Key result
CBT improves illness adjustment scores by ~26 points vs conventional training in depressed heart failure patients.
Why the study?
Psychosocial adjustment to illness is an important factor in treatment participation and decision-making in chronic diseases, but the effect of cognitive-behavioral training on this adjustment in depressed heart failure patients was unclear.
Does cognitive-behavioral training improve psychosocial adjustment to illness in depressed patients with heart failure?
RCT (n=80)
Open-label
Randomly assigned
No
Does cognitive-behavioral training improve psychosocial adjustment to illness in depressed patients with heart failure?
Cognitive-behavioral training significantly improves psychosocial adjustment and reduces depressive symptoms in patients with heart failure compared to conventional training.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports cognitive-behavioral training for depressed HF patients; extends RCT evidence on psychosocial interventions in cardiac disease.
Background Psychosocial adjustment to illness in the treatment process of chronic diseases is an important factor in attracting patient participation in treatment and helping in the decision-making process of their treatment-care. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of cognitive-behavioral training (CBT) compared to conventional training on the level of psychosocial adjustment to illness in depressed heart failure patients in Zahedan (Iran). Method This study was a quasi-experimental study that was conducted on 80 patients with heart failure hospitalized in 2025. One group received cognitive-behavioral training and the other group received conventional training. Data were collected using the Beck Depression Inventory and the Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale at baseline and eight weeks after the educational interventions. The data were analyzed with SPSS 20 software. Results The results showed that the average adjustment score in depressed heart failure patients in the cognitive-behavioral training group was 81.65 ± 17.04 before the intervention and decreased to 59.30 ± 11.46 after the intervention, indicating an increase in adjustment. In addition, in the conventional training group, the average adjustment score before the intervention was 85.40 ± 20.50 and increased to 89.45 ± 20.75 after the intervention. The mean baseline BDI score was 39.02 ± 8.08 and decreased to 16.95 ± 5.53 after the intervention in the cognitive-behavioral-training group. Conclusion According to the results of this study, cognitive-behavioral training seems to be a more effective approach to adjustment to a chronic disease compared to conventional training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khayati et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Heart failure with depression (n=80). Cognitive-behavioral training (CBT) vs. Conventional training (4 sessions, 30 minutes each) was evaluated on Change in Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale (PAIS) score from baseline to 8 weeks (SMD 2.88, p=<0.001). Cognitive-behavioral training significantly improved psychosocial adjustment to illness compared to conventional training in depressed heart failure patients (mean PAIS score change -22.35 vs 4.05).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: