Background Mind–body medical interventions are commonly used to cope with depression and yoga is one of the most commonly used mind–body interventions. The aim of this review was to systematically assess and meta‐analyze the effectiveness of yoga for depression. Methods Medline/PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and IndMED were searched through January 2013. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of yoga for patients with depressive disorders and individuals with elevated levels of depression were included. Main outcomes were severity of depression and remission rates, secondary outcomes were anxiety, quality of life, and safety. Results Twelve RCTs with 619 participants were included. Three RCTs had low risk of bias. Regarding severity of depression, there was moderate evidence for short‐term effects of yoga compared to usual care (standardized mean difference (SMD) = −0.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.99, −0.39; P < .001), and limited evidence compared to relaxation (SMD = −0.62; 95%CI −1.03, −0.22; P = .003), and aerobic exercise (SMD = −0.59; 95% CI −0.99, −0.18; P = .004). Limited evidence was found for short‐term effects of yoga on anxiety compared to relaxation (SMD = −0.79; 95% CI −1.3, −0.26; P = .004). Subgroup analyses revealed evidence for effects in patients with depressive disorders and in individuals with elevated levels of depression. Due to the paucity and heterogeneity of the RCTs, no meta‐analyses on long‐term effects were possible. No RCT reported safety data. Conclusions Despite methodological drawbacks of the included studies, yoga could be considered an ancillary treatment option for patients with depressive disorders and individuals with elevated levels of depression.

To systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness of yoga for low back pain. MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CAMBASE, and PsycINFO, were screened through January 2012. Randomized controlled trials comparing yoga to control conditions in patients with low back pain were included. Two authors independently assessed risk of bias using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group. Main outcome measures were pain, back-specific disability, generic disability, health-related quality of life, and global improvement. For each outcome, standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Ten randomized controlled trials with a total of 967 chronic low back pain patients were included. Eight studies had low risk of bias. There was strong evidence for short-term effects on pain (SMD=-0.48; 95% CI, -0.65 to -0.31; P<0.01), back-specific disability (SMD=-0.59; 95% CI, -0.87 to -0.30; P<0.01), and global improvement (risk ratio=3.27; 95% CI, 1.89-5.66; P<0.01). There was strong evidence for a long-term effect on pain (SMD=-0.33; 95% CI, -0.59 to -0.07; P=0.01) and moderate evidence for a long-term effect on back-specific disability (SMD=-0.35; 95% CI, -0.55 to -0.15; P<0.01). There was no evidence for either short-term or long-term effects on health-related quality of life. Yoga was not associated with serious adverse events. This systematic review found strong evidence for short-term effectiveness and moderate evidence for long-term effectiveness of yoga for chronic low back pain in the most important patient-centered outcomes. Yoga can be recommended as an additional therapy to chronic low back pain patients.

Background: The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically update the evidence for mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) in women with breast cancer. Material and methods: In October 2016, PubMed, Scopus, and Central were searched for randomized controlled trials on MBSR/MBCT in breast cancer patients. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, sleep stress, depression, anxiety, and safety. For each outcome, standardized mean differences (SMD/Hedges’ g) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results: The Literature search identified 14 articles on 10 studies that included 1709 participants. The overall risk of bias was unclear, except for risk of low attrition bias and low other bias. Compared to usual care, significant post-intervention effects of MBSR/MBCT were found for health-related quality of life (SMD = .21; 95%CI = [.04–.39]), fatigue (SMD = −.28; 95%CI = [−.43 to −.14]), sleep (SMD = −.23; 95%CI = [−.40 to −.05]), stress (SMD = −.33; 95%CI = [−.61 to −.05]), anxiety (SMD = −.28; 95%CI = [−.39 to −.16]), and depression (SMD = −.34; 95%CI = [−.46 to −.21]). Up to 6 months after baseline effects were significant for: anxiety (SMD = −.28; 95%CI = [−.47 to −.09]) and depression (SMD = −.26; 95%CI = [−.47 to −.04]); and significant for anxiety (SMD = −.21; 95%CI = [−.40 to −.03]) up to 12 months after baseline. Compared to other active interventions, significant effects were only found post-intervention and only for anxiety (SMD = −.45; 95%CI = [−.71 to −.18]) and depression (SMD = −.39; 95%CI = [−.65 to −.14]). However, average effects were all below the threshold of minimal clinically important differences. Effects were robust against potential methodological bias. Adverse events were insufficiently reported. Conclusions: This meta-analysis revealed evidence for the short-term effectiveness and safety of mindfulness-based interventions in women with breast cancer. However, their clinical relevance remains unclear. Further research is needed.