Buscemi Nina, Vandermeer Ben, Friesen Carol, Bialy Liza, Tubman Michelle, Ospina Maria, Klassen Terry P, Witmans Manisha
University of Alberta/Capital Health Evidence-Based Practice Centre, Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada.
J Gen Intern Med. 2007 Sep;22(9):1335-50. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0251-z. Epub 2007 Jul 10.
Hypnotics have a role in the management of acute insomnia; however, the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions in the management of chronic insomnia is unclear.
The objective of this paper is to conduct a systematic review of the efficacy and safety of drug treatments for chronic insomnia in adults.
Twenty-one electronic databases were searched, up to July 2006.
Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were eligible. Quality was assessed using the Jadad scale. Data were pooled using the random effects model.
One hundred and five studies were included in the review. Sleep onset latency, as measured by polysomnography, was significantly decreased for benzodiazepines (BDZ), (weighted mean difference: -10.0 minutes; 95% CI: -16.6, -3.4), non-benzodiazepines (non-BDZ) (-12.8 minutes; 95% CI: -16.9, -8.8) and antidepressants (ADP) (-7.0 minutes; 95% CI: -10.7, -3.3). Sleep onset latency assessed by sleep diaries was also improved (BDZ: -19.6 minutes; 95% CI: -23.9, -15.3; non-BDZ: -17.0 minutes; 95% CI: -20.0, -14.0; ADP: -12.2 minutes; 95% CI: -22.3, -2.2). Indirect comparisons between drug categories suggest BDZ and non-BDZ have a similar effect. All drug groups had a statistically significant higher risk of harm compared to placebo (BDZ: risk difference [RD]: 0.15; non-BDZ RD: 0.07; and ADP RD: 0.09), although the most commonly reported adverse events were minor. Indirect comparisons suggest that non-BDZ are safer than BDZ.
Benzodiazepines and non-benzodiazepines are effective treatments in the management of chronic insomnia, although they pose a risk of harm. There is also some evidence that antidepressants are effective and that they pose a risk of harm.
催眠药物在急性失眠的治疗中具有一定作用;然而,药物干预在慢性失眠治疗中的疗效和安全性尚不清楚。
本文旨在对成人慢性失眠药物治疗的疗效和安全性进行系统评价。
检索了截至2006年7月的21个电子数据库。
符合条件的为随机双盲、安慰剂对照试验。使用Jadad量表评估质量。采用随机效应模型汇总数据。
该评价纳入了105项研究。通过多导睡眠图测量,苯二氮䓬类药物(BDZ)的入睡潜伏期显著缩短(加权平均差:-10.0分钟;95%置信区间:-16.6,-3.4),非苯二氮䓬类药物(非BDZ)为-12.8分钟(95%置信区间:-16.9,-8.8),抗抑郁药(ADP)为-7.0分钟(95%置信区间:-10.7,-3.3)。通过睡眠日记评估的入睡潜伏期也有所改善(BDZ:-19.6分钟;95%置信区间:-23.9,-15.3;非BDZ:-17.0分钟;95%置信区间:-20.0,-14.0;ADP:-12.2分钟;95%置信区间:-22.3,-2.2)。药物类别之间的间接比较表明,BDZ和非BDZ具有相似的效果。与安慰剂相比,所有药物组的伤害风险在统计学上均显著更高(BDZ:风险差[RD]:0.15;非BDZ的RD:0.07;ADP的RD:0.09),尽管最常报告的不良事件较轻。间接比较表明,非BDZ比BDZ更安全。
苯二氮䓬类药物和非苯二氮䓬类药物是治疗慢性失眠的有效药物,尽管它们存在伤害风险。也有一些证据表明抗抑郁药有效且存在伤害风险。