Efficacy of transcranial alternating current stimulation for insomnia: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Insomnia affects 10–30% of adults worldwide, with current treatment options showing limited efficacy. Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) has emerged as a promising neuro-modulatory approach, though its clinical utility remains uncertain. We systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tACS with sham stimulation for adults with insomnia. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception to July 2025). Primary outcomes were changes in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI); secondary outcomes included sleep onset latency, sleep efficiency, mood symptoms (depression and anxiety), and total sleep time. Analysis of data was performed using random-effects model in RevMan (Version 5.4.1). Six RCTs with a total of 354 participants were included. Compared to sham, tACS significantly improved sleep quality, with a mean difference (MD) of − 2.99 in PSQI scores (95% CI: − 4.91 to − 1.06; p = 0.002; I2 = 90%), further supported by sensitivity analysis (MD: − 3.79; p < 0.00001; I2 = 22%). ISI improvements were not significant in the main analysis but became so in sensitivity analysis (MD: − 7.02; p < 0.00001). No significant effects were found for sleep latency, efficiency, total sleep time, and depression or anxiety scores. Although tACS shows potential for improving subjective sleep quality, it did not significantly improve objectively measured sleep efficiency. The high heterogeneity and predominance of low-certainty evidence limit confidence in these findings, and current evidence remains insufficient to support clinical recommendations. Further high-quality, large-scale RCTs are needed to optimize stimulation parameters and establish long-term efficacy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sleep Science and Practice
Published
2025-12-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41606-025-00163-6
Primary Topic
Sleep and related disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Efficacy of transcranial alternating current stimulation for insomnia: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Sajjad Khan, Anzalee Khan, Muhammad Azam Khan, Naveed Ahmed Khan et al.
Sleep Science and Practice
Sleep and related disorders
article

Efficacy of transcranial alternating current stimulation for insomnia: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Sajjad Khan, Anzalee Khan, Muhammad Azam Khan, Naveed Ahmed Khan, Taha Qazi, Umer Khan, Kanza Farhan, Haris Khan, Bilal Wazir Khan, Muhammad Khattak, Laiba Niaz Syed
article en

Abstract

Insomnia affects 10–30% of adults worldwide, with current treatment options showing limited efficacy. Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) has emerged as a promising neuro-modulatory approach, though its clinical utility remains uncertain. We systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tACS with sham stimulation for adults with insomnia. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception to July 2025). Primary outcomes were changes in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI); secondary outcomes included sleep onset latency, sleep efficiency, mood symptoms (depression and anxiety), and total sleep time. Analysis of data was performed using random-effects model in RevMan (Version 5.4.1). Six RCTs with a total of 354 participants were included. Compared to sham, tACS significantly improved sleep quality, with a mean difference (MD) of − 2.99 in PSQI scores (95% CI: − 4.91 to − 1.06; p = 0.002; I2 = 90%), further supported by sensitivity analysis (MD: − 3.79; p < 0.00001; I2 = 22%). ISI improvements were not significant in the main analysis but became so in sensitivity analysis (MD: − 7.02; p < 0.00001). No significant effects were found for sleep latency, efficiency, total sleep time, and depression or anxiety scores. Although tACS shows potential for improving subjective sleep quality, it did not significantly improve objectively measured sleep efficiency. The high heterogeneity and predominance of low-certainty evidence limit confidence in these findings, and current evidence remains insufficient to support clinical recommendations. Further high-quality, large-scale RCTs are needed to optimize stimulation parameters and establish long-term efficacy.

Sleep Science and PracticeVol. 9(1)
Ayub Medical College (PK), Khyber Medical College (PK), Jinnah Sindh Medical University (PK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Sleep and related disorders
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.