Next-day residual effects of hypnotics in DSM-IV primary insomnia: a driving simulator study with simultaneous electroencephalogram monitoring
- 472 Downloads
Most studies that investigated the next-day residual effects of hypnotic drugs on daytime driving performances were performed on healthy subjects and after a single drug administration.
In the present study, we further examine whether the results of these studies could be generalised to insomniac patients and after repeated drug administration.
Single and repeated (7 day) doses of zolpidem (10 mg), zopiclone (7.5 mg), lormetazepam (1 mg) or placebo were administered at bedtime in a crossover design to 23 patients (9 men and 14 women aged 38.8±2.0 years) with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) primary insomnia. Driving tests were performed 9–11 h post-dose.
Results showed that treatment effects were evidenced for subjective sleep, for driving abilities, and for electroencephalogram (EEG) recorded before (resting EEG) and during the driving simulation test (driving EEG). Compared to placebo, zopiclone increased the number of collisions and lormetazepam increased deviation from speed limit and deviation from absolute speed, whereas zolpidem did not differentiate from placebo on these analyses. EEG recordings showed that in contrast to zolpidem, lormetazepam and zopiclone induced typical benzodiazepine-like alterations, suggesting that next-day poor driving performance could relate to a prolonged central nervous system effect of these two hypnotics.
The present results corroborate studies on healthy volunteers showing that residual effects of hypnotics increase with their half-lives. The results further suggest that drugs preserving physiological EEG rhythms before and during the driving simulation test 9–11 h post-dose, such as zolpidem, do not influence next-day driving abilities.
KeywordsHypnotics Insomnia Hangover effects Driving simulator
This study was supported by the Sanofi-Aventis Group, manufacturer of zolpidem and zopiclone.
- American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th edn. APA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- Bauer G (1993) EEG, drug effects and central nervous system poisoning. In: Niedermeyer E, Lopes da Silva S (eds) Electroencephalography. Basic principles, clinical applications, and related fields, 3rd edn. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 631–642Google Scholar
- Dupuy HJ, Engel A, Devine BK, Scanlon J, Querec L (1970) Selected symptoms of psychological distress. US Vital Health Stat 1 11:1–44Google Scholar
- Freeman HL (1996) Is there a need for a para hypnotic? Approaches to the co-diagnosis of insomnia and anxiety. J Drug Dev Clin Pract 7:289–302Google Scholar
- Gold MS, Miller NS, Stennie K, Populla-Vardi C (1995) Epidemiology of benzodiazepine use and dependence. Psychiatr Ann 25:146–148Google Scholar
- Karle J, Nielsen M (1998) The mechanism of action and pharmacology of zopiclone. Rev Contemp Pharmacother 9:77–87Google Scholar
- Vermeeren A, O'Hanlon JF, Declerck AC (1995) Acute effects of zolpidem and flunitrazepam on sleep, memory and driving performance, compared to those of partial sleep deprivation and placebo. Acta Ther 21:47–64Google Scholar
- Volkerts ER, O'Hanlon EF (1988) Residual effects on real car driving performance. Zopiclone versus flunitrazepam and nitrazepam. J Drug Ther Res 13:111–114Google Scholar
- Volkerts ER, Louwerens JW, Gloerich ABM (1984) Zopiclone's residual effect upon actual driving performance versus those of nitrazepam and flunitrazepam. VSC, Report 84-10, Traffic Research Centre, Groningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar