Effect of a nutraceutical combination on sleep quality among people with mildly impaired sleep: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3417083/v1

Download PDF

Article

Effect of a nutraceutical combination on sleep quality among people with mildly impaired sleep: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3417083/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 05 Apr, 2024

Read the published version in Scientific Reports →

You are reading this latest preprint version

In this randomised, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned adults with a Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) > = 5 to receive a formulation containing L-theanine (from green tea – Camellia sinensis extract), lemon balm (Melissa officinalis) extract, valerian (Valeriana officinalis) extract, and saffron extract (Crocus sativus), or placebo, during six weeks. We enrolled and randomised 64 individuals, of whom 31 from the active group and 27 from the placebo group completed the six-week follow-up. Mean sleep efficiency remained unmodified in the active group, and increased by 3% in the placebo group, the between-group difference in the change was not statistically significant (p = 0.49). Total sleep time also improved more with placebo (13.0 vs. 1.33 minutes, p = 0.66). Time wake after sleep onset (WASO) decreased more in the active group (4.6% vs. 2.4%), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.33). Mean PSQI decreased by 3.11 points (32.3%) in the active group, and by 3.86 points (39.5%) in the placebo group (p = 0.41). SF-36 increased more with placebo (+ 18.3 in active, + 32.1 in placebo, p = 0.68). Salivary cortisol remained unchanged in both groups. No serious adverse events were reported. Among adults with mildly impaired sleep, a nutraceutical combination did not improve objective or subjective sleep parameters more than a placebo infusion.

Health sciences/Neurology/Neurological disorders/Sleep disorders

Health sciences/Medical research/Translational research

Health sciences/Risk factors

Sleep is a fundamental biological process for human health [1]. During sleep, the human organism saves energy, repairs tissues, restores energy sources and develops metabolic and immunologic adaptations [2]. Sleep also plays a fundamental role in memory consolidation [3] and in the clearance of beta-amyloid and other noxious metabolites [4].

From an evolutionary perspective, sleep shows substantial variation among species, as it is determined largely by environmental conditions and feeding requirements [5]. In human beings, many additional elements may influence sleep, including social, environmental, and individual factors [6]. At the societal level, public policies, exposure to technology, and the 24/7 society characteristic of a globalized labour market, condition sleep habits. At the environmental level, factors like living conditions, work schedules, neighbourhood safety and prevailing cultural norms also impinge on sleep. Finally, the genetic makeup, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours of each individual are key determinants of their sleep patterns [6]. All these features make sleep a complex and labile experience for humans.

Data from the 2021 Philips Global Sleep Survey show that sleep disturbances are an underdiagnosed and poorly controlled problem worldwide. Only 55% of adults were completely or somewhat satisfied with their sleep [7]. The majority of adults sleep on average 1.2 hours less than recommended (6.8 hours vs. 7–9 hours), and eight out of ten want to improve their quality of sleep, but less than half of them (40%) have consulted a health professional for this. Data from an urban population in Colombia showed that almost 60% of adults had a sleep concern, of whom 45% might require medical management [8].

Given the multifactorial nature of sleep, and the fact that sleep disorders can be successfully managed when properly diagnosed [9], multiple interventions have been tested to improve sleep quality. One such group of interventions is nutraceutical products, supplements derived from plants or plant extracts containing biological components that potentially improve different aspects of sleep quality [10]. The public interest and exposure to advertising of nutraceutical products is growing rapidly [11], but there is a paucity of data from quality randomised trials assessing the efficacy and safety of nutraceutical products and their combinations among people with sleep problems [12, 13].

On this basis, we aimed to assess the impact of a nutraceutical formulation that combines extracts from different plants for which positive impacts on sleep have been reported (green tea, lemon balm, valerian and saffron) [14–17], among adults with mildly impaired sleep.

Study design

This was a randomised, doble-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial conducted between December 2022 and June 2023 in Bogota, Colombia. The purpose of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a nutraceutical formulation aimed at improving sleep quality, among people with mildly impaired sleep (see inclusion criteria). The study protocol was approved by the IRB Riesgo de Fractura S.A., according to minute CEI-51 of December 15, 2022. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov under number NCT05609890. All participants underwent an informed consent procedure and provided written informed consent before participation. All study procedures were executed in compliance with regulations for health research dictated by resolution 8430 − 1993 of the Colombian Ministry of Health and with the principles stated by the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and its later amendments.

Participants

Participants were men and women aged 18 or older, with mildly impaired sleep (defined as a Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Score [PSQI] > = 5), not receiving any specific treatment for sleep improvement at the time of enrolment. The exclusion criteria were: History of a specific sleep disorder according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fifth Edition (DSM-5), history of an anxiety disorder, depression or other serious psychiatric or neurological condition, uncontrolled hypothyroidism, history of cortisol deficit or excess disorders, alcohol intake greater than two standard drinks (30g alcohol) per day, caffeine intake greater than 400 mg per day, frequent sleep deprivation over the last two months, smoking or use of tobacco products, use of recreational drugs, shift work, and childbearing desire among women.

Randomisation and masking

Eligible individuals who manifested their wish to take part in the study were contacted for screening by phone, filled a PSQI questionnaire to verify eligibility and provided their informed consent. Then, they underwent a one-week run-in phase, in which all received the active nutraceutical formulation. Those with adherence > = 85% went on to a washout week, during which they wore a Fitbit Charge 5 actigraphy device, linked to a cloud-based server for collection of sleep variables, and kept a detailed sleep diary. Participants who completed the run-in and washout phases attended an in-person visit in which baseline vital signs, anthropometric variables and blood and saliva samples were collected. In the same visit, participants fulfilled a Short Form − 36 questions (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire and were randomised to the active intervention or placebo group with minimization by age (< 40 or > = 40), sex and basal PSQI (< 8 or > = 8). Participants, data collectors and researchers who performed statistical analysis were unaware of the group allocation codes. The nutraceutical formulation and placebo were both powdered and contained in sealed opaque envelopes. Even though the appearance and taste of the two interventions were not identical, participants and researchers who provided the envelopes and assessed the results were unaware of which color or taste corresponded to which intervention.

Procedures

The nutraceutical formulation was a powder mixture of green tea (Camellia sinensis) extract, lemon balm (Melissa officinalis) extract, valerian (Valeriana officinalis) extract, saffron extract (Lepticrosalides®), and excipients. The placebo group received a powder mixture of the excipients with natural lemongrass, peppermint, and mint flavouring.

Participants were instructed to pour the full content of each envelope into 200 ml of warm water and drink it one hour before going to bed. They were also advised not to add anything else to this beverage, and to store all empty envelopes in order to return them to the study staff for assessment of adherence. In the randomization visit, each participant received enough envelopes of their allocated intervention for the study duration (6 weeks). Participants received a diary book to keep track of their taken doses of the intervention and were asked to record any new symptom in this book, and to communicate it immediately to the study staff. All participants received a phone call at week three of the intervention phase, in which they were inquired about adverse events and adherence. At the end of week five for each participant, we delivered the actigraphy device at their home in order to collect the final values of actigraphy measures during week six. At the end of week six, participants attended a final in-person visit in which they returned the actigraphy device, fulfilled again the PSQI and SF-36 questionnaires, and provided final blood and saliva samples. Figure 1 summarizes the study timeline.

Outcomes

Our primary outcome was the between-group difference in the change in sleep efficiency (final-basal) over six weeks. Sleep efficiency is defined as the ratio of total time asleep to total time in bed (expressed as a percentage). Total time in bed was calculated by subtracting the go-to-sleep time from the wake-up time, both reported in the sleep diary. Patients were instructed to be as accurate as possible in registering the exact time they attempted to fall asleep, and the exact time they woke up and no longer intended to sleep [18]. Total time asleep was extracted from actigraphy data registered by the Fitbit Charge 5. One secondary outcome was the group difference in change in PSQI, collected from participants at the screening contact and at the final visit. The PSQI is a 10-item instrument that assesses seven domains related to sleep quality, namely subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleep medications, and daytime dysfunction; all of them over the last month. PSQI scores range from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating worse sleep quality. Another secondary outcome was the group difference in change in wake after sleep onset (WASO), defined as the total number of minutes that the participant was awake after having initially fallen asleep [19]. WASO was obtained directly from actigraphy data. We also analysed as secondary outcomes the group difference in salivary cortisol (measured at the exact same time of the day for each participant), and the change in the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36) score. SF-36 is a questionnaire that assesses health-related quality of life reflected in eight domains: physical functioning, physical role, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, emotional role, and mental health [20]. Higher SF-36 scores represent better health and functioning. Safety was monitored by inquiring in detail about adverse events in all study visits, and by assessing changes in liver and kidney function tests. All measurements were undertaken in a centralized laboratory.

Statistical analyses

Sample size was calculated using the expression for two-arm trials with a continuous outcome [21]. For an assumed variability in sleep efficiency of 2.3% [22], a sample size of 60 participants would provide us with 95% power to detect a true difference of 2.18% in our primary outcome, at a two-sided type I error rate (alpha) of 0.05. Expecting a 10% dropout rate, we aimed to recruit a total of sixty-six participants.

The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis population consisted of all participants who were randomised and received at least one dose of the assigned study intervention. The normality of continuous variables was tested using the Shapiro-Wilk and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. Within-group comparisons of study outcomes were made using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Between-group comparisons in changes in study outcomes were made using an ANCOVA linear model, with intervention group as fixed factor, and basal value of each outcome as covariate. Statistical analyses were performed in IBM SPSS Statistics 23. For all analyses we used a significance level of 5% (0.05).

Role of the funding source

The funding source of this study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report. All authors had full access to the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Between January 16 and April 18, 2023, we screened 193 potential participants, 88 of whom were excluded due to neurologic or psychiatric disease, night shift work, smoking or recreational drug use, or other reasons (Fig. 2).

Sixty-seven eligible individuals started the run-in phase, during which three patients decided not to go on with the study, while 64 continued to the washout phase. All 64 participants moved on to randomization, the minimization algorithm allocated 35 of them to the active group and 29 to the placebo group. The sex distribution, age, demographic, anthropometric, clinical and laboratory measures were similar between groups (Table 1). Mean basal PSQI and SF-36 scores were also comparable. Concerning actigraphy variables, all were similar except for sleep latency which was slightly longer in the placebo group. Throughout the six weeks of follow-up, there were in total four dropouts in the active group, and two in the placebo group (Fig. 2).

Table 1

Baseline characteristics of study participants. Data are means (SD), unless indicated otherwise.
	Intervention group
	Active		Placebo
	n = 35		n = 29
Women, n (%)	24	(68·6)	19	(65·5)
Age (years)	36·4	(14·4)	33	(13·0)
Educational level n (%)
High school	3	(8·57)	1	(3·45)
College	5	(14·3)	7	(24·14)
Technical/Associate	2	(5·71)	1	(3·45)
Professional	21	(60·0)	17	(58·6)
Postgraduate	4	(11·4)	3	(10·3)
Weight (Kg)	63·9	(11·1)	67·2	(12·0)
Height (m)	1·63	(0·08)	1·64	(0·10)
Body-mass index (Kg/m2)	23·9	(3·14)	24·9	(3·07)
Systolic blood pressure (mmHg)	108·2	(12·2)	111·2	(11·7)
Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg)	75·5	(6·99)	78·4	(7·02)
Heart rate	73·9	(11·3)	78·6	(8·85)
PSQI	9·60	(3·70)	9·86	(2·79)
SF-36 score	619·3	(93·7)	592·9	(138·5)
Sleep latency (mean)	24·1	(26·4)	33·6	(31·3)
Total sleep time (min)	383·2	(55·4)	370·4	(50·8)
Sleep efficiency	0·84	(0·06)	0·81	(0·07)
Midsleep variability	1·03	(0·69)	1·00	(0·45)
Wake after sleep onset (minutes)	53·1	(12·9)	55·5	(14·9)
Salivary cortisol (nmol/L)	7·15	(3·99)	6·60	(4·27)
Blood glucose (mg/dL)	120·1	(70·3)	103·6	(27·1)
Urea nitrogen (mg/dL)	18·1	(6·33)	16·4	(5·28)
Creatinine (mg/dL)	0·91	(0·28)	0·85	(0·26)
Aspartate amino transferase (U/L)	14·4	(13·7)	12·6	(12·5)
Alanine amino transferase (U/L)	19·7	(9·21)	21·8	(8·15)
Bilirubin (mg/dL)	0·22	(0·20)	0·22	(0·12)
Thyroid-stimulating hormone (mUI/L)	2·58	(1·59)	2·67	(1·98)

The intention-to-treat analysis included 64 participants. In the within-group change analyses, sleep efficiency increased 3% in the placebo group (p = 0.049) but did not change in the active group (Table 2). The PSQI improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.001 in both cases), while the SF-36 score increased by 32.1 points with placebo (p = 0.032) and by 18.3 points with the active treatment (p = 0.077) (Table 2).

Table 2

Within-group change in study outcomes. P-values are within-group, from a Wilcoxon test.
	Active		Placebo
	Final - basal	p-value	Final -basal	p-value
Change in sleep efficiency (%)	0.00	0.71	0.03	0.049
Change in PSQI	-3.11	< 0.001	-3.86	< 0.001
Change in WASO (minutes)	-2.43	0.20	-1.34	0.83
Change in TST (minutes)	1.33	0.91	13.0	0.28
Change in SF-36	18.3	0.077	32.1	0.032
Change in salivary cortisol (nmol/L)	0.03	0.71	-0.40	0.95

For our primary outcome, sleep efficiency, the between-group difference in the change was not significant (p = 0.49) (Fig. 3, Panel A). Both groups experienced a noticeable improvement in the PSQI, a decrease of 3.86 points (39.1%) in the placebo group, and of 3.11 points (32.3%) in the active group (between-groups p-value 0.41) (Fig. 3, Panel B). In actigraphy variables, the mean WASO also decreased in both groups, by 2.4% in the placebo arm, and by 4.6% in the active treatment arm (Fig. 3, Panel C). Total sleep time increased more in the placebo (13.0 minutes) than in the active group (1.33 minutes), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.66) (Fig. 3, Panel D). There were improvements in quality of life in both groups, with the mean SF-36 score increasing by almost twice as much in the placebo group relative to the active treatment. Nonetheless, the between-group difference was not significant (p = 0.68) (Fig. 3, Panel E). Salivary cortisol remained relatively stable in both groups (-0.40 nmol/L ion placebo, + 0.03 nmol/L in active, p = 0.52) (Fig. 3, Panel F).

There were no serious adverse events during the trial. The frequency of reported adverse events is displayed in Table 3. The most frequently reported adverse events were gastrointestinal in both groups: 22.9% of the participants in the active and 10.3% in the placebo group referred heartburn, while bloating was reported by 14.3% and 3.4%, respectively. Daytime sleepiness was more frequent in the active (17.1%) than in the placebo group (10.3%). One participant from the placebo group reported a poorer quality of sleep. All adverse events improved after the first week of intervention and had resolved by the end of the follow-up period.

Table 3

Frequency of adverse events. Data are n (%).
	Group
Adverse events	Active	Placebo
	n = 35	n = 29
Nausea	1 (2·9%)	2 (6·9%)
Diarrhea	0 (0%)	2 (6·9%)
Constipation	1 (2·9%)	1 (3·4%)
Heartburn	8 (22·3%)	3 (10·3%)
Palpitations	1 (2·9%)	0 (0%)
Daytime sleepiness	6 (17·1%)	3 (10·3%)
Skin lesions	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Hypoprosexia	0 (0%)	1 (3·4%)
Dysgeusia	3 (8·6%)	1 (3·4%)
Others	10 (28·6%)	4 (13·8%)
Bloated stomach	5 (14·3%)	1 (3·4%)
Abdominal pain	2 (5·7%)	0 (0%)
Early awakening	1 (2·9%)	0 (0%)
Nightmares	1 (2·9%)	0 (0%)
Low libido	1 (2·9%)	0 (0%)
Headache	0 (0%)	1 (3·4%)
Night sweats	0 (0%)	1 (3·4%)
Poorer sleep	0 (0%)	1 (3·4%)

Laboratory parameters showed no indication of renal or hepatic impairment in either group (Table 4).

Table 4

Changes in laboratory parameters, by intervention group. Data are means (SD).
	Group				Between-groups p-value
	Active		Placebo		Between-groups p-value
Blood glucose (mg/dL)	-10.7	31.7	-7.14	31.6	0.66
Urea nitrogen (mg/dL)	-0.42	7.09	-1.97	7.60	0.40
Creatinine (mg/dL)	0.09	0.28	0.10	0.27	0.85
AST (U/L)	-3.33	16.1	-4.18	11.2	0.81
ALT (U/L)	-8.57	12.5	-13.2	10.6	0.12
Bilirubin (mg/dL)	0.13	0.29	0.17	0.27	0.61

Nutraceutical products have been proposed as a treatment alternative for sleep disturbances. This study assessed the effect of a nutraceutical combination on objective and subjective sleep parameters during six weeks of intervention among adults with mildly impaired sleep. Our primary outcome, sleep efficiency, remained unchanged in the intervention group and improved in the placebo group, but the difference between groups was not statistically significant. For patient-reported outcomes like sleep quality (measured by PSQI) and health-related quality of life (measured by SF-36), there were improvements regardless of intervention group. On the other hand, other objective variables measured by actigraphy showed a slightly different result according to the intervention. In the active group the reduction in WASO was larger than in the placebo group, while total sleep time improved markedly in the placebo group. Salivary cortisol levels remained relatively stable in both groups.

In concordance with our results, a prior clinical trial of valerian extract among older women with insomnia found no significant effect on sleep efficiency, but a trend towards a benefit in WASO with the supplementary intervention [23]. Likewise, a randomised study of saffron against placebo in adults with mild to moderate sleep disorders and anxiety, found no between-groups difference in the change in sleep efficiency [24]. Concerning other components of the study intervention, there was a host of prior evidence suggesting a positive impact of lemon balm and green tea on sleep quality, but these studies had derived sleep efficiency from PSQI component 4, rather than directly measuring it [25, 26]. Interestingly, the small 3% increase in sleep efficiency in the placebo group reached within-group significance. This finding highlights the potential relevance of the placebo effect even on objective sleep measurements [27, 28].

One of the outcomes most related to sleep quality is WASO, the amount of time spent in the wake state after initially having fallen asleep. In our study, WASO decreased in both groups, but the change was not significant. Moreover, total sleep time increased in the placebo group by 13 minutes, but this change was also not statistically significant. A clinical trial in healthy young woman assessed the acute effect of green tea extract on sleep and polysomnographic variables, registering no difference in WASO and total sleep time between green tea extract and placebo [29].

PSQI summarizes in a single score the perceived quality of sleep and represents a true measure of the burden imposed by sleep disturbances. Participants in the active and placebo group started with a comparable PSQI, after six weeks of intervention both groups had a notable 3 point-improvement in their mean total score. A study of green tea extract among healthy Japanese adults found a substantial improvement in PSQI with the intervention, but like in our study, it was not significantly different from placebo [26]. Moreover, when the presumed active component of tea extract (L-theanine) was combined with magnesium, B-vitamins and Rhodiola in a single nutraceutical supplement, its effect on the PSQI among adults who scored high on a stress questionnaire was comparable to placebo [30]. Despite initially encouraging results among post-menopausal women [25], the evidence on the efficacy of lemon balm for sleep quality has yielded heterogeneous results. Haybar H et al., assessed the effect of lemon balm or placebo on the PSQI among patients with chronic stable angina, both groups had equally significant reductions in the PSQI [31]. Contrastingly, a study in patients with type 2 diabetes plus depression or anxiety symptoms found no significant modification in the PSQI after four weeks of lemon balm supplementation [32]. In patients with insomnia, a four-week study of a combination of lemon balm with the plant Nepeta menthoides evidenced a PSQI improvement significantly different from placebo [33]. A host of prior evidence suggested an effect of valerian on sleep quality. A meta-analysis of six studies comparing valerian mono-preparations to placebo indicated statistically significant placebo-subtracted reductions in the PSQI [34], albeit with a large between-trial heterogeneity (I² = 93%). Unfortunately, such results were not replicated in our study.

We observed a very large improvement in the PSQI, regardless of intervention group. The magnitude of the placebo effect can be unusually high for sleep-related outcomes: A meta-analysis of 82 treatment groups from 32 clinical trials reported a mean placebo effect of 61% on subjective sleep parameters [27]. Hence, the inclusion of a placebo control is of utmost importance in studies that assess the efficacy of any intervention for sleep, nutraceuticals included. In parallel to the improvements in PSQI, participants from both groups increased their SF-36 scores. This is an anticipated result, as quality of sleep greatly influences health-related quality of life [35, 36].

Multiple factors can explain the results of our study, in which the intervention and placebo group experienced similar improvements in key sleep outcomes. Many effective interventions for sleep disturbances are behavioural in nature, including relaxation training, stimulus control therapy, sleep restriction therapy, sleep hygiene, paradoxical intention therapy, cognitive restructuring, and many others [37]. In our study, participants had to follow a pre-bed routine that included tasks like warming and drinking a beverage, which may have induced a particular disposition, more favourable to sleep. This implicit behavioural and cognitive influence may partially explain the positive effect in both groups, without evidence of an added benefit from the composition of the tested intervention. Some of the favourable changes may also reflect a plausible Hawthorne effect from feeling observed while wearing the actigraphy device [38].

The proportion of adverse events was low and very similar between groups, and we found no evidence of renal or hepatic impairment.

Strengths of our study include its randomised design, careful collection and control of study variables, provision of the study intervention and close monitoring of adherence. Also, the combination of objective and subjective outcome measures of sleep quality provided a more holistic assessment of sleep. We assessed not only sleep itself, but variables closely related to it and with clinical or biological relevance, such as health-related quality of life or salivary cortisol, information that is not always collected in studies of non-pharmacological interventions for sleep. Concerning the intervention, the simultaneous assessment of various nutraceutical products with prior indications of positive effects on sleep, increased the probability of evidencing a beneficial effect, if it was present. The central limitations of our study are its duration of only six weeks, although most evidence shows that sleep-related variables can be substantially modified in such timespan [39], and its relatively modest sample size. Another phenomenon that we cannot rule out is the existence of antagonism among the components of the nutraceutical intervention, so that one component may partially antagonize the effects of another, we had no mechanism for testing this hypothesis. Lastly, it is also possible that participants communicated among them leading to some degree of unmasking, but there was no way for the participants to tell the particular organoleptic characteristics of each intervention.

Future research efforts should focus on the use of nutraceuticals as part of a broader behavioural strategy aimed at patients with sleep disorders. In this context, the inclusion of an appropriate comparator will be of extreme relevance. Formal evaluations of the effect of nutraceuticals are needed in order to inform evidence-based recommendations about products from this growing market.

In conclusion, in this clinical trial among adults with mildly impaired sleep, a nutraceutical combination improved sleep to the same extent as a placebo infusion. This result may be explained by the influence of behavioural and cognitive factors.

Data availability

De-identified data and a data dictionary will be available upon request to the corresponding author according to a formal research proposal. The data will be available only for research and non-commercial purposes carried out by individuals with academic or public health institutions. Data access will need agreement and approval by the local ethics committee.

Author contributions

COM and SAG-R contributed to the conceptualization, data collection and curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, and writing of the article. COM supervised all study activities. EST-N contributed to data collection, formal analysis, and execution of the study. ACZ-G contributed to conceptualization, execution and writing of the article. SC-C, ALL-V and CB-V contributed to the conceptualization, funding acquisition, and writing of the article. All authors critically revised the content of the manuscript. All authors had full access to all the data in the study and accept responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Additional information

Declaration of interest

This study was funded by Team Foods Colombia, but the sponsor was not involved in the study conduct or analysis, or in the decision to publish.

Grandner, M. Fernandez, F. The translational neuroscience of sleep: A contextual framework. Science. 374, 568–573 (2021).
Krueger, JM. Frank, MG. Wisor, JP. Roy, S. Sleep function: Toward elucidating an enigma. Sleep. Medicine. Reviews. 28, 46–54 (2016).
Rash, B. Born, J. About sleep's role in memory. Physiol. Rev. 93, 381–766 (2013).
Xie, L. et al. Sleep drives metabolite clearance from the adult brain. Science. 342, 373–377 (2013).
Siegel, J. Sleep function: an evolutionary perspective. Lancet. Neurol. 21, 937–946 (2022).
Grandner, M. Sleep, health, and society. Sleep. Med. Clin. 15, 139–340 (2020).
Koninklijke Philips, N.V. Seeking solutions: how COVID-19 changed sleep around the world. Philips Global Survey. https://www.philips.com/c-dam/b2c/master/experience/smartsleep/world-sleep-day/2021/philips-world-sleep-day-2021-report.pdf?_ga=2.266737478.939582726.1694542028-662900700.1694542028 (2021).
Ruiz, AJ. et al. Prevalence of sleep complaints in Colombia at different altitudes. Sleep. Sci. 9, 100–1005 (2016).
Pavlova, M. Latreille, V. Sleep Disorders. The American Journal of Medicine. 132, 292–299 (2019).
Guadagna, S. Barattini, DF. Rosu, S. Ferini-Strambi, L. Plant Extracts for Sleep Disturbances: A Systematic Review. Evid. Based. Complement. Alternat. Med. 2020, 3792390 (2020).
Puri, V. et al. A comprehensive review on nutraceuticals: theraphy support and formulation challenges. Nutrients. 14, 1–28 (2022).
Chan, V. Lo, K. Efficacy of dietary supplements on improving sleep quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Postgrad. Med. J. 98, 285–293 (2022).
Yurcheshen, M. Seehuus, M. Pigeon, W. Updates on Nutraceutical Sleep Therapeutics and Investigational Research. Evid. Based. Complement. Alternat. Med. 2015, 105256 (2015).
Nathan, PJ. Lu, K. Gray, M. Oliver, C. The neuropharmacology of L-theanine(N-ethyl-L-glutamine): a possible neuroprotective and cognitive enhancing agent. J. Herb. Pharmacother. 6, 21–30 (2006).
Cases, J. Ibarra, A. Feuillère, N. Roller, M. Sukkar, SG. Pilot trial of Melissa officinalis L. leaf extract in the treatment of volunteers suffering from mild-to-moderate anxiety disorders and sleep disturbances. Med. J. Nutrition. Metab. 4, 211–218 (2011).
Shinjyo, N. Waddell, G. Green, J. Valerian Root in Treating Sleep Problems and Associated Disorders-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Evid. Based. Integr. Med. 25, 2515690X20967323 (2020).
Lian, J. et al. Effects of saffron supplementation on improving sleep quality: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Sleep Med. 92, 24–33 (2022).
Ancoli-Israel, S. et al. The SBSM Guide to Actigraphy Monitoring: Clinical and Research Applications. Behav Sleep Med. 13 Suppl 1, S4-S38 (2015).
Shrivastava, D. Jung, S. Saadat, M. Sirohi, R. Crewson, K. How to interpret the results of a sleep study. J. Community. Hosp. Intern. Med. Perspect. 4, 24983 (2014).
Hooker, SA. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine (ed. Gellman, MD. Turner, JR.) 1784–6 (Springer, 2013).
Wittes, J. Sample size calculations for randomized controlled trials. Epidemiol. Rev. 24, 39–53 (2002).
Ong, JL. et al. COVID-19-related mobility reduction: heterogenous effects on sleep and physical activity rhythms. Sleep. 44, zsaa179 (2021).
Taibi, DM. et al. A randomized clinical trial of valerian fails to improve self-reported, polysomnographic, and actigraphic sleep in older women with insomnia. Sleep. Med. 10, 319–28 (2009).
Pachikian, BD. Copine, S. Suchareau, M. Deldicque, L. Effects of Saffron extract on eleep quality: A randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial. Nutrients. 13, 1473 (2021).
Taavoni, S. Nazem Ekbatani, N. Haghani, H. Valerian/lemon balm use for sleep disorders during menopause. Complement. Ther. Clin. Pract. 19, 193–6 (2013).
Hidese, S. et al. Effects of L-Theanine administration on stress-related symptoms and cognitive functions in healthy adults: A randomized controlled trial. Nutrients. 11, 2362 (2019).
Winkler, A. Rief, W. Effect of Placebo Conditions on polysomnographic parameters in primary insomnia: A meta-analysis. Sleep. 38, 925–31 (2015).
Yeung, V. Sharpe, L. Geers, A. Colagiuri, B. Choice, expectations, and the placebo effect for sleep difficulty. Ann. Behav. Med. 54, 94–107 (2020).
Baba, Y. Takihara, T. Okamura, N. Theanine maintains sleep quality in healthy young women by suppressing the increase in caffeine-induced wakefulness after sleep onset. Food. Funct. 14, 7109–7116 (2023).
Noah, L. et al. Effect of a combination of magnesium, B vitamins, Rhodiola, and green tea (L-Theanine) on chronically stressed healthy individuals - A randomized, placebo-controlled study. Nutrients. 14, 1863 (2022).
Haybar, H. et al. The effects of Melissa officinalis supplementation on depression, anxiety, stress, and sleep disorder in patients with chronic stable angina. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 26, 47–52 (2018).
Safari, M. et al. The effects of melissa officinalis on depression and anxiety in type 2 diabetes patients with depression: a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled clinical trial. BMC Complement Med Ther. 23, 140 (2023).
Ranjbar, M. et al. Efficacy of a combination of Melissa officinalis L. and Nepeta Menthoides Boiss. & Buhse on insomnia: A triple-Blind, randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. J. Altern. Complement. Med. 24, 1197–1203 (2018).
Zhang, X. Lu, Y. Lv, F. Hu, Y. Valerian for insomnia on subjective and objective sleep parameters: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Curr. Sleep. Medicine. Rep. 9, 211–224 (2023).
Lee, S. Kim, JH. Chung, JH. The association between sleep quality and quality of life: a population-based study. Sleep Med. 84, 121–126 (2021).
Matsui, K. et al. Association of subjective quality and quantity of sleep with quality of life among a general population. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 18, 12835 (2021).
Sharma, MP. Andrade, C. Behavioral interventions for insomnia: Theory and practice. Indian J Psychiatry. 54, 359–66 (2012).
McCarney, R. et al. The Hawthorne effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC. Med. Res. Methodol. 7, 30 (2007).
Zheng, X. et al. Quantitative analysis of the placebo response in pharmacotherapy of insomnia and its application in clinical trials. Sleep. 43, zsz286 (2020).

Competing interest reported. This study was funded by Team Foods Colombia, but the sponsor was not involved in the study conduct or analysis, or in the decision to publish.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 05 Apr, 2024

Read the published version in Scientific Reports →

Editorial decision: Revision requested
21 Feb, 2024
Reviews received at journal
05 Feb, 2024
Reviews received at journal
18 Jan, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
24 Dec, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
23 Dec, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
12 Dec, 2023
Reviews received at journal
04 Dec, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
22 Nov, 2023
Reviewers invited by journal
22 Nov, 2023
Editor assigned by journal
09 Nov, 2023
Editor invited by journal
18 Oct, 2023
Submission checks completed at journal
18 Oct, 2023
First submitted to journal
06 Oct, 2023

You are reading this latest preprint version

Effect of a nutraceutical combination on sleep quality among people with mildly impaired sleep: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Study design

Participants

Randomisation and masking

Procedures

Outcomes

Statistical analyses

Role of the funding source

Results

Discussion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1