Summary: Progress in the field of insomnia since 2017 necessitated this update of the European Insomnia Guideline. Recommendations for the diagnostic procedure for insomnia and its comorbidities are: clinical interview (encompassing sleep and medical history); the use of sleep questionnaires and diaries (and physical examination and additional measures where indicated) (A). Actigraphy is not recommended for the routine evaluation of insomnia (C), but may be useful for differential‐diagnostic purposes (A). Polysomnography should be used to evaluate other sleep disorders if suspected (i.e. periodic limb movement disorder, sleep‐related breathing disorders, etc.), treatment‐resistant insomnia (A) and for other indications (B). Cognitive‐behavioural therapy for insomnia is recommended as the first‐line treatment for chronic insomnia in adults of any age (including patients with comorbidities), either applied in‐person or digitally (A). When cognitive‐behavioural therapy for insomnia is not sufficiently effective, a pharmacological intervention can be offered (A). Benzodiazepines (A), benzodiazepine receptor agonists (A), daridorexant (A) and low‐dose sedating antidepressants (B) can be used for the short‐term treatment of insomnia (≤ 4 weeks). Longer‐term treatment with these substances may be initiated in some cases, considering advantages and disadvantages (B). Orexin receptor antagonists can be used for periods of up to 3 months or longer in some cases (A). Prolonged‐release melatonin can be used for up to 3 months in patients ≥ 55 years (B). Antihistaminergic drugs, antipsychotics, fast‐release melatonin, ramelteon and phytotherapeutics are not recommended for insomnia treatment (A). Light therapy and exercise interventions may be useful as adjunct therapies to cognitive‐behavioural therapy for insomnia (B).

S and full research articles published in SLEEP, the official journal of the APSS. Sleep and sleep disorder scientific findings.

The effects of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) have consistently been shown to improve insomnia symptoms and other health-related outcomes, but the effects on QoL have been inconsistent. Many factors including the type CBT-I delivery and type of instrument used to assess QoL make the topic complex. The present systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized the evidence of CBT-I efficacy on QoL outcomes across different populations, delivery modes, and methodological aspects. Following the guidelines on preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), a literature search was conducted through PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycINFO using keywords from relevant MeSH terms based on PICOS (Participants, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Study) criteria. Clinical trials investigating the effect of CBT-I as an intervention on QoL with any kind of control group were eligible if they reported mean scores and variation of QoL. Meta-analysis using a random-effect model was conducted to calculate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) in a set including all identified studies, as well as in three sub-sets: face-to-face CBT-I using randomized controlled trials (RCTs), online CBT-I using RCTs, and one-group pre- and post-treatment design. A total of 24 studies comprising 1977 participants (808 in an intervention group) from 12 countries were eligible for meta-analysis. The overall pooled estimate of SMD of QoL when all 24 studies were included was 0.47 (95% CI: 0.22; 0.72; I² = 84.5%; tau² = 0.31; p < 0.001). The overall pooled estimate of SMD of QoL was 0.46 (95% CI: 0.01-0.90; I² = 87.5%; tau² = 0.48, p < 0.001) for intervention groups with face-to-face CBT-I compared to controls; 0.47 (95% CI: 0.02-0.92; I² = 88.3%; tau² = 0.36; p = 0.04) for intervention groups with digital CBT-I compared to controls, and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.12-0.80; I² = 52.9%; tau² = 0.07; p = 0.08) for one-group pre- and post-comparison using CBT-I intervention compared to baseline. Moreover, effects of CBT-I on QoL were different across populations (pooled SMD = 0.59 for patients with insomnia; 0.29 for patients with insomnia comorbid with another major disorder; and 0.48 for other conditions) and types of QoL instruments (pooled SMD = 0.36 for disease-specific QoL instrument not on insomnia, 0.43 for generic QoL instrument, and 0.67 for a single-QoL-item instrument). The probability of publication bias was ruled out in overall and design specific sub-group analysis based on funnel plot and Egger's test. In conclusion, this meta-analysis confirmed a moderate, overall effect of CBT-I in improving QoL. However, due to small power and heterogeneity, future studies are needed to better explore the impact of moderating factors such as mode of delivery and type of QoL measure for assessment used.

The aim of this study was to compare guided Internet-delivered to group-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for insomnia. We conducted an 8-week randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with 6-months follow-up. Participants were forty-eight adults with insomnia, recruited via media. Interventions were guided Internet-delivered CBT (ICBT) and group-delivered CBT (GCBT) for insomnia. Primary outcome measure was the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), secondary outcome measures were sleep diary data, depressive symptoms, response- and remission rates. Both treatment groups showed significant improvements and large effect sizes for ISI (Within Cohen's d: ICBT post = 1.8, 6-months follow-up = 2.1; GCBT post = 2.1, 6-months follow-up = 2.2). Confidence interval of the difference between groups post-treatment and at FU6 indicated non-inferiority of ICBT compared to GCBT. At post-treatment, two thirds of patients in both groups were considered responders (ISI-reduction > 7p). Using diagnostic criteria, 63% (ICBT) and 75% (GCBT) were in remission. Sleep diary data showed moderate to large effect sizes. We conclude that both guided Internet-CBT and group-CBT in this study were efficacious with regard to insomnia severity, sleep parameters and depressive symptoms. The results are in line with previous research, and strengthen the evidence for guided Internet-CBT for insomnia. The study protocol was approved by, and registered with, the regional ethics review board in Linköping, Sweden, registration number 2010/385-31.

To evaluate if internet-delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for insomnia (ICBT-i) with brief therapist support outperforms an active control treatment. Adults diagnosed with insomnia were recruited via media (n = 148) and randomized to either eight weeks of ICBT-i or an active internet-based control treatment. Primary outcome was the insomnia severity index (ISI) assessed before and after treatment, with follow-ups after 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes were use of sleep medication, sleep parameters (sleep diary), perceived stress, and a screening of negative treatment effects. Hierarchical Linear Mixed Models were used for intent-to-treat analyses and handling of missing data. ICBT-i was significantly more effective than the control treatment in reducing ISI (Cohen's d = 0.85), sleep medication, sleep efficiency, sleep latency, and sleep quality at post-treatment. The positive effects were sustained. However, after 12 months the difference was no longer significant due to a continuous decrease in ISI among controls, possibly due to their significantly higher utilization of insomnia relevant care after treatment. Forty-six negative effects were reported but did not differ between interventions. Supported ICBT-i is more effective than an active control treatment in reducing insomnia severity and treatment gains remain stable one year after treatment.

Cognitive behavioral therapy is treatment of choice for insomnia, but availability is scarce. Self-help can increase availability at low cost, but evidence for its efficacy is limited, especially for the typical insomnia patient with co-morbid problems. We hypothesized that a cognitive behaviorally based self-help book is effective to treat insomnia in individuals, also with co-morbid problems, and that the effect is enhanced by adding brief therapist telephone support. Volunteer sample; 133 media-recruited adults with insomnia. History of sleep difficulties (mean [SD]) 11.8 [12.0] years. 92.5% had co-morbid problems (e.g. allergy, pain, and depression). Parallel randomized (block-randomization, n ≥ 21) controlled "open label" trial; three groups-bibliotherapy with (n = 44) and without (n = 45) therapist support, and waiting list control (n = 44). Assessments before and after treatment, and at three-month follow-up. Intervention was six weeks of bibliotherapeutic self-help, with established cognitive behavioral methods including sleep restriction, stimulus control, and cognitive restructuring. Therapist support was a 15-minute structured telephone call scheduled weekly. Main outcome measures were sleep diary data, and the Insomnia Severity Index. Intention-to-treat analyses of 133 participants showed significant improvements in both self-help groups from pre to post treatment compared to waiting list. For example, treatment with and without support gave shorter sleep onset latency (improvement minutes [95% Confidence Interval], 35.4 [24.2 to 46.6], and 20.6 [10.6 to 30.6] respectively), and support gave a higher remission rate (defined as ISI score below 8; 61.4%), than bibliotherapy alone (24.4%, p's < .001). Improvements were not seen in the control group (sleep onset latency 4.6 minutes shorter [-1.5 to 10.7], and remission rate 2.3%). Self-help groups maintained gains at three-month follow-up. Participants receiving self-help for insomnia benefited markedly. Self-help, especially if therapist-supported, has considerable potential to be as effective as individual treatment at lower cost, also for individuals with co-morbid problems. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01105052