4.6 Review

Adherence to cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia: A systematic review

Journal

SLEEP MEDICINE REVIEWS
Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages 453-464

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.smrv.2013.01.001

Keywords

Adherence; Cognitive behavioral therapy; Insomnia; Behavioral intervention

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health
  2. National Institute of Nursing Research [1K23NR010587]
  3. American Nurses Foundation [2010-049]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chronic insomnia is a significant public health problem worldwide, and insomnia has considerable personal and social costs associated with serious health conditions, greater healthcare utilization, work absenteeism, and motor-vehicle accidents. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTI) is an efficacious treatment, yet attrition and suboptimal adherence may diminish its impact. Despite the increasing use of CBTI, surprisingly little attention has been devoted to understanding the role of adherence. This review describes a comprehensive literature search of adherence to CBTI. The search revealed 15 studies that evaluated adherence to CBTI in adults using valid and reliable measures of sleep, and measure of adherence other than study withdrawals. The primary purposes of this review were to 1) synthesize current study characteristics, methodology, adherence rates, contributing factors, and impact on outcomes, 2) discuss measurement issues, and 3) identify future practice and research directions that may lead to improved outcomes. Strong patterns and inconsistencies were identified among the studies, which complicate an evaluation of the role of adherence as a factor and outcome of CBTI success. The importance of standardized adherence and outcome measures is discussed. In light of the importance of adherence to behavior change; this systematic review may better inform future intervention efforts. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available