Article

The economic burden of insomnia: direct and indirect costs for individuals with insomnia syndrome, insomnia symptoms, and good sleepers.

Ecole de psychologie, Université Laval, Québec, Canada.
Sleep (Impact Factor: 5.06). 02/2009; 32(1):55-64.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Insomnia is a highly prevalent problem that is associated with increased use of health care services and products, as well as functional impairments. This study estimated from a societal perspective the direct and indirect costs of insomnia.
A randomly selected sample of 948 adults (mean age = 43.7 years old; 60% female) from the province of Quebec, Canada completed questionnaires on sleep, health, use of health-care services and products, accidents, work absences, and reduced productivity. Data were also obtained from the Quebec government administered health insurance board regarding consultations and hospitalizations. Participants were categorized as having insomnia syndrome, insomnia symptoms or as being good sleepers using a standard algorithm. Frequencies of target cost variables were obtained and multiplied by unit costs to generate estimates of total costs for the adult population of the province of Quebec.
The total annual cost of insomnia in the province of Quebec was estimated at $6.6 billion (Cdn$). This includes direct costs associated with insomnia-motivated health-care consultations ($191.2 million) and transportation for these consultations ($36.6 million), prescription medications ($16.5 million), over the-counter products ($1.8 million) and alcohol used as a sleep aid ($339.8 million). Annual indirect costs associated with insomnia-related absenteeism were estimated at $970.6 million, with insomnia-related productivity losses estimated at $5.0 billion. The average annual per-person costs (direct and indirect combined) were $5,010 for individuals with insomnia syndrome, $1431 for individuals presenting with symptoms, and $421 for good sleepers.
This study suggests that the economic burden of insomnia is very high, with the largest proportion of all expenses (76%) attributable to insomnia-related work absences and reduced productivity. As the economic burden of untreated insomnia is much higher than that of treating insomnia, future clinical trials should evaluate the cost-benefits, cost-utility, and cost-effectiveness of insomnia therapies.

0 Followers
 · 
126 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both the 2012 Beers list and the American Geriatric Society 'Choosing Wisely' campaign suggest restraint in the use of sedative-hypnotics for the treatment of insomnia in older people. Sedative hypnotic agents continue to be widely prescribed even though their use in the elderly is associated with an increased risk of falls, fractures, and emergency hospitalizations. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) compared with sedative-hypnotics and no treatment for insomnia in the US Medicare population, adjusting for the risk of falls and related consequences. A model-based economic evaluation (decision tree) using the US Medicare perspective and a conservative annual temporal framework was conducted. Simulations were performed in a hypothetical cohort of Medicare beneficiaries suffering from insomnia. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analyses assessed the robustness of the base-case analysis. On an annual basis, CBT showed a dominance (cost: US$19,442; QALYs: 0.594) over sedative hypnotics (cost: US$32,452; QALYs: 0.552) and no treatment (cost: US$33,853; QALYs: 0.517). Assuming a willingness to pay of US$50,000, the net monetary benefit was positive for CBT (US$10,287) and negative for sedative hypnotics (-US$4,851) and no treatment (-US$7,993). CBT had a 95 % chance of being the dominant strategy, with results most sensitive to an older adult's baseline risk of falling. Failure to consider drug harms such as drug-induced falls and hospitalization represents a growing public health concern, significantly underestimating the cost of sedative-hypnotic therapy and loss in quality of life for the elderly. Public payers should reconsider reimbursement of sedative-hypnotic drugs as first-line treatment for insomnia in older adults.
    Drugs & Aging 04/2015; 32(4). DOI:10.1007/s40266-015-0251-3 · 2.50 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) commissioned five Workgroups to develop quality measures to optimize management and care for patients with common sleep disorders including insomnia. Following the AASM process for quality metric development, this document describes measurement methods for two desirable outcomes of therapy, improving sleep quality or satisfaction, and improving daytime function, and for four processes important to achieving these goals. To achieve the outcome of improving sleep quality or satisfaction, pre- and post-treatment assessment of sleep quality or satisfaction and providing an evidence-based treatment are recommended. To realize the outcome of improving daytime functioning, pre- and post-treatment assessment of daytime functioning, provision of an evidence-based treatment, and assessment of treatment-related side effects are recommended. All insomnia measures described in this report were developed by the Insomnia Quality Measures Workgroup and approved by the AASM Quality Measures Task Force and the AASM Board of Directors. The AASM recommends the use of these metrics as part of quality improvement programs that will enhance the ability to improve care for patients with insomnia. © 2015 American Academy of Sleep Medicine.
    Journal of clinical sleep medicine: JCSM: official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine 01/2015; DOI:10.5664/jcsm.4552 · 2.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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.