Evidence Hub

Effect of age on hypnotics' efficacy and safety in insomnia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Nguyen PV, Dang-Vu TT, Leduc P, Champagne S, Saidi L, Desmarais P

Sleep medicine, 2025

14,720 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy in improving sleep quality and safety of hypnotics in individuals aged 65 years or older compared to those under 65 years.

METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and EBM Reviews were searched for randomized clinical trials comparing hypnotics to the placebo in adults with chronic insomnia between Jan 2000 and Dec 2022. The efficacy outcome included all participant self-assessments sleep quality questionnaires. The safety outcome included acceptability and tolerance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) was estimated using a random effect model.

RESULTS: We included 17 and 53 clinical trials with 3688 and 14,720 participants in the ≥65 years and <65 years group respectively. The SMD for the sleep quality outcome was -0.36 [Confidence interval (CI) 95 %: 0.45;-0.26] in the ≥65 years group compared to -0.51 [95%CI: 0.61; -0.41] in the <65 years group (p = 0.02). Differences in efficacy were observed between pharmacological classes. The overall SMD for the tolerance outcome was - 0.25 [95%CI: 0.34; -0.16] favoring the placebo group (p < 0.001). In the ≥65 years group the SMD was -0.07 [95%CI: 0.21; 0.08] compared to -0.31 [95%CI: 0.41; -0.21] in the <65 years group (p = 0.01). There were no differences for acceptability.

CONCLUSION: We found that some hypnotics classes could be less effective in older individuals. We encourage authors to include details on multimorbidity and polypharmacy in their…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 14,720 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free