The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.155.10.1443

Objective:The authors’ goal was to determine whether cognitive behavioral treatment of residual symptoms of depression might have a significant effect on relapse rate. Method:A 6-year follow-up assessment was conducted of 40 patients with primary major depressive disorder who had been successfully treated with antidepressants and were randomly assigned to either cognitive behavioral treatment of residual symptoms or standard clinical management.Results:Ten of the patients (50%) in the cognitive behavioral treatment group and 15 (75%) in the standard clinical management group relapsed. The difference did not attain statistical significance. When multiple relapses were considered, patients in the cognitive behavioral treatment group had a significantly lower number of depressive episodes than those in the standard clinical management group. Patients responded to the same antidepressant drug used in the index episode; in two cases (4%), resistance occurred.Conclusions:The protective effects of cognitive behavioral treatment that were evident at 4-year follow-up faded afterward. Cognitive behavioral treatment of residual symptoms, however, improved the long-term outcome of major depression in terms of total number of episodes during the follow-up period. Am J Psychiatry 1998; 155: 1443-1445