Over the past 15 years, a number of studies have reported benefits of CBT in patients with medication-resistant schizophrenia. The definition of medication resistance varies among the trials but generally the studies use criteria involving persistent psychotic symptoms for at least 6 months despite trials with adequate doses of two antipsychotics. However, before discussing those findings, we provide a brief review of early work with CBT for psychosis as background.
More recent controlled trials in treatment resistant psychosis
In a study published in 1993, Tarrier et al. (
53) compared the effectiveness of CBT for medication-resistant psychotic symptoms (residual hallucinations and delusions) with a general cognitive intervention aimed at improving problem-solving skills. Forty-nine patients were recruited, 27 of whom entered the trial and completed a post-treatment assessment; 23 of the patients were reassessed at 6-month follow-up. The participants were randomly assigned to receive five weekly sessions of coping strategy enhancement aimed at reducing psychotic symptoms or a general problem-solving intervention. Problems with this study included a high drop-out rate, lack of diagnostic clarity, and failure to use intention-to-treat methodology, with dropouts excluded from the analysis. The group who received coping strategy enhancement showed benefit on the Delusions Scale of the Psychiatric Assessment Scale (PAS) (
54) and in overall symptom severity on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) (
55) at the end of therapy and at follow-up. Despite the fact that the intervention was briefer, more intensive, and more focused (10 sessions over 5 weeks) than that used in later studies, such as the London-East Anglia Study published in 1997 (
56), it had a similar effect size on overall symptoms. Early studies of CBT interventions for resistant hallucinations using both focusing and distraction techniques (e.g., Haddock et al. 1996 [
57]) also reported improvements in symptoms.
In a controlled pilot study of CBT for drug-resistant psychosis with non-random allocation of participants, Garety et al. (
58) found that an average of 16 sessions of cognitive therapy was significantly more effective than a control group in reducing delusional conviction, overall symptomatology on the BPRS, and level of depression as measured by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) (
59). In this study, the first subjects referred for therapy (
n = 13) were placed in the experimental group, while subjects who were subsequently referred (
n = 7) were placed in the waiting list group. This study was designed as a pilot for future larger studies.
Bouchard et al. (
60) reviewed 15 studies of cognitive restructuring in the treatment of schizophrenia, 5 of which were found to be methodologically rigorous. Focusing on changes in positive symptoms as the main outcome measure, they concluded that cognitive approaches are effective in reducing or eliminating delusions and hallucinations in patients with schizophrenia and that the effect on delusions may be larger.
As noted above, the London-East Anglia group published its initial findings in 1997 (
56) and followed this up with papers on prediction of outcome (
61) and cost effectiveness (
62). In this study, 60 patients who had at least one distressing positive symptom of psychosis that was medication resistant were randomly assigned to 20 sessions of manualized CBT delivered by therapists who were expert clinical psychologists (
n = 28) or to a control condition involving standard care (
n = 32). At the end of 9 months of individualized therapy, 50% of the CBT group were treatment responders compared with 31% of the control group. Over 9 months, improvement was significant only in the treatment group, who showed a 25% reduction in scores on the BPRS. Participants had a low drop-out rate from therapy (11%) and expressed high levels of satisfaction with treatment (80%). However, this study did not find significant treatment effects on measures that were more specifically focused on delusional conviction or frequency of hallucinations; and differences in BPRS scores between the groups were not considered clinically meaningful. The raters, though independent, were not blind, and fidelity to the treatment manual as evaluated by an independent rater was not undertaken. Among the 47 participants who were available for follow-up at 18 months, those in the CBT treatment group continued to show significant continued improvement in BPRS scores. Delusional distress and frequency of hallucinations were also significantly reduced in the CBT group.
In a well designed, methodologically robust study in 87 patients with treatment-resistant hallucinations published in 1998, Tarrier et al. (
8) compared three treatments: 1) a CBT intervention combining coping strategy enhancement and problem-solving, 2) supportive counseling, and 3) treatment as usual. They used an intensive approach for all treatment groups that involved 2 sessions per week over 10 weeks and a random allocation design. Tarrier et al. found that both CBT and supportive counseling were significantly better than treatment as usual at 3 months. CBT had a significant effect on positive symptoms whereas supportive counseling did not. Significantly more patients who received CBT showed more than a 50% improvement in positive symptoms. The relapse rate and time spent in hospital were significantly worse in the treatment as usual group. However, the improvements favoring the CBT intervention over supportive counselling were not sustained at long-term follow-up. After 1 and 2 years, both therapy groups were comparably less likely to relapse than the routine care group (
63,
64). It is possible that the result could have been influenced by medication dose and type, since these variables were not reported. The assessors were blind to group allocation but not to the fact that the assessment was a follow up.
In Italy, Pinto et al. (
65) carried out a randomized study of CBT in patients who were beginning treatment with clozapine. Twenty clients were randomly assigned to receive CBT plus social skills training, and 21 were assigned to supportive therapy. Both groups showed statistically significant improvement on the BPRS, the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS) (
66), and the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) (
67) from baseline to post-intervention. Comparisons between the groups showed that, postintervention, clients who had received CBT plus social skills training had lower BPRS and SAPS scores than the clients who received supportive therapy. No significant differences between treatment groups were found on SANS scores during the evaluation period. Adherence to the therapeutic regimen was high in both groups, ranging from 75% to 85%, but the clients in the experimental group attended more sessions than the clients in the comparison group. Unfortunately the results of the study are difficult to interpret since the onset of clozapine's effects varies and may take up to 6 months, and a number of patients were receiving subtherapeutic doses due to side effects. Despite these confounding factors, the CBT group showed a significant effect on overall symptoms.
Sensky et al. (
9) conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing 9 months of CBT with befriending (an intervention designed to be a control for non-specific therapy factors, including time spent with subjects) in a randomized controlled trial of patients with drug-refractory positive symptoms of schizophrenia. Ninety patients received a mean of 19 individual treatment sessions over 9 months, with no significant between-group differences in treatment duration. Both interventions resulted in significant reductions in positive and negative symptoms and depression. At the 9-month follow-up evaluation, patients who had received CBT continued to improve on the same measures, while those in the befriending group did not.
Recently, successful pilot projects of CBT for treatment-resistant psychosis in the United States and Canada have been reported by Rector et al. (
68), who undertook a randomized controlled trial comparing CBT plus enriched treatment-as-usual (CBT-ETAU) (
n = 24) with enriched treatment-as-usual only (ETAU) (
n = 18). Enriched treatment-as-usual involved comprehensive treatment in a specialized schizophrenia treatment service. CBT was conducted on an individual basis for 6 months (20 sessions). Significant clinical effects on positive and negative symptoms and overall symptom severity were observed in patients treated with CBT-ETAU, although there were no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups post treatment. The most pronounced effect of CBT-ETAU compared with ETAU in this study was a reduction in negative symptoms at follow-up. However numbers in this study were small.
Temple and Ho (
69) performed another open-label controlled study comparing cognitive therapy with treatment-as-usual in 19 patients, 10 of whom received up to 20 sessions of individual CBT, while the others received treatment as usual which included case management or community-based psychotherapy but not CBT. Improvements were found in the CBT group on the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (
70), psychosocial functioning (measured by occupational impairment, housework impairment, relationship impairment, and level of satisfaction), the Global Assessment Scale (
71), and in overall symptoms and delusions. There was a trend toward significance in the reductions in negative symptoms. Limitations of this study included small sample size, lack of randomized assignment, and the fact that raters were not blinded to treatment condition.
In a pilot study by Cather et al. published in 2005 (
72), 30 outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, depressed type, with residual psychotic symptoms, were randomly assigned to either 16 weekly sessions of functional CBT (fCBT) or psychoeducation, with assessments conducted at baseline and post-treatment by blind evaluators. In fCBT, symptom-focused CBT interventions are delivered in the context of working on functional goals: a premise of fCBT is that the therapeutic alliance and patient motivation are enhanced by linking interventions to life goals. The results of this study suggested that both treatments were well tolerated. Effects were not significantly different between the groups, but within group effect sizes indicated that fCBT produced greater treatment benefit for positive symptoms.
Granholm et al. (
73) compared cognitive behavioral social skills training with treatment as usual in a randomized, controlled trial. The sample included 76 middle-aged and older outpatients with chronic schizophrenia, who were assigned to either treatment as usual or a combined treatment involving cognitive behavioral social skills training administered in 24 weekly group sessions. The authors concluded that the subjects who received cognitive behavioral social skills training learned coping skills, evaluated anomalous experiences with more objectivity (achieved greater cognitive insight), and had improved social functioning.
In the Netherlands, Valmaggia et al. (
74) compared 16 sessions of manualized CBT with supportive counseling in a randomized trial in inpatients with resistant symptoms of schizophrenia. They reported that the participants who received CBT (
n = 36) showed improvements in auditory hallucinations and insight at the post-therapy assessment compared with those who received supportive counseling (
n = 26) but that these findings were not maintained at follow-up. However, the sample size was small and, due to strict inclusion criteria, the results cannot be widely generalized.
Review articles
Over the past 5–10 years, a number of comprehensive reviews and meta-analyses have discussed findings concerning the impact of CBT on the psychopathology of schizophrenia (
75–
88). Most of these reviews did not focus solely on treatment resistance; rather, they considered the impact of CBT on the general psychopathology of schizophrenia. One review by Garety et al. (
76) did focus on CBT for medication-resistant symptoms. In that study, they looked at four controlled trials and found that CBT reduced symptoms of psychosis, and that there was also some evidence that it may contribute to relapse reduction. In the rest of this section, we discuss several important systematic reviews and meta-analyses that have contributed to the growing evidence for the efficacy of CBT for the psychopathology of schizophrenia.
Rector and Beck (
83) examined seven randomized, controlled trials that tested the efficacy of CBT for schizophrenia. A review by Pilling et al. (
84) included the results from eight randomized trials. A review by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) (
85) published in 2002 included 13 randomized clinical trials with data from 1297 patients. The NICE guidelines (
85) concluded that “longer treatments with CBT are significantly more effective than shorter ones, which may improve depressive symptoms but are unlikely to improve psychotic symptoms. An adequate course of CBT to generate improvements in psychotic symptoms in these circumstances should be of more than 6 months duration and include more than 10 planned sessions.”
Gould et al. (
86) reviewed controlled treatment outcome studies of cognitive therapy (CT) for psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia. Effect sizes were calculated for seven studies involving 340 subjects. The mean effect size (ES) for reduction of psychotic symptoms was 0.65. The findings suggest that CT is an effective treatment for patients with schizophrenia who have persistent psychotic symptoms. Follow-up analyses in four studies indicated that patients receiving CT continued to make gains over time (ES = 0.93).
In 2004, Tarrier and Wykes (
87) reviewed 20 controlled trials of CBT for schizophrenia, most of which focused on treatment-resistant schizophrenia, and reported a mean ES of 0.37. They found that the effect size of the trials was significantly and negatively correlated with their methodological quality and concluded that overall there was good evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of CBT in the treatment of schizophrenia.
Zimmermann et al. (
82) reviewed 14 studies published between 1990 and 2004 that included 1484 patients. Based on a meta-analysis of the results of these studies, they concluded that, compared with other adjunctive measures, CBT produced a significant reduction in positive symptoms and had greater benefit for patients suffering from an acute psychotic episode rather than a chronic condition (i.e., presentation characterized by residual symptoms) (effect size of 0.57 vs. 0.27)
Pfammatter et al. (
88) reviewed the evidence for the efficacy of psychological therapies for schizophrenia derived from meta-analyses on the topic and supplemented these data with selected findings from their own recent meta-analysis. They concluded that CBT for persistent positive symptoms is an effective adjunct to pharmacotherapy (ES = 0.47)
While the studies described in these reviews differed in various factors such as duration of intervention, number of sessions, comparison treatment, and outcomes post-intervention and at follow-up, and some studies had methodological problems (e.g., small sample sizes (
53), different levels of baseline symptoms (
53), and absence of experimental blinding to treatment conditions (
56,
61), a number of common findings emerged. CBT appears to be particularly effective as an adjunct to medication in helping people with the psychopathology of schizophrenia, especially persistent symptoms of psychosis.