Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
BACKGROUND Up to 75% of young adult cancer survivors (YACS) experience chronic insomnia, negatively affecting physical and emotional health and overall quality of life. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is a gold standard intervention to address insomnia. However, widespread uptake of CBT-I remains limited and new strategies of CBT-I delivery are warranted. OBJECTIVE We wished to understand how YACS experience insomnia, how they might incorporate technology-delivered CBT-I into a daily routine and test the feasibility and acceptability of a novel voice-activated virtual assistant-delivered CBT-I prototype. METHODS We conducted four focus groups (6-7 participants per group, N=26 total) to understand the YACS experience of insomnia, their routine use of technology at home, particularly voice-activated virtual assistants such as the Amazon Alexa, and input on how CBT-I might be delivered at home through a smart speaker system. We developed a prototype device to deliver key elements of CBT-I at home along with circadian lighting and monitoring of post-bedtime device use, collected YACS user perspectives on this prototype, and then conducted a single-arm feasibility and acceptability study. RESULTS Twenty-six YACS experiencing insomnia participated in focus groups to share experiences of insomnia during cancer survivorship and to provide input regarding a CBT-I prototype. Common triggers of insomnia included worry about disease management and progression, disease-related pain and other symptoms, choices regarding personal device use, and worry about the impact of poor sleep on daily functioning. Twelve participants completed device prototype testing, exceeding pre-determined feasibility and acceptability benchmarks and providing qualitative data to inform future device refinement. CONCLUSIONS YACS were highly engaged with our voice-activated virtual assistant-delivered CBT-I prototype and found it acceptable to use. Following final device development, future studies should evaluate efficacy of this intervention among YACS. CLINICALTRIAL NCT05875129
Groninger et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: