Clinical Study Conductive Education as a Method of Stroke Rehabilitation: A Single Blinded Randomised Controlled Feasibility Study Judith Bek, 1 Melanie R. Brown, 2 Jagjeet Jutley-Neilson, 2,3 Nicholas C. C. Russell, 4 Pia A. J. Huber, 4 and Catherine M. Sackley 4 1 Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK 2 National Institute of Conductive Education, Birmingham B13 3RD, UK 3 School of Social Sciences, Birmingham City University, Birmingham B4 7BD, UK 4 Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King’s College London, London SE1 1UL, UK Correspondence should be addressed to Catherine M. Sackley; catherine.sackley@kcl.ac.uk Received 14 January 2016; Accepted 29 May 2016 Academic Editor: Wai-Kwong Tang Copyright © 2016 Judith Bek et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background. Conductive Education for stroke survivors has shown promise but randomised evidence is unavailable. Tis study assessed the feasibility of a defnitive randomised controlled trial to evaluate efcacy. Methods. Adult stroke survivors were recruited through local community notices. Tose completing the baseline assessment were randomised using an online program and group allocation was independent. Intervention group participants received 10 weekly 1.5-hour sessions of Conductive Education at the National Institute of Conductive Education in Birmingham, UK. Te control group participants attended two group meetings. Te study evaluated the feasibility of recruitment procedures, delivery of the intervention, retention of participants, and appropriateness of outcome measures and data collection methods. Independent assessments included the Barthel Index, the Stroke Impact Scale, the Timed Up and Go test, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Results. Eighty-two patients were enrolled; 77 completed the baseline assessment (46 men, mean age 62.1 yrs.) and were randomised. 70 commenced the intervention ( = 37) or an equivalent waiting period ( = 33). 32/37 completed the 10-week training and 32/33 the waiting period. Tere were no missing items from completed questionnaires and no adverse events. Discussion. Recruitment, intervention, and assessment methods worked well. Transport issues for intervention and assessment appointments require review. Conclusion. A defnitive trial is feasible. Tis trial is registered with ISRCTN84064492. 1. Introduction Rehabilitation provision for stroke survivors is typically limited to the frst few months afer stroke [1, 2]. However, improvements in mobility, activities of daily living, and qual- ity of life have been reported following rehabilitation beyond this period [3–5]. Te UK Department of Health’s National Stroke Strategy advised that support from stroke services should be available as required by patients and identifed a need for the development of long-term community rehabili- tation [6]. Similarly, the UK National Service Framework for Older People states that “rehabilitation should continue until it is clear that maximum recovery has been achieved” [7]. Conductive Education (CE) is an approach to rehabilita- tion that views stroke recovery as a learning process. CE was developed in Hungary in the 1940s as a specialised learning system for adults and children with neurological motor disorders [8]. Programmes are tailored to specifc conditions, including stroke, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, and cerebral palsy. CE aims to help stroke survivors at any stage of recovery to maintain or increase their range and control of movement, confdence, and coordination. It teaches strate- gies that participants can apply to their daily activities [9]. Functional tasks are broken down into a series of compo- nents, or a “task series,” which is designed to enable partici- pants to develop an increased awareness of their own move- ment and to learn the basic rules of move-ment solutions. Movements are practised repeatedly and rhythmically with verbal reinforcement or “rhythmical intention” and the tasks are performed in a specifc order. Both repeated practice Hindawi Publishing Corporation Stroke Research and Treatment Volume 2016, Article ID 5391598, 6 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/5391598