The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the Evidence

The Feldenkrais Method (FM) has broad application in populations interested in improving awareness, health, and ease of function. This review aimed to update the evidence for the benefits of FM, and for which populations. A best practice systematic review protocol was devised. Included studies were...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Susan Hillier, Anthea Worley
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2015-01-01
Series:Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/752160
id doaj-2bda4e44fe65479d849202798ab4ae79
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2bda4e44fe65479d849202798ab4ae792020-11-25T00:01:27ZengHindawi LimitedEvidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine1741-427X1741-42882015-01-01201510.1155/2015/752160752160The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the EvidenceSusan Hillier0Anthea Worley1International Centre for Allied Health Evidence, Sansom Institute of Health Research, School of Health Science, University of South Australia, P.O. Box 2471, Adelaide, SA 5001, AustraliaSchool of Health Science, University of South Australia, P.O. Box 2471, Adelaide, SA 5001, AustraliaThe Feldenkrais Method (FM) has broad application in populations interested in improving awareness, health, and ease of function. This review aimed to update the evidence for the benefits of FM, and for which populations. A best practice systematic review protocol was devised. Included studies were appraised using the Cochrane risk of bias approach and trial findings analysed individually and collectively where possible. Twenty RCTs were included (an additional 14 to an earlier systematic review). The population, outcome, and findings were highly heterogeneous. However, meta-analyses were able to be performed with 7 studies, finding in favour of the FM for improving balance in ageing populations (e.g., timed up and go test MD −1.14 sec, 95% CI −1.78, −0.49; and functional reach test MD 6.08 cm, 95% CI 3.41, 8.74). Single studies reported significant positive effects for reduced perceived effort and increased comfort, body image perception, and dexterity. Risk of bias was high, thus tempering some results. Considered as a body of evidence, effects seem to be generic, supporting the proposal that FM works on a learning paradigm rather than disease-based mechanisms. Further research is required; however, in the meantime, clinicians and professionals may promote the use of FM in populations interested in efficient physical performance and self-efficacy.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/752160
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Susan Hillier
Anthea Worley
spellingShingle Susan Hillier
Anthea Worley
The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
author_facet Susan Hillier
Anthea Worley
author_sort Susan Hillier
title The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
title_short The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
title_full The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
title_fullStr The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
title_full_unstemmed The Effectiveness of the Feldenkrais Method: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
title_sort effectiveness of the feldenkrais method: a systematic review of the evidence
publisher Hindawi Limited
series Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
issn 1741-427X
1741-4288
publishDate 2015-01-01
description The Feldenkrais Method (FM) has broad application in populations interested in improving awareness, health, and ease of function. This review aimed to update the evidence for the benefits of FM, and for which populations. A best practice systematic review protocol was devised. Included studies were appraised using the Cochrane risk of bias approach and trial findings analysed individually and collectively where possible. Twenty RCTs were included (an additional 14 to an earlier systematic review). The population, outcome, and findings were highly heterogeneous. However, meta-analyses were able to be performed with 7 studies, finding in favour of the FM for improving balance in ageing populations (e.g., timed up and go test MD −1.14 sec, 95% CI −1.78, −0.49; and functional reach test MD 6.08 cm, 95% CI 3.41, 8.74). Single studies reported significant positive effects for reduced perceived effort and increased comfort, body image perception, and dexterity. Risk of bias was high, thus tempering some results. Considered as a body of evidence, effects seem to be generic, supporting the proposal that FM works on a learning paradigm rather than disease-based mechanisms. Further research is required; however, in the meantime, clinicians and professionals may promote the use of FM in populations interested in efficient physical performance and self-efficacy.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/752160
work_keys_str_mv AT susanhillier theeffectivenessofthefeldenkraismethodasystematicreviewoftheevidence
AT antheaworley theeffectivenessofthefeldenkraismethodasystematicreviewoftheevidence
AT susanhillier effectivenessofthefeldenkraismethodasystematicreviewoftheevidence
AT antheaworley effectivenessofthefeldenkraismethodasystematicreviewoftheevidence
_version_ 1725441909813411840