Publication:

Religious vs. Conventional Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Major Depression in Persons With Chronic Medical Illness

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2015

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Koenig, Harold G., Michelle J. Pearce, Bruce Nelson, Sally F. Shaw, Clive J. Robins, Noha S. Daher, Harvey Jay Cohen, et al. 2015. “Religious Vs. Conventional Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Major Depression in Persons With Chronic Medical Illness.” The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 203 (4) (April): 243–251. doi:10.1097/nmd.0000000000000273.

Abstract

Abstract: We examine the efficacy of conventional cognitive behavioral therapy (CCBT) versus religiously integrated CBT (RCBT) in persons with major depression and chronic medical illness. Participants were randomized to either CCBT (n = 67) or RCBT (n = 65). The intervention in both groups consisted of ten 50-minute sessions delivered remotely during 12 weeks (94% by telephone). Adherence to treatment was similar, except in more religious participants in whom adherence to RCBT was slightly greater (85.7% vs. 65.9%, p = 0.10). The intention-to-treat analysis at 12 weeks indicated no significant difference in outcome between the two groups (B = 0.33; SE, 1.80; p = 0.86). Response rates and remission rates were also similar. Overall religiosity interacted with treatment group (B = −0.10; SE, 0.05; p = 0.048), suggesting that RCBTwas slightly more efficacious in the more religious participants. These preliminary findings suggest that CCBT and RCBT are equivalent treatments of major depression in persons with chronic medical illness. Efficacy, as well as adherence, may be affected by client religiosity.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

religion, spiritual, psychotherapy, CBT, major depression, chronic illness, randomized clinical trial

Terms of Use

Metadata Only

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories