Butler Mark J, Chandereng Thevaa, Ahn Heejoon, Slotnick Stefani, Miller Danielle, Perrin Alexandra, Rodillas Jordyn, Friel Ciaran P, Goodwin Ashley M, Cheung Ying Kuen, Davidson Karina W
Northwell, 2000 Marcus Ave, Suite 300, New Hyde Park, NY, 11042-1069, United States, 1 6467667181.
Institute of Health System Science, Feinstein Institutes For Medical Research, Manhasset, NY, United States.
JMIR Form Res. 2025 Sep 26;9:e58192. doi: 10.2196/58192.
Poor sleep (defined by short sleep duration or poor quality) is a common condition with potential serious health consequences. Exogenous melatonin supplements have been found to effectively improve poor sleep but have also been shown to have heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTEs) between individuals. Personalized N-of-1 trials, in which each participant is the unit of analysis, are ideal for identifying whether a treatment with high HTE is beneficial for each individual patient.
This study aimed to identify the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of a series of personalized N-of-1 trials of melatonin for poor sleep.
This study consisted of 60 digital, personalized N-of-1 crossover trials comparing the effects of 3.0 mg and 0.5 mg of melatonin versus placebo for poor sleep with randomization to 1 of 2 orders. The trial comprised a 2-week baseline period and a 12-week intervention period. The primary outcomes were usability of the personalized trial system (measured using the System Usability Scale [SUS]) and participant satisfaction with the trial. Effectiveness outcomes included sleep duration (measured using a Fitbit activity tracker [Google]) and sleep quality (measured using the consensus sleep diary).
Participants rated the usability of the personalized trial as acceptable (average SUS score 76.3, SD 17.1), and 96% (55/57) of those who completed satisfaction surveys stated that they would recommend the trial to others. Importantly, indices of HTE were low for 3.0 mg and 0.5 mg doses of melatonin, indicating that the effect of these treatments on sleep duration and sleep quality did not substantially vary between participants and that averaged treatment responses are appropriate. Averaged participant sleep duration did not significantly differ between the 3.0 mg (P=.70) and 0.5 mg (P=.90) melatonin intervention periods and the baseline period. In addition, regression models did not show differences between different levels of melatonin and placebo periods for sleep duration or quality.
Participant ratings of the usability of and satisfaction with this series of personalized N-of-1 trials of melatonin for sleep suggest these trials are both feasible and acceptable. However, our results show that melatonin supplements did not significantly improve sleep duration or sleep quality. Furthermore, the treatment effects' lack of heterogeneity among participants suggests that future use of N-of-1 trials of melatonin for poor sleep is not needed.
睡眠不佳(定义为睡眠时间短或质量差)是一种常见情况,可能会对健康造成严重后果。已发现外源性褪黑素补充剂可有效改善睡眠不佳的状况,但也显示出个体间治疗效果的异质性(HTEs)。以每个参与者为分析单位的个性化单病例试验,非常适合确定具有高HTE的治疗方法对每个患者是否有益。
本研究旨在确定一系列针对睡眠不佳的褪黑素个性化单病例试验的可行性、可接受性和有效性。
本研究包括60项数字化、个性化单病例交叉试验,比较3.0毫克和0.5毫克褪黑素与安慰剂对睡眠不佳的影响,并随机分为两种顺序之一。该试验包括一个为期2周的基线期和一个为期12周的干预期。主要结局是个性化试验系统的可用性(使用系统可用性量表[SUS]进行测量)和参与者对试验的满意度。有效性结局包括睡眠时间(使用Fitbit活动追踪器[谷歌]进行测量)和睡眠质量(使用共识睡眠日记进行测量)。
参与者对个性化试验的可用性评价为可接受(平均SUS评分为76.3,标准差为17.1),完成满意度调查的参与者中有96%(55/57)表示会向他人推荐该试验。重要的是,3.0毫克和0.5毫克剂量的褪黑素的HTE指数较低,这表明这些治疗对睡眠时间和睡眠质量的影响在参与者之间没有显著差异,平均治疗反应是合适的。在3.0毫克(P = 0.70)和0.5毫克(P = 0.90)褪黑素干预期与基线期之间,参与者的平均睡眠时间没有显著差异。此外,回归模型未显示不同水平的褪黑素与安慰剂期在睡眠时间或质量上存在差异。
参与者对这一系列针对睡眠的褪黑素个性化单病例试验的可用性和满意度评价表明,这些试验既可行又可接受。然而,我们的结果表明,褪黑素补充剂并未显著改善睡眠时间或睡眠质量。此外,参与者之间治疗效果缺乏异质性表明,未来无需对睡眠不佳使用褪黑素单病例试验。