtypes and the differential response of sleep quality and depressive symptoms to CBT-I and CBT-I plus, highlighting the importance of personalized treatment strategies based on insomnia subtypes.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100562\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1697260025000201\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1697260025000201","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:失眠症的内表型复杂,治疗缺乏针对性。数据驱动的类型化方法可以为精确处理提供一定的依据。本研究基于事后分析,旨在探讨失眠障碍亚型与认知行为治疗失眠(CBT-I)疗效之间的关系。方法本研究纳入118例合并轻度焦虑或/和抑郁症状的慢性失眠症患者,这些患者完成了为期8周的CBT-I与CBT-I + (CBT-I联合针对焦虑和抑郁症状的模块)的随机对照试验。剪影系数确定最佳聚类数,并进行k均值聚类分析。采用t检验评估8周时的基线差异,以及自我报告的总睡眠时间(sTST)、匹兹堡睡眠质量指数(PSQI)、汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表(HRSD-17)和汉密尔顿焦虑评定量表(HAMA)评分的变化,以探讨亚型和治疗方法(CBT-I和CBT-I +)对失眠和情绪症状的影响。结果分析显示,两类人群在人口统计学上无显著差异。亚型2的特点是基线睡眠质量明显较差(PSQI: 16.59 vs 12.74, t = -9.90, p <;0.01),重度抑郁(HRSD: 18.47 vs 13.21, t = -8.37, p <;0.01)和焦虑水平(HAMA: 17.47 vs 13.46, t = -6.23, p <;0.01)和较短的sTST (4.67 vs 6.09 h, t = 8.31, p <;0.01)。治疗后分析显示两种亚型均有显著改善,亚型2的睡眠持续时间增加较多(csTST: 0.58 vs 1.77 h, t = -7.18, p <;0.01)和更明显的睡眠质量改善(cPSQI: 6.92 vs 8.88, t = -3.57, p <;0.001)、抑郁(cHRSD: 8.07 vs 10.59, t = -2.71, p = 0.008)和焦虑(cHAMA: 9.28 vs 11.22, t = -2.56, p = 0.012)。尽管有这些改善,但亚型1在睡眠质量方面保持了明显更好的结果(PSQI: 5.81 vs 7.71, p <;0.01),抑郁(HRSD: 5.14 vs 7.89, p <;0.01)和焦虑(HAMA: 4.18 vs 6.25, p <;0.01)。各治疗组在亚型内基线特征无显著差异,表明均质性。在集群1中,CBT-I +在减轻抑郁症状方面更有效(cHRSD: t = -2.48, p = 0.016),而CBT-I在增强集群2中的sTST方面更有效(t = 2.01, p = 0.049),其他措施之间无显著差异。结论本研究强调了失眠亚型的异质性,以及CBT-I和CBT-I +对睡眠质量和抑郁症状的差异反应,强调了基于失眠亚型的个性化治疗策略的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring the associations between data-driven insomnia disorder combined with mild anxiety or/and depressive symptoms and the efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for insomnia

Objectives

The endophenotype of insomnia disorder is complex and the treatment is not targeted. The data-driven typing method might provide some bases for precise treatment. The present study was based on a post hoc analysis, aiming to explore the association between subtypes of insomnia disorder and the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I).

Methods

The present study was conducted on data of 118 patients with chronic insomnia disorder combined mild anxiety or/and depressive symptoms, who had completed an 8-week randomized controlled trial of CBT-I vs CBT-I plus (CBT-I combined with modules targeting anxiety and depressive symptoms). The silhouette coefficient determined the optimal number of clusters, and a K-means clustering analysis was performed. T-tests were conducted to assess baseline differences at eight weeks, and the changes in self-reported total sleep time (sTST), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD-17), and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores in order to explore the impact of subtypes and treatment approaches (CBT-I and CBT-I plus) on insomnia and emotional symptoms.

Results

The analysis revealed no significant demographic differences between the two clusters. Subtype 2 was characterized by significantly poorer baseline sleep quality (PSQI: 16.59 vs 12.74, t = -9.90, p < 0.01), higher depressive (HRSD: 18.47 vs 13.21, t = -8.37, p < 0.01), and anxiety levels (HAMA: 17.47 vs 13.46, t = -6.23, p < 0.01), and shorter sTST (4.67 vs 6.09 h, t = 8.31, p < 0.01) compared to Subtype 1. Post-treatment analyses showed significant improvements in both subtypes, with Subtype 2 experiencing a larger increase in sleep duration (csTST: 0.58 vs 1.77 h, t = -7.18, p < 0.01) and more pronounced improvements in sleep quality (cPSQI: 6.92 vs 8.88, t = -3.57, p < 0.001), depression (cHRSD: 8.07 vs 10.59, t = -2.71, p = 0.008), and anxiety (cHAMA: 9.28 vs 11.22, t = -2.56, p = 0.012). Despite these improvements, Subtype 1 maintained significantly better outcomes in sleep quality (PSQI: 5.81 vs 7.71, p < 0.01), depression (HRSD: 5.14 vs 7.89, p < 0.01), and anxiety (HAMA: 4.18 vs 6.25, p < 0.01) at 8 weeks. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were found between treatment groups within subtypes, indicating homogeneity. Within Cluster 1, CBT-I plus was more effective in reducing depressive symptoms (cHRSD: t = -2.48, p = 0.016), whereas CBT-I was superior in enhancing sTST in Cluster 2 (t = 2.01, p = 0.049), with no significant differences in other measures.

Conclusions

The study underscores the heterogeneity within ID subtypes and the differential response of sleep quality and depressive symptoms to CBT-I and CBT-I plus, highlighting the importance of personalized treatment strategies based on insomnia subtypes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
5.70%
发文量
38
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology is dedicated to publishing manuscripts with a strong emphasis on both basic and applied research, encompassing experimental, clinical, and theoretical contributions that advance the fields of Clinical and Health Psychology. With a focus on four core domains—clinical psychology and psychotherapy, psychopathology, health psychology, and clinical neurosciences—the IJCHP seeks to provide a comprehensive platform for scholarly discourse and innovation. The journal accepts Original Articles (empirical studies) and Review Articles. Manuscripts submitted to IJCHP should be original and not previously published or under consideration elsewhere. All signing authors must unanimously agree on the submitted version of the manuscript. By submitting their work, authors agree to transfer their copyrights to the Journal for the duration of the editorial process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信