The effects of the Alexander Technique on Chronic Non-specific Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Abstract

Abstract Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy of the Alexander Technique courses compared to the conventional therapy in patients with chronic Non-specific neck pain. Methods According to PICO (participant, intervention, comparison, outcome) elements, the effects of Alexander Technique on chronic Non-specific neck pain were evaluated in this paper. PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, EMBESE, and Cochrane Library et al English databases were searched with a search time frame from databases build to December 31, 2021. Weighted mean differences (WMD), Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. We used a random-effects model to minimize the heterogeneity, and I2 test was used to assess heterogeneity. Results Three studies were included according to the predetermined eligibility criteria. Compared with the conventional therapy group, the merge of included studies showed that the Alexander Technique could significantly improve the pain for chronic neck pain patients, and the treatment effects can be maintained for 3–6 months with a very low heterogeneity (six-month follow-up pain outcome: SMD: -0.20, 95%CI: -0.38–0.01, P = 0.035, I2 = 15.7%; three-month follow-up pain outcome: -0.33, 95%CI: -0.53-0.13, P = 0.001, I2 = 0%). In addition, compared with the conventional therapy group, the Alexander Technique would not significantly increase adverse events (AE: RR = 1.690, 95% CI: 0.67–4.27, P = 0.267, I2 = 44.3%). Conclusion Although the number of studies and personnel involved was limited, the meta-analysis preliminarily indicated that the Alexander Technique courses is effective for chronic Non-specific neck pain, which is related to the follow-up time of the post-intervention. However, it’s necessary to interpret and apply the outcome of this research cautiously and the specific efficacy and mechanisms of Alexander Technique therapy are needed to be investigated to demonstrate further. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, CRD420222361001.