Lancee Jaap, van Straten Annemieke, Morina Nexhmedin, Kaldo Viktor, Kamphuis Jan H
Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Clinical Psychology and EMGO Institute, VU University, the Netherlands.
Sleep. 2016 Jan 1;39(1):183-91. doi: 10.5665/sleep.5344.
To compare the efficacy of guided online and individual face-to-face cognitive behavioral treatment for insomnia (CBT-I) to a wait-list condition.
A randomized controlled trial comparing three conditions: guided online; face-to-face; wait-list. Posttest measurements were administered to all conditions, along with 3- and 6-mo follow-up assessments to the online and face-to-face conditions. Ninety media-recruited participants meeting the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria for insomnia were randomly allocated to either guided online CBT-I (n = 30), individual face-to-face CBT-I (n = 30), or wait-list (n = 30).
At post-assessment, the online (Cohen d = 1.2) and face-to-face (Cohen d = 2.3) intervention groups showed significantly larger treatment effects than the wait-list group on insomnia severity (insomnia severity index). Large treatment effects were also found for the sleep diary estimates (except for total sleep time), and anxiety and depression measures (for depression only in the face-to-face condition). Face-to-face treatment yielded a statistically larger treatment effect (Cohen d = 0.9) on insomnia severity than the online condition at all time points. In addition, a moderate differential effect size favoring face-to-face treatment emerged at the 3- and 6-mo follow-up on all sleep diary estimates. Face-to-face treatment further outperformed online treatment on depression and anxiety outcomes.
These data show superior performance of face-to-face treatment relative to online treatment. Yet, our results also suggest that online treatment may offer a potentially cost-effective alternative to and complement face-to-face treatment.
Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01955850.
A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 13.
比较指导性在线认知行为疗法治疗失眠(CBT-I)和个体面对面认知行为疗法治疗失眠与等待列表状态的疗效。
一项随机对照试验,比较三种情况:指导性在线治疗;面对面治疗;等待列表。对所有情况进行后测,并对在线治疗和面对面治疗情况进行3个月和6个月的随访评估。90名通过媒体招募的符合《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)失眠标准的参与者被随机分配到指导性在线CBT-I组(n = 30)、个体面对面CBT-I组(n = 30)或等待列表组(n = 30)。
在后测时,在线干预组(Cohen d = 1.2)和面对面干预组(Cohen d = 2.3)在失眠严重程度(失眠严重指数)方面的治疗效果显著大于等待列表组。在睡眠日记评估(总睡眠时间除外)以及焦虑和抑郁测量方面(仅面对面治疗组的抑郁有显著效果)也发现了较大的治疗效果。在所有时间点,面对面治疗在失眠严重程度方面的治疗效果(Cohen d = 0.9)在统计学上均大于在线治疗。此外,在3个月和6个月的随访中,所有睡眠日记评估均显示出有利于面对面治疗的中等效应量差异。面对面治疗在抑郁和焦虑结果方面也优于在线治疗。
这些数据表明面对面治疗相对于在线治疗具有更好的效果。然而,我们的结果也表明,在线治疗可能是一种潜在的具有成本效益的替代方案,并可补充面对面治疗。
Clinicaltrials.gov,NCT01955850。
关于本文的一篇评论文章发表在本期第13页。