Skip to content

The Effectiveness of Imagery Rescripting Interventions for Military Veterans With Nightmares and Sleep Disturbances: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Marya Hicks, Laura M. Simonds, Linda Morison

Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy July 1, 2024 DOI: 10.1002/cpp.3025 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Systematic review and meta-analysis Randomized Peer reviewed
Sample size 658
Population Military veterans with sleep disturbances or nightmares
Intervention Imagery rescripting
Topics Dreaming
Keywords Psycinfo Psychological intervention Meta-analysis Cinahl Medline Clinical psychology
Citations 4
Key findings Imagery rescripting interventions significantly improved sleep quality but not nightmare frequency in military veterans compared to control groups.

Abstract

Imagery rescripting (ImRs) interventions have been found effective in improving sleep outcomes, although research has mostly focused on civilian, rather than military, samples. The aim of this review was to estimate the overall effectiveness of ImRs interventions for military veterans on primary outcomes of nightmare frequency and sleep quality. A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycArticles, PsycINFO, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection and the PTSDpubs database and was completed on 1 November 2021. Randomised controlled trials, nonrandomised trials and pre-post studies of ImRs interventions in veterans with sleep disturbances or nightmares were included. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool, and meta-analysis was performed using Stata. Nineteen articles from 15 empirical studies were included in the review, and data from the 15 studies (involving 658 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis findings indicated that ImRs interventions are associated with significant positive changes from pretreatment to posttreatment for nightmare and sleep quality. Significantly greater improvements were found in ImRs interventions compared to control groups for sleep quality (Hedges' g = -0.65, 95% CI [-1.20, -0.10]) but not for nightmare frequency (Hedges' g = -0.10, 95% CI [-0.34, 0.14]). Overall, the meta-analysis included a relatively small number of studies with poor methodological quality and considerable heterogeneity; therefore, findings should be cautiously interpreted. Further research should focus on veteran participants with larger samples and from a broader range of sources to determine effectiveness more confidently.

Comparable studies

Other systematic reviews and meta-analyses on dreaming, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Dreaming as mind wandering: evidence from functional neuroimaging and first-person content reports. 2013 Systematic review with meta-analytic comparison
Lucid dreaming incidence: A quality effects meta-analysis of 50 years of research 2016 Meta-analysis
The effectiveness of lucid dreaming therapy in patients with nightmares: A systematic review. Adults with chronic and recurring nightmares 2023 Systematic review
The relationships between insomnia, nightmares, and dreams: A systematic review Individuals without a concomitant psychopathology, including those with insomnia or... 2024 Systematic review
Psychosocial treatments for nightmares in adults and children: a systematic review 2023 Systematic review

Citations in the library

Explore topics