> Detailanzeige

Simon, Laura; Steinmetz, Lisa; Feige, Bernd; Benz, Fee; Spiegelhalder, Kai; Baumeister, Harald

Comparative efficacy of onsite, digital, and other settings for cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Literatur-
verwaltung

Zur
Merkliste

Lösche von
Merkliste

Per Whatsapp teilen

Schließen

Merkliste



Sie können Bookmarks mittels Listen verwalten, loggen Sie sich dafür bitte in Ihr SLUB Benutzerkonto ein.
  • Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: Comparative efficacy of onsite, digital, and other settings for cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
  • Beteiligte: Simon, Laura; Steinmetz, Lisa; Feige, Bernd; Benz, Fee; Spiegelhalder, Kai; Baumeister, Harald
  • Erschienen: Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2023
  • Erschienen in: Scientific Reports
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-28853-0
  • ISSN: 2045-2322
  • Schlagwörter: Multidisciplinary
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Given the limited availability and accessibility of onsite cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), other CBT-I settings, such as internet-delivered CBT-I (iCBT-I), have been proposed. The primary aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of available CBT-I settings on insomnia severity. A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of available CBT-I settings was performed. PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, PubMed, and CINAHL were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating any CBT-I settings in adults with insomnia disorder. The systematic literature search (3851 references) resulted in 52 RCTs. For the primary outcome insomnia severity, all examined CBT-I settings except smartphone-delivered CBT-I yielded significant effects when compared to WL. Large standardized mean differences were found for individual onsite CBT-I (− 1.27;95%CI − 1.70, − 0.84), group-delivered CBT-I (− 1.00;95%CI − 1.42. − 0.59), telehealth (− 1.28;95%CI − 2.06, − 0.50), and guided bibliotherapy (− 0.99;95%CI − 1.67, − 0.32). Both guided iCBT-I (− 0.71;95%CI − 1.18, − 0.24) and unguided iCBT-I (− 0.78;95%CI − 1.18, − 0.38) yielded medium effect sizes. The results underline that health care systems should intensify their efforts to provide synchronously-delivered CBT-I (individual onsite, group-delivered, and telehealth), and particularly individual onsite CBT-I, given its solid evidence base. Medium to large effect sizes for iCBT-I and guided bibliotherapy indicate that self-help settings may be a viable alternative when synchronously-delivered CBT-I is not available.</jats:p>
  • Zugangsstatus: Freier Zugang