Would you like to go from experiencing back pain every day to 3 days a month, or fewer? That’s the startling evidence of what the Alexander Technique can do, according to a large-scale clinical trial into its effectiveness. The research into the Alexander Technique was conducted by the NHS and was a randomised control trial, considered the ‘gold standard’ for clinical research. You can take a look at my summary of the results here.

Alexander Technique sessions are traditionally taken individually, with hands-on guidance from the teacher, and this is what produced the amazing results above. Yet, very recently, researchers have also been investigating a novel approach to the use of the Alexander Technique for back pain. This new approach involved participants with back pain attending both individual Alexander Technique lessons and small group sessions. Although just a pilot study, it produced encouraging results; for example, there was a significant reduction in participants’ days in pain per week from an average of 5.56 to 3.20.

The researchers found that, in general, participants liked the novel combination of individual and group sessions. They noted that:

[a majority of] participants tended to value the group support and solidarity highly and liked having the opportunity to share experiences and problems with the group. They valued the dual learning environments: focusing on their own specific problems in individual lessons and using group lessons as an opportunity to observe and interact with other participants and learn from one another’s experiences.

There has been no previously published research into group teaching of the Alexander Technique for back pain, but this is a promising start. Importantly, an approach that includes group teaching is more likely to be provided on the NHS because it can be provided more cheaply.

As the authors of the report state, ‘a mixed course of individuals and group AT [Alexander Technique] lessons appears to have the potential to cost-effectively produce clinically important changes in function and pain efficiently and is likely to be acceptable to both participants and practitioners.’