4.0 Article

The Natural History of Insomnia A Population-Based 3-Year Longitudinal Study

期刊

ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 169, 期 5, 页码 447-453

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2008.610

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MT 42504]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Despite its high prevalence, little information is available about the natural history of insomnia. The extent to which episodes of insomnia will persist or remit over time is difficult to predict. We examined the natural history of insomnia and describe the most common trajectories over 3 years. Methods: Three hundred eighty-eight adults (mean [SD] age, 44.8 [13.9] years; 61% women) were selected from a larger population-based sample on the basis of the presence of insomnia at baseline. They completed standardized sleep/insomnia questionnaires at 3 annual follow-up assessments. For each follow-up assessment, participants were classified into 1 of 3 groups (individuals with an insomnia syndrome, individuals with insomnia symptoms, and individuals with good sleep) on the basis of algorithms using standard diagnostic criteria for insomnia. Rates of persistent insomnia, remission, and relapse were computed for each group. Results: Of the study sample, 74% reported insomnia for at least 1 year (2 consecutive assessments) and 46% reported insomnia persisting over the entire 3-year study. The course of insomnia was more likely to be persistent in those with more severe insomnia at baseline (ie, insomnia syndrome) and in women and older adults. Remission rate was 54%; however, 27% of those with remission of insomnia eventually experienced relapse. Individuals with subsyndromal insomnia at baseline were 3 times more likely to remit than worsen to syndrome status, although persistence was the most frequent course in that group as well. Conclusion: These findings indicate that insomnia is often a persistent condition, in particular when it reaches the diagnostic threshold for an insomnia disorder.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据