Abstract

Study Objectives

The goal of this randomized controlled trial, conducted in breast cancer patients, was to assess the long-term efficacy of a video-based cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (VCBT-I), as compared to a professionally administered intervention (PCBT-I) and to a no-treatment group (CTL). An earlier report revealed that, at posttreatment, VCBT-I patients showed significantly greater sleep improvements than CTL, but that PCBT-I produced superior effects than VCBT-I on some sleep and secondary outcomes. In this report, long-term effects are compared.

Methods

Two hundred forty-two women with breast cancer and with insomnia symptoms or using hypnotic medications participated to this three-arm randomized controlled trial: (1) PCBT-I (n = 81); (2) VCBT-I (n = 80); or (3) no treatment (CTL; n = 81) group. PCBT-I was composed of six weekly, individual sessions of approximately 50 min, whereas VCBT-I comprised a 60-min animated video and six booklets.

Results

Study measures (sleep and secondary variables) were administered at pretreatment and posttreatment, and at a 3-, 6-, and 12-mo follow-up. Treatment gains were well sustained at follow-up in both PCBT-I and VCBT-I. As at posttreatment, the remission rate of insomnia at follow-up was greater in PCBT-I than in VCBT-I, which was greater than in CTL.

Conclusions

Although face-to-face therapy remains the optimal format to efficaciously administer CBT for insomnia in cancer patients, a minimal intervention, such as the video-based intervention tested in this study, produces significant and sustainable treatment effects.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00674830.

Significance

Self-administered forms of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) are increasingly recommended to increase patients' accessibility to this treatment. However, it is important to compare their long-term efficacy to that of a professionally-administered CBT-I (PCBT-I), which constitutes the standard delivery format. This study suggests that a video-based CBT-I (VCBT-I) provides a most valuable alternative. It could be used as a stand-alone treatment in settings where resources for administering CBT-I are lacking. However, given that many VCBT-I patients were still symptomatic following treatment, minimal interventions should ideally be used as part of a stepped care model in which low-intensity interventions are followed by more intensive forms of treatment (e.g., group or individual sessions) when needed. Clinical trials are needed to assess the utility of a stepped care approach to administer CBT-I.

You do not currently have access to this article.

Comments

0 Comments
Submit a comment
You have entered an invalid code
Thank you for submitting a comment on this article. Your comment will be reviewed and published at the journal's discretion. Please check for further notifications by email.