Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although the average depressed patient benefits moderately from cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) or pharmacotherapy, some experience divergent outcomes. The authors tested frequencies, predictors, and moderators of negative and unusually positive outcomes. METHOD: Sixteen randomized clinical trials comparing CBT and pharmacotherapy for unipolar depression in 1,700 patients provided individual pre- and posttreatment scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and/or Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). The authors examined demographic and clinical predictors and treatment moderators of any deterioration (increase ≥1 HAM-D or BDI point), reliable deterioration (increase ≥8 HAM-D or ≥9 BDI points), extreme nonresponse (posttreatment HAM-D score ≥21 or BDI score ≥31), superior improvement (HAM-D or BDI decrease ≥95%), and superior response (posttreatment HAM-D or BDI score of 0) using multilevel models. RESULTS: About 5%-7% of patients showed any deterioration, 1% reliable deterioration, 4%-5% extreme nonresponse, 6%-10% superior improvement, and 4%-5% superior response. Superior improvement on the HAM-D only (odds ratio=1.67) and attrition (odds ratio=1.67) were more frequent in pharmacotherapy than in CBT. Patients with deterioration or superior response had lower pretreatment symptom levels, whereas patients with extreme nonresponse or superior improvement had higher levels. CONCLUSIONS: Deterioration and extreme nonresponse and, similarly, superior improvement and superior response, both occur infrequently in randomized clinical trials comparing CBT and pharmacotherapy for depression. Pretreatment symptom levels help forecast negative and unusually positive outcomes but do not guide selection of CBT versus pharmacotherapy. Pharmacotherapy may produce clinician-rated superior improvement and attrition more frequently than does CBT.