Objective: Patients with depression frequently experience persistent residual symptoms even with optimal interventions. These patients often use complementary treatments, including yoga, as a preferred alternative or adjunctive treatment. There is evidence for the benefit of yoga for depression, but this has not been rigorously evaluated, particularly in bipolar depression. We aimed to determine the feasibility and benefit of manualized breathing-focused yoga in comparison to psychoeducation as augmentation to pharmacotherapy for improving residual symptoms of depression in unipolar and bipolar patients. Methods: Using a randomized single-blind crossover design, 72 outpatients with unipolar or bipolar depression were augmented with the two 8-week interventions at separate times, as add-ons to current first-line antidepressants and mood stabilizers. The primary outcome measure was the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Due to the high dropout of participants after crossover at Week 8, analysis focused on between-group comparisons of yoga and psychoeducation during the initial 8 weeks of the study. Results: There was a significant decline in depressive symptoms, as measured by the MADRS, following 8 weeks of yoga. However, there was no significant difference in MADRS ratings between intervention groups. Similar improvements in self-rated depressive symptoms and well-being were also observed across time. Conclusions: Both yoga and psychoeducation may improve residual symptoms of unipolar and bipolar depression as add-on to medications. In-class group sessions and long study durations may reduce feasibility for this population. Larger trials with parallel group design and shorter duration may be more feasible.

The success of an interprofessional educational program of this nature is dependent on the collaboration of a number of stakeholders from a variety of areas of the organization.

Aims Research on drug dependence often involves the administration of drugs of abuse to experienced drug users under controlled laboratory conditions. The primary objective of this study was to assess whether participation in such research alters the frequency of heroin use by non-treatment seeking opioid-dependent volunteers after study completion. Design Data were examined from four inpatient studies involving controlled opioid administration. Setting Substance Use Research Center at Columbia University, New York State Psychiatric Institute. Participants Sixty-nine heroin dependent volunteers. Measurements Participants’ self-reported heroin use prior to and one month after study participation was compared using a Wilcoxon test. Because a number of participants reported that they had stopped using heroin, a logistic regression was used to identify correlates of heroin cessation one month after study completion. Findings One hundred one participants entered laboratory studies and 69 completed them. Self-reported heroin use significantly decreased one month after study participation [1.7 (+/− 2) bags per day] compared to baseline [6.8 (+/− 4.2) bags per day], p < 0.001 among the 69 completers. In addition, 42% of the completers were heroin abstinent one month after study completion. Being African American, having a history of opioid dependence treatment, reporting heavier heroin use at baseline, and a longer history of heroin use were correlated with cessation of heroin use. Conclusions These findings demonstrate that participation in opioid administration studies does not increase subsequent heroin use and for some individuals leads to accessing opioid dependence treatment and cessation of heroin use in the short term.