July 2002
C Stallibrass, P Sissons, & C Chalmers
Objective: To determine whether the Alexander Technique,
alongsidenormal treatment, is of benefit to people disabled
by idiopathicParkinson's disease.
Design: A randomized controlled trial with three groups, onereceiving lessons in the Alexander Technique, another receivingmassage and one with no additional intervention. Measures weretaken pre and post-intervention, and at follow-up, six monthslater.
Setting: The Polyclinic at the University of Westminster, CentralLondon.
Subjects: Ninety-three people with clinically confirmed
idiopathicParkinson's disease.
Interventions: The Alexander Technique group received 24 lessonsin the Alexander Technique and the massage group received 24sessions of massage.
Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were the
Self-assessmentParkinson's Disease Disability Scale (SPDDS)
at best and atworst times of day. Secondary measures
included the Beck DepressionInventory and an Attitudes to
Self Scale.
Results: The Alexander Technique group improved compared withthe no additional intervention group, pre-intervention to
post-intervention,both on the SPDDS at best, p = 0.04
(confidence interval (CI)–6.4 to 0.0) and on the SPDDS at
worst, p = 0.01 (CI –11.5 to –1.8). The comparative
improvement was maintained atsix-month follow-up: on the
SPDDS at best, p = 0.04 (CI –7.7 to 0.0) and on the
SPDDS at worst, p = 0.01 (CI –11.8 to –0.9). The
Alexander Technique group was comparativelyless depressed
post-intervention, p = 0.03 (CI –3.8 to 0.0) on the
Beck Depression Inventory, and at six-month follow-uphad
improved on the Attitudes to Self Scale, p = 0.04 (CI –13.9 to
0.0).
Conclusions: There is evidence that lessons in the AlexanderTechnique are likely to lead to sustained benefit for peoplewith Parkinson's disease.
