Search

Background: Insomnia is common in primary care, can persist after co-morbid conditions are treated, and may require long-term medication treatment. A potential alternative to medications is cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I). Methods: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CBT-I to any prescription or nonprescription medication in patients with primary or comorbid insomnia. Trials had to report quantitative sleep outcomes (e.g. sleep latency) in order to be included in the analysis. Extracted results included quantitative sleep outcomes, as well as psychological outcomes and adverse effects when available. Evidence base quality was assessed using GRADE. Results: Five studies met criteria for analysis. Low to moderate grade evidence suggests CBT-I has superior effectiveness to benzodiazepine and non-benzodiazepine drugs in the long term, while very low grade evidence suggests benzodiazepines are more effective in the short term. Very low grade evidence supports use of CBT-I to improve psychological outcomes. Conclusions: CBT-I is effective for treating insomnia when compared with medications, and its effects may be more durable than medications. Primary care providers should consider CBT-I as a first-line treatment option for insomnia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic pain and insomnia have a complex, bidirectional relationship – addressing sleep complaints alongside pain may be key to alleviating patient-reported distress and disability. Healthcare professionals have consistently reported wanting to offer psychologically informed chronic pain management at the primary care level. Research in secondary care has demonstrated good treatment efficacy of hybrid CBT for chronic pain and insomnia. However, primary care is typically the main point of treatment entry, hence may be better situated to offer treatments using a multidisciplinary approach. In this study, primary care service providers' perception of feasibility for tackling pain-related insomnia in primary care was explored. Methods: The data corpus originates from a feasibility trial exploring hybrid CBT for chronic pain and insomnia delivered in primary care. This formed three in-depth group interviews with primary care staff (n = 9) from different primary care centres from the same NHS locale. All interviews were conducted on-site using a semi-structured approach. Verbal data was recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the thematic analysis process. Results: Eight themes were identified – 1) Discrepant conceptualisations of the chronic pain-insomnia relationship and clinical application, 2) Mismatch between patients' needs and available treatment offerings, 3) Awareness of psychological complexities, 4) Identified treatment gap for pain-related insomnia, 5) Lack of funding and existing infrastructure for new service development, 6) General shortage of psychological services for complex health conditions, 7) Multidisciplinary team provision with pain specialist input, and 8) Accessibility through primary care. These mapped onto four domains - Current understanding and practice, Perceived facilitators, Perceived barriers, Ideal scenarios for a new treatment service – which reflected the focus of our investigation. Taken together these provide key context for understanding challenges faced by health care professionals in considering and developing a new clinical service. Conclusions: Primary care service providers from one locale advocate better, multidisciplinary treatment provision for chronic pain and insomnia. Findings suggest that situating this in primary care could be a feasible option, but this requires systemic support and specialist input as well as definitive trials for success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Insomnia is a common sleep complaint, with 10% of adults in the general population experiencing insomnia disorder, defined as lasting longer than three months in DSM-5. Up to 50% of patients attending family practice experience insomnia, however despite this, symptoms of insomnia are not often screened for, or discussed within this setting. We aimed to examine barriers to the assessment and diagnosis of insomnia in family practice from both the clinician and patient perspective. Methods: The present article identified research that has examined barriers to assessing insomnia from the clinician's and the client's perspectives following MEDLINE and Google Scholar searches, and then classified these barriers using the theoretical domains framework. Results: The most common barriers from the clinician's perspective were related to Knowledge, Skills, and the Environmental Context. From the patient perspective, barriers identified included their Beliefs about the consequences of Insomnia, Social Influences, and Behavioural Regulation of Symptoms. Conclusions: Utilising this theoretical framework, we discuss options for bridging the gap between the identification and subsequent management of insomnia within the family practice setting. To assist clinicians and those in community health care to overcome the Knowledge and Skills barriers identified, this article provides existing relevant clinical criteria that can be utilised to make a valid diagnosis of insomnia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Comorbidity is common in patients consulting in primary care. Musculoskeletal pain and insomnia each increase the risk of the other. Co-occurrence may pose an increased burden on well-being. However, the prevalence and impact of co-existing pain and insomnia in adults living in the community who may present to primary care is unclear. The aim of this study was to report the prevalence of pain and insomnia in adults registered with primary care, and to examine the impact of co-occurrence on social activities. Methods: This population-based prospective cohort study of adults aged ≥18 years (n = 1181) used health survey data collected via baseline and 12 month follow-up questionnaires. Baseline data on pain, insomnia (4 symptoms: delayed sleep onset, difficulty maintaining sleep, early waking and non-restorative sleep) and putative confounders and social activity restriction at follow up was collected. Associations between baseline pain, insomnia and restricted social activities (RSA) at 12 months were examined using logistic regression, with adjustment for confounders. Interaction terms between pain and each insomnia symptom were examined in final models. Results: Mean respondent age was 49.6 (SD ± 15.2) years, 55.7% were female. At baseline, 880 (74.5%) reported pain, 122 (10.3%) delayed sleep onset, 298 (25.2%) difficulty maintaining sleep, 188 (15.9%) early wakening, and 215 (18.2%) reported non-restorative sleep. At follow-up 200 (16.9%) reported RSA. Pain and each insomnia symptom were associated with RSA at 12 month follow-up; pain [unadjusted odds ratio (OR:2.3;95%CI:1.5,3.5), delayed sleep onset (OR:6.1;95%CI:4.0,9.1), difficulty maintaining sleep (OR:3.2;95%CI:2.3,4.4), early wakening (OR:4.1;95%CI:2.9,5.9), and non-restorative sleep (OR:4.0; 95%CI:2.8,5.8). Only delayed sleep onset (OR:2.6;95%C:1.5,4.5) remained significantly associated with restricted social activities in the fully adjusted model. There was a significant interaction between pain and delayed sleep onset (OR:0.3;95%CI:0.1,0.99; p = .049) and restricted social activity at 12 months in the final multivariable model. Conclusions: Pain and insomnia commonly co-occur, resulting in greater impact upon subsequent functional ability. Delayed sleep onset is the insomnia symptom most strongly associated with reduced functional ability. Clinicians should be aware of the common co-occurrence of insomnia symptoms, inquire about sleep in patients consulting with pain, and offer interventions that target both sleep and pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antidepressants (ADs) are commonly prescribed in primary care and are mostly indicated for depression. According to the literature, they are now more frequently prescribed for health conditions other than psychiatric ones. Due to their many indications in a wide range of medical fields, assessing the appropriateness of AD prescription seems to be a challenge for GPs. The aim of this study was to review evidence from guidelines for antidepressant prescription for non-psychiatric conditions in Primary Care (PC) settings. Methods: Data were retrieved from French, English and US guideline databases. Guidelines or reviews were eligible if keywords regarding 44 non-psychiatric conditions related to GPs' prescription of ADs were encountered. After excluding psychiatric and non-primary care conditions, the guidelines were checked for keywords related to AD use. The latest updated version of the guidelines was kept. Recent data was searched in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and in PubMed for updated reviews and randomized control trials (RCTs). Results: Seventy-eight documents were retrieved and were used to assess the level of evidence of a potential benefit to prescribing an AD. For 15 conditions, there was a consensus that prescribing an AD was beneficial. For 5 others, Ads were seen as potentially beneficial. No proof of benefit was found for 15 conditions and proof of no benefit was found for the last 9. There were higher levels of evidence for pain conditions, (neuropathic pain, diabetic painful neuropathy, central neuropathic pain, migraine, tension-type headaches, and fibromyalgia) incontinence and irritable bowel syndrome. There were difficulties in summarizing the data, due to a lack of information on the level of evidence, and due to variations in efficacy between and among the various classes of ADs. Conclusions: Prescription of ADs was found to be beneficial for many non-psychiatric health conditions regularly encountered in PC settings. On the whole, the guidelines were heterogeneous, seemingly due to a lack of trials assessing the role of ADs in treatment strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on a study conducted on the relationship of primary health care with persistence of insomnia. It states that pain is related to insomnia, and is a cofounder between poor sleep and the use of primary health care. It mentions that 69 percent of the participants continued to suffer from insomnia.

Background: Although benzodiazepines are effective, long-term use is not recommended because of potential adverse effects; the risks of tolerance and dependence; and an increased risk of hip fractures, motor vehicle accidents, and memory impairment. The estimated prevalence of long-term benzodiazepine use in the general population is about 2,2 to 2,6%, is higher in women and increases steadily with age. Interventions performed by General Practitioners may help patients to discontinue long-term benzodiazepine use. We have designed a trial to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of two brief general practitioner-provided interventions, based on gradual dose reduction, and will compare the effectiveness of these interventions with that of routine clinical practice. Methods/Design: In a three-arm cluster randomized controlled trial, general practitioners will be randomly allocated to: a) a group in which the first patient visit will feature a structured interview, followed by visits every 2- 3 weeks to the end of dose reduction; b) a group in which the first patient visit will feature a structured interview plus delivery of written instructions to self-reduce benzodiazepine dose, or c) routine care. Using a computerized pharmaceutical prescription database, 495 patients, aged 18-80 years, taking benzodiazepine for at least 6 months, will be recruited in primary care health districts of three regions of Spain (the Balearic Islands, Catalonia, and Valencia). The primary outcome will be benzodiazepine use at 12 months. The secondary outcomes will include measurements of anxiety and depression symptoms, benzodiazepine dependence, quality of sleep, and alcohol consumption. Discussion: Although some interventions have been shown to be effective in reducing benzodiazepine consumption by long-term users, the clinical relevance of such interventions is limited by their complexity. This randomized trial will compare the effectiveness and safety of two complex stepped care interventions with that of routine care in a study with sufficient statistical power to detect clinically relevant differences. Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN13024375 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although sleep disorders are common, they frequently remain unnoticed by the general practitioner. Few data are available about the willingness and reasons of patients with sleep disturbances to seek for medical assistance. Methods: The results of a cross-sectional community-based multinational survey in three major Latin American urban areas, i.e. Buenos Aires, Mexico City and Sao Paulo, are reported. Two-hundred subjects suffering sleep disturbances and 100 non-sufferers were selected from the general population in each city (total number: 600 sufferers vs. 300 non-sufferers). A structured interview was conducted, sleep characteristics, feelings about sleep disturbances and strategies to cope with those problems being recorded. Data were analyzed by employing either t-test or analysis of variance (ANOVA) to the Z-transformed proportions. Results: 22.7 ± 3.5 % (mean ± SEM) of subjects reported to suffer from sleep disturbances every night. About 3 out of 4 (74.2 ± 2.0 %) considered their disorder as mild and were not very concerned about it. Only 31 ± 2 % of sufferers reported to have sought for medical help. Although 45 ± 2 % of sufferers reported frequent daily sleepiness, trouble to remember things, irritability and headaches, they did not seek for medical assistance. Among those patients who saw a physician with complaints different from sleep difficulties only 1 out of 3 (33 ± 2 % of patients) were asked about quality of their sleep by the incumbent practitioner. Strategies of patients to cope with sleep problems included specific behaviors (taking a warm bath, reading or watching TV) (44 ± 1.6 %), taking herbal beverages (17 ± 1.2 %) or taking sleeping pills (10 ± 1.1 %). Benzodiazepines were consumed by 3 ± 0.6 % of sufferers. Conclusion: Public educational campaigns on the consequences of sleep disorders and an adequate training of physicians in sleep medicine are needed to educate both the public and the general practitioners about sleep disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to determine and compare patients' and physicians' perceptions of benefits and risks of long term benzodiazepine use for insomnia in the elderly. Methods: A cross-sectional study (written survey) was conducted in an academic primary care group practice in Toronto, Canada. The participants were 93 patients over 60 years of age using a benzodiazepine for insomnia and 25 physicians comprising sleep specialists, family physicians, and family medicine residents. The main outcome measure was perception of benefit and risk scores calculated from the mean of responses (on a Likert scale of 1 to 5) to various items on the survey. Results: The mean perception of benefit score was significantly higher in patients than physicians (3.85 vs. 2.84, p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.69, 1.32). The mean perception of risk score was significantly lower in patients than physicians (2.21 vs. 3.63, p < 0.001, 95% CI 1.07, 1.77). Conclusions: There is a significant discordance between older patients and their physicians regarding the perceptions of benefits and risks of using benzodiazepines for insomnia on a long term basis. The challenge is to openly discuss these perceptions in the context of the available evidence to make collaborative and informed decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The majority of patients who seek help for insomnia do so in primary health care. Nurse-led group treatment in primary care based on cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) can lead to improvements in both day- and nighttime symptoms. This study aimed to explore patients' experiences of nurse-led group treatment for insomnia in primary health care. Methods: Seventeen patients who had participated in the group treatment program were interviewed in five focus groups. Interview transcriptions were analyzed with qualitative content analysis. Results: Four themes emerged that described patients' experiences of the group treatment program. Involvement and trust open the door for change: Motivation to engage in treatment arose from patients' own desire for change, from being together with others who shared or understood their struggles, and from feeling emotionally affirmed and trustful. Competence arising from deeper understanding: Patients obtained knowledge and made it their own, which enabled them to develop functional sleep habits and let go of sleep performance and worry. The ability to impact their insomnia increased patients' trust in their own efficacy and helped them persist in behavioral change. Struggling with vulnerability and failure: Treatment was tough, and patients could feel challenged by external circumstances. Moreover, they could distrust their own efficacy. Tailoring treatment to individual needs: Patients experienced different life circumstances and adapted the techniques to their needs and abilities by focusing on what felt right for them. Conclusions: Patients went through a process of motivation, change, and challenges. They experienced certain aspects of treatment as essential to changing behavior and achieving improvements. Examples included being in a group with others who shared similar experiences, gaining knowledge about sleep, keeping a sleep diary, and practicing the sleep restriction technique. The study provides insights into patients' struggles during treatment, both those related to external circumstances and those related to feelings of vulnerability and failure. It also highlights the importance of adapting treatment to patients' differing needs, underscoring the value of person-centered care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]