The American College of Physicians (ACP) recently identified cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) as the first-line treatment for insomnia. Although CBT-I improves sleep outcomes and reduces the risks associated with reliance on hypnotics, patients are rarely referred to this treatment, especially in primary care where most insomnia treatment is provided. We reviewed the evidence about barriers to CBT-I referrals and efforts to increase the use of CBT-I services. PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase were searched on January 11, 2018; additional titles were added based on a review of bibliographies and expert opinion and 51 articles were included in the results of this narrative review. Implementation research testing specific interventions to increase routine and sustained use of CBT-I was lacking. Most research focused on pre-implementation work that revealed the complexity of delivering CBT-I in routine healthcare settings due to three distinct categories of barriers. First, system barriers result in limited access to CBT-I and behavioral sleep medicine (BSM) providers. Second, primary care providers are not adequately screening for sleep issues and referring appropriately due to a lack of knowledge, treatment beliefs, and a lack of motivation to assess and treat insomnia. Finally, patient barriers, including a lack of knowledge, treatment beliefs, and limited access, prevent patients from engaging in CBT-I. These findings are organized using a conceptual model to represent the many challenges inherent in providing guideline-concordant insomnia care. We conclude with an agenda for future implementation research to systematically address these challenges.

/pdf/increasing-access-to-and-utilization-of-cognitive-behavioral-19mkm9mqog.pdf

Increasing access to and utilization of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I): a narrative review

Objectives
To test a new cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) program designed for use by nonclinicians.

Design
Randomized controlled trial.

Setting
Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system.

Participants
Community-dwelling veterans aged 60 and older who met diagnostic criteria for insomnia of 3 months duration or longer (N = 159).

Intervention
Nonclinician “sleep coaches” delivered a five-session manual-based CBT-I program including stimulus control, sleep restriction, sleep hygiene, and cognitive therapy (individually or in small groups), with weekly telephone behavioral sleep medicine supervision. Controls received five sessions of general sleep education.

Measurements
Primary outcomes, including self-reported (7-day sleep diary) sleep onset latency (SOL-D), wake after sleep onset (WASO-D), total wake time (TWT-D), and sleep efficiency (SE-D); Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI); and objective sleep efficiency (7-day wrist actigraphy, SE-A) were measured at baseline, at the posttreatment assessment, and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Additional measures included the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)), and quality of life (Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short-form Survey version 2 (SF-12v2)).

Results
Intervention subjects had greater improvement than controls between the baseline and posttreatment assessments, the baseline and 6-month assessments, and the baseline and 12-month assessments in SOL-D (−23.4, −15.8, and −17.3 minutes, respectively), TWT-D (−68.4, −37.0, and −30.9 minutes, respectively), SE-D (10.5%, 6.7%, and 5.4%, respectively), PSQI (−3.4, −2.4, and −2.1 in total score, respectively), and ISI (−4.5, −3.9, and −2.8 in total score, respectively) (all P < .05). There were no significant differences in SE-A, PHQ-9, or SF-12v2.

Conclusion
Manual-based CBT-I delivered by nonclinician sleep coaches improves sleep in older adults with chronic insomnia.

/pdf/cognitive-behavioral-therapy-for-insomnia-in-older-veterans-34y4tqw3n9.pdf

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia in Older Veterans Using Nonclinician Sleep Coaches: Randomized Controlled Trial.

(1) To describe the prevalence of benzodiazepine use in Belgian nursing homes, with specific attention to indications and dosages. (2) To compare actual and recommended dosages of benzodiazepines for anxiety and insomnia. (3) To explore the risk profile for chronic benzodiazepine use in institutionalised older adults. Medication charts of 1,730 residents from 76 nursing homes in Belgium were collected and analysed, using the ATC classification. Drug name, indication and daily dosage were recorded. From authoritative international sources, we extracted for each drug and each indication a daily dosage recommended not to be exceeded in older adults for comparison with observed actual dosages. Among the chronic benzodiazepine or z-drug (BZD/Z) users (50% of the residents), the leading indication was ‘insomnia’ (59% of the users) followed by ‘anxiety’ (17%) and ‘unrest’ (10%). In the chronic prescriptions of BZD/Zs indicated for insomnia, the actual daily dose exceeded the geriatric upper limit in 95% of lormetazepam prescriptions, 82% of zolpidem, 78% of zopiclone and 35% of lorazepam prescriptions. For anxiety, daily doses also exceeded the limit but not to the same extent. Multivariate analysis showed BZD/Z use was positively associated with pain (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.27–1.97), constipation (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.16–1.76) and depression (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.35–2.08). Residents with dementia were less likely to receive a BZD/Z (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48–0.74). Efforts to reduce the use of BZD/Zs in nursing homes should concentrate on insomnia, with interventions aimed at reducing too high prevalence of chronic use and too high daily dosages in this indication.

/pdf/benzodiazepine-use-in-belgian-nursing-homes-a-closer-look-5g0mq2lsrx.pdf

Benzodiazepine use in Belgian nursing homes: a closer look into indications and dosages

Background Insomnia is common leading to patients with sleep problems often presenting to primary care services including general practice, community pharmacies and community mental health teams. Little is known about how health professionals in
primary care respond to patients with insomnia. 
Aim We aimed to explore health professionals’ and patients’ experiences and perceptions of the management of insomnia in
primary care.
Design We used a qualitative design and thematic approach.
Setting Primary care in Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire.
Method We undertook focus groups and one-to-one interviews with a purposive sample of health professionals and adults with insomnia.
Results We interviewed 28 patients and 23 health professionals. Practitioners focused on treating the cause of insomnia rather than the insomnia itself. They described providing stepped care for insomnia, but this focused on sleep hygiene which patients often disregarded, rather than cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I). Practitioners were ambivalent towards hypnotic drugs but often colluded with patients to prescribe to avoid confrontation or express empathy. Patients sometimes took hypnotics in ways that were not intended, for example together with over-the-counter medication. Practitioners and patients were sometimes but not always concerned about addiction. Practitioners sometimes prescribed despite these concerns but at other times withdrew hypnotics abruptly without treating insomnia. Both patients and practitioners wanted more options and better training for the management of insomnia in primary care.
Conclusion A better understanding of the current approaches and difficulties in the management of insomnia will help to inform
more therapeutic options and health professional training.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/hex.12119

Patients' and clinicians' experiences and perceptions of the primary care management of insomnia: qualitative study.

Benzodiazepines are commonly prescribed psycho-pharmaceuticals (e.g., for anxiety, tension, and insomnia); they are generally considered safe but have potential adverse effects. Benzodiazepine use in Canada versus internationally is comparably high, yet no recent comprehensive review of use, misuse, or related (e.g., morbidity, mortality) harm at the population level exists; the present review aimed to fill this gap. We searched four key scientific literature databases (Medline, CINAHL, EBM Reviews, and Web of Science) with relevant search terms, and collected relevant "gray literature" (e.g., survey, monitoring, government reports) data published in 1995-2015. Two reviewers conducted data screening and extraction; results were categorized and narratively summarized by key sub-topics. Levels of benzodiazepine use in the general population have been relatively stable in recent years; medical use is generally highest among older adults. Rates of non-medical use are fairly low in general but higher in marginalized (e.g., street drug use) populations; high and/or inappropriate prescribing appears common in older adults. Benzodiazepines are associated with various morbidity outcomes (e.g., accidents/injuries, cognitive decline, sleep disturbances, or psychiatric issues), again commonly observed in older adults; moreover, benzodiazepines are identified as a contributing factor in suicides and poisoning deaths. Overall there is a substantial benzodiazepine-related health problem burden-although lower than that for other psycho-medications (e.g., opioids)-in Canada, mainly as a result of overuse and/or morbidity. National benzodiazepine prescription guidelines are lacking, and few evaluated interventions to reduce benzodiazepine-related problems exist. There is a clear need for reducing inappropriate benzodiazepine use and related harm in Canada through improved evidence-based practice as well as monitoring and control.

Benzodiazepine Use, Misuse, and Harm at the Population Level in Canada: A Comprehensive Narrative Review of Data and Developments Since 1995

OBJECTIVE To explore the attitudes of FPs toward benzodiazepine (BZD) prescribing and the perceived barriers to nonpharmacologic approaches to managing stress, anxiety, and insomnia. DESIGN A questionnaire including 32 statements about treatment of insomnia, stress, and anxiety. SETTING Local quality groups for FPs in Belgium. PARTICIPANTS A total of 948 Belgian FPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Barriers to using nonpharmacologic approaches in family practice. RESULTS We identified 3 different groups of FPs according to their attitudes about BZD prescribing. A first relatively big group of FPs (39%) were not really concerned about the risks of BZD prescribing. Those in the second group (17%) were aware of the problems associated with BZDs, but did not perceive it to be their role to use nonpharmacologic approaches in family practice. Those in the third group (44%) were concerned about BZD prescribing and found it to be a “bad solution,” but were faced with various barriers to applying nonpharmacologic approaches. Surprisingly, we found that nearly 97% of FPs thought that most people were eligible for nonpharmacologic approaches, but experienced implementation barriers at the level of the patient, the level of the FP, and the level of the health care system. CONCLUSION Using different education and behavioural-change strategies for different FP groups seems important. A large group of FPs does not find prescribing BZDs to be problematic. Sensitizing and alerting FPs to this issue remains very important.

https://www.cfp.ca/content/cfp/56/11/e398.full.pdf

Barriers to nonpharmacologic treatments for stress, anxiety, and insomnia Family physicians’ attitudes toward benzodiazepine prescribing

OBJECTIVE To explore the attitudes of FPs toward benzodiazepine (BZD) prescribing and the perceived barriers to nonpharmacologic approaches to managing stress, anxiety, and insomnia.

DESIGN A questionnaire including 32 statements about treatment of insomnia, stress, and anxiety.

SETTING Local quality groups for FPs in Belgium.

PARTICIPANTS A total of 948 Belgian FPs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Barriers to using nonpharmacologic approaches in family practice.

RESULTS We identified 3 different groups of FPs according to their attitudes about BZD prescribing. A first relatively big group of FPs (39%) were not really concerned about the risks of BZD prescribing. Those in the second group (17%) were aware of the problems associated with BZDs, but did not perceive it to be their role to use nonpharmacologic approaches in family practice. Those in the third group (44%) were concerned about BZD prescribing and found it to be a “bad solution,” but were faced with various barriers to applying nonpharmacologic approaches. Surprisingly, we found that nearly 97% of FPs thought that most people were eligible for nonpharmacologic approaches, but experienced implementation barriers at the level of the patient, the level of the FP, and the level of the health care system.

CONCLUSION Using different education and behavioural-change strategies for different FP groups seems important. A large group of FPs does not find prescribing BZDs to be problematic. Sensitizing and alerting FPs to this issue remains very important.

Pascale Steinberg

Papers

Barriers to nonpharmacologic treatments for stress, anxiety, and insomnia Family physicians’ attitudes toward benzodiazepine prescribing

Barriers to nonpharmacologic treatments for stress, anxiety, and insomnia