|
A correction has been published: N Engl J Med 2005;353(10):1078.
|
Background Patients with shift-work sleep disorder chronically have excessive sleepiness during night work and insomnia when attempting to sleep during the day. We evaluated the use of modafinil for treating sleepiness in patients with this disorder.
Methods In a three-month, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 209 patients with shift-work sleep disorder to receive either 200 mg of modafinil or placebo before the start of each shift. Assessments were performed with the use of the nighttime Multiple Sleep Latency Test, the Clinical Global Impression of Change, the Psychomotor Vigilance Test, diaries of patients, and daytime polysomnography. After randomization, we conducted monthly assessments.
Results Treatment with modafinil, as compared with placebo, resulted in a modest improvement from baseline in mean (±SEM) nighttime sleep latency (the interval between the time a person attempts to fall asleep and the onset of sleep) (1.7±0.4 vs. 0.3±0.3 minutes, respectively; P=0.002), and more patients had improvement in their clinical symptoms (74 percent vs. 36 percent, respectively; P<0.001). Patients who were receiving modafinil also had a reduction in the frequency and duration of lapses of attention during nighttime testing of their performance on the Psychomotor Vigilance Test (change from baseline, a reduction in lapse frequency of 2.6 vs. an increase of 3.8, respectively; P<0.001), and proportionally fewer patients reported having had accidents or near accidents while commuting home (29 percent vs. 54 percent, respectively; P<0.001). Despite these benefits, patients treated with modafinil continued to have excessive sleepiness and impaired performance at night. Modafinil did not adversely affect daytime sleep as compared with placebo. Headache was the most common adverse event.
Conclusions Treatment with 200 mg of modafinil reduced the extreme sleepiness that we observed in patients with shift-work sleep disorder and resulted in a small but significant improvement in performance as compared with placebo. However, the residual sleepiness that was observed in the treated patients underscores the need for the development of interventions that are even more effective.
Source Information
From the Division of Sleep Medicine, Harvard Medical School, and the Division of Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital — both in Boston (C.A.C., K.P.W.); the Sleep Medicine Research Center, St. Luke's Hospital, Chesterfield, Mo. (J.K.W.); the Sleep Disorders and Research Center, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit (T.R.); Cephalon, Frazer, Pa. (R.JH., L.K., S.A., G.E.N.); the Sleep and Chronobiology Laboratory, Department of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado, Boulder (K.P.W.); Integris Southwest and Baptist Medical Centers, Oklahoma City (J.R.L.S.); and the Division of Sleep and Chronobiology, Department of Psychiatry and Center for Sleep and Respiratory Neurobiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia (D.F.D.).
Drs. Walsh, Roth, and Hughes contributed equally to this article.
Address reprint requests to Dr. Czeisler at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 221 Longwood Ave., Suite 438, Boston, MA 02115, or at caczeisler{at}hms.harvard.edu.
This article has been cited by other articles:
HOME | SUBSCRIBE | SEARCH | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | COLLECTIONS | PRIVACY | HELP | beta.nejm.org Comments and questions? Please contact us. The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved. |
Previous
