Comparing Guidelines for Insomnia Treatment in China and Korea: Focusing on Traditional Medicine

Objectives: This study aimed to compare clinical practice guidelines for insomnia in China and Korea, with a particular focus on traditional medicine (TM) approaches.Methods: A comparative study was conducted on insomnia guidelines from the Chinese Neuropsychiatric Association (CG), the Korean Neuropsychiatric Association (KG), and the Society of Korean Medicine Neuropsychiatry (TKG). The comparison items, including definitions, evaluations, and treatment, were determined through collaborative work involving a panel of five traditional medicine experts (two traditional Chinese medicine doctors and three Korean medicine doctors) with research or clinical experience in insomnia.Results: While both countries’ guidelines align with international standards, they differ in evaluation and treatment, especially regarding TM. CG integrates TM holistically alongside Western medicine, recommending Chinese patent medicines, herbal therapies based on pattern identification, and various nonpharmacological TM methods, such as acupuncture and traditional exercises. In contrast, Korea has a bifurcated system. KG adheres strictly to DSM-5 and minimally references TM (mentioning valerian but not recommending it), while the TKG specifically details traditional Korean medicine treatments, including pattern identification tools, specific herbal formulas with evidence grading (e.g., <i>Guibi-tang</i>, <i>Ondam-tang</i>), and acupuncture, but offers limited integration with Western approaches, such as CBT-I or pharmacotherapy.Conclusion: The guidelines reflect distinct approaches shaped by differing healthcare systems and cultural contexts. Future collaborative research is needed to establish criteria for treatment duration and combination therapies for TM treatments.