Janet M Y Cheung, Lee M Ritterband, Si-Jing Chen, Hans Ivers, Charles M Morin
{"title":"失眠的阶梯式护理管理:在实用的非随机临床试验环境下,由患者决策辅助指导的治疗选择。","authors":"Janet M Y Cheung, Lee M Ritterband, Si-Jing Chen, Hans Ivers, Charles M Morin","doi":"10.1111/jsr.70127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patients with insomnia face difficult decisions when choosing between treatment options with competing risk-benefit profiles. Patient treatment choices were evaluated as part of a pragmatic nonrandomized clinical trial for a two-step cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) intervention. Upon enrollment, participants were guided by a patient decision aid (PtDA), outlining the risk-benefit profiles of medication, face-to-face CBT-I (FtFCBT-I), and digital CBT-I (dCBT-I). In Step 1, participants chose between dCBT-I alone, combined dCBT-I plus medication or medication alone. Non-remitters who enrolled into Step 2 chose between FtFCBT-I, medication, or no additional treatment. A secondary analysis was conducted evaluating patient treatment choices, the presence of decisional conflict, and the acceptability of the PtDA. In Step 1, 47.4% (n = 73) of participants chose dCBT-I, followed by combined dCBT-I plus medication (42.3% n = 66) and medication alone (9.74%; n = 15). The dCBT-I group was less likely to use medications or used them less frequently compared to the other treatment groups. Men and individuals less motivated to change sleep habits were more likely to choose medication in Step 1. In Step 2, 60.9% (n = 42) of non-remitters chose FtFCBT-I, followed by no additional treatment (23.6%; n = 16) and medication (15.9%; n = 11). Non-remitters from the medication group in Step 1 were more likely to choose medication again in Step 2. Over 90% of participants across both treatment steps endorsed the PtDA as acceptable and facilitated their decision-making. This corroborated with the minimal decisional conflict observed, highlighting a potential role in further developing and integrating patient decision aids into practice. Trial Registration: NCT03633305.</p>","PeriodicalId":17057,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sleep Research","volume":" ","pages":"e70127"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stepped-Care Management of Insomnia: Treatment Choices Guided by a Patient Decision Aid in a Pragmatic Nonrandomized Clinical Trial Setting.\",\"authors\":\"Janet M Y Cheung, Lee M Ritterband, Si-Jing Chen, Hans Ivers, Charles M Morin\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jsr.70127\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Patients with insomnia face difficult decisions when choosing between treatment options with competing risk-benefit profiles. Patient treatment choices were evaluated as part of a pragmatic nonrandomized clinical trial for a two-step cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) intervention. Upon enrollment, participants were guided by a patient decision aid (PtDA), outlining the risk-benefit profiles of medication, face-to-face CBT-I (FtFCBT-I), and digital CBT-I (dCBT-I). In Step 1, participants chose between dCBT-I alone, combined dCBT-I plus medication or medication alone. Non-remitters who enrolled into Step 2 chose between FtFCBT-I, medication, or no additional treatment. A secondary analysis was conducted evaluating patient treatment choices, the presence of decisional conflict, and the acceptability of the PtDA. In Step 1, 47.4% (n = 73) of participants chose dCBT-I, followed by combined dCBT-I plus medication (42.3% n = 66) and medication alone (9.74%; n = 15). The dCBT-I group was less likely to use medications or used them less frequently compared to the other treatment groups. Men and individuals less motivated to change sleep habits were more likely to choose medication in Step 1. In Step 2, 60.9% (n = 42) of non-remitters chose FtFCBT-I, followed by no additional treatment (23.6%; n = 16) and medication (15.9%; n = 11). Non-remitters from the medication group in Step 1 were more likely to choose medication again in Step 2. Over 90% of participants across both treatment steps endorsed the PtDA as acceptable and facilitated their decision-making. This corroborated with the minimal decisional conflict observed, highlighting a potential role in further developing and integrating patient decision aids into practice. Trial Registration: NCT03633305.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sleep Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e70127\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sleep Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jsr.70127\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sleep Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jsr.70127","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Stepped-Care Management of Insomnia: Treatment Choices Guided by a Patient Decision Aid in a Pragmatic Nonrandomized Clinical Trial Setting.
Patients with insomnia face difficult decisions when choosing between treatment options with competing risk-benefit profiles. Patient treatment choices were evaluated as part of a pragmatic nonrandomized clinical trial for a two-step cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) intervention. Upon enrollment, participants were guided by a patient decision aid (PtDA), outlining the risk-benefit profiles of medication, face-to-face CBT-I (FtFCBT-I), and digital CBT-I (dCBT-I). In Step 1, participants chose between dCBT-I alone, combined dCBT-I plus medication or medication alone. Non-remitters who enrolled into Step 2 chose between FtFCBT-I, medication, or no additional treatment. A secondary analysis was conducted evaluating patient treatment choices, the presence of decisional conflict, and the acceptability of the PtDA. In Step 1, 47.4% (n = 73) of participants chose dCBT-I, followed by combined dCBT-I plus medication (42.3% n = 66) and medication alone (9.74%; n = 15). The dCBT-I group was less likely to use medications or used them less frequently compared to the other treatment groups. Men and individuals less motivated to change sleep habits were more likely to choose medication in Step 1. In Step 2, 60.9% (n = 42) of non-remitters chose FtFCBT-I, followed by no additional treatment (23.6%; n = 16) and medication (15.9%; n = 11). Non-remitters from the medication group in Step 1 were more likely to choose medication again in Step 2. Over 90% of participants across both treatment steps endorsed the PtDA as acceptable and facilitated their decision-making. This corroborated with the minimal decisional conflict observed, highlighting a potential role in further developing and integrating patient decision aids into practice. Trial Registration: NCT03633305.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Sleep Research is dedicated to basic and clinical sleep research. The Journal publishes original research papers and invited reviews in all areas of sleep research (including biological rhythms). The Journal aims to promote the exchange of ideas between basic and clinical sleep researchers coming from a wide range of backgrounds and disciplines. The Journal will achieve this by publishing papers which use multidisciplinary and novel approaches to answer important questions about sleep, as well as its disorders and the treatment thereof.