3.9.R1 Recommendation
Enquiring about sexual function
- Strength of recommendation:
- Strong for intervention
- Level of evidence:
- Very low
How the strength and level of evidence are graded
What the strength of a recommendation means
The strength of a recommendation reflects the extent to which a guideline panel is confident that desirable effects of an intervention outweigh undesirable effects, or vice versa, across the range of patients for whom the recommendation is intended.
Strong for (↑↑) or against (↓↓) intervention
For patients: Most individuals in this situation would want the recommended course of action and only a small proportion would not.
For clinicians: Most individuals should receive the recommended course of action.
Conditional for (↑) or against (↓) intervention
For patients: The majority of individuals in this situation would want the suggested course of action, but many would not.
For clinicians: Recognize that different choices will be appropriate for different patients, and that you must help each patient arrive at a management decision consistent with her or his values and preferences.
Neither intervention nor comparison (—)
The panel did not recommend for or against the intervention.
Source: GRADE Handbook, section 6.1, Table 6.1 (GRADE uses “weak” and “conditional” interchangeably).
For the rating of the strength of the recommendation, in addition to evidence from studies in FRDA, evidence from like conditions, clinical experience and expert consensus are taken into account when published evidence is not available.
The level of evidence is based on published evidence from studies in FRDA. If there is no published evidence in FRDA, evidence from other like conditions or clinical expertise may have been used to make the recommendation – this is graded as ‘very low’ or in some cases ‘low’ level evidence. See the table below for an explanation of the symbols used to grade recommendations.
| Strength of recommendation | Symbol | Level of evidence | Symbol |
| Strong for intervention | ↑↑ | High | ⨁⨁⨁⨁ |
| Conditional for intervention | ↑ | Moderate | ⨁⨁⨁◯ |
| Neither intervention nor comparison | — | Low | ⨁⨁◯◯ |
| Conditional against intervention | ↓ | Very low | ⨁◯◯◯ |
| Strong against intervention | ↓↓ |
We recommend clinicians enquire about sexual function, including but not limited to erectile or vaginal lubrication dysfunction, the physical capacity to engage in sexual activity and the psychological aspect of the sexual response in sexually active individuals with Friedreich ataxia.
Question
Should enquiring about sexual function including erectile or vaginal lubrication dysfunction versus no enquiry be used for all sexually active people with Friedreich ataxia?
Justification
There are two recent published studies that indicate sexual dysfunction is a greater issue in individuals with Friedreich ataxia than those without (1, 2). It is important that the clinician enquires about the possibility to ensure appropriate intervention can be implemented aimed at improving intimate relationships.
Subgroup consideration
This recommendation is for sexually active individuals with Friedreich ataxia.
Evidence to recommendation table (PDF)
Part of 3.9 Sexual function in Friedreich ataxia
References (7)
1. Corben LA, Hermans MM, Marks A, Crowe LM, Delatycki MB. Sexual function, intimate relationships and Friedreich ataxia. J Neurol. 2021;268(3):1088-95.
2. Lad M, Parkinson MH, Rai M, Pandolfo M, Bogdanova-Mihaylova P, Walsh RA, et al. Urinary, bowel and sexual symptoms in a cohort of patients with Friedreich's ataxia. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017;12(1):158.
3. Nasimbera A, Rosales J, Silva B, Alonso R, Bohorquez N, Lepera S, et al. Everything you always wanted to know about sex and neurology: neurological disability and sexuality. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2018;76(7):430-5.
4. Matthews V. Sexual dysfunction in people with long-term neurological conditions. Nurs Stand. 2009;23(50):48-56; quiz 8.
5. Basson R, Bronner G. Management and rehabilitation of neurologic patients with sexual dysfunction. Handb Clin Neurol. 2015;130:415-34.
6. Lundberg PO, Ertekin C, Ghezzi A, Swash M, Vodusek D. Neurosexology: Guideline for neurologists. Eur J Neurol. 2001;8 (Suppl 3):2-24.
7. Lombardi G, Nelli F, Celso M, Mencarini M, Del Popolo G. Treating erectile dysfunction and central neurological diseases with oral phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors. Review of the literature. J Sex Med. 2012;9(4):970-85.
Disclaimer, intended use and funding
Disclaimer
The Clinical Management Guidelines for Friedreich ataxia (‘Guidelines’) are protected by copyright owned by the authors who contributed to their development or said authors’ assignees.
These Guidelines are systematically developed evidence statements incorporating data from a comprehensive literature review of the most recent studies available (up to the Guidelines submission date) and reviewed according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework © The Grade Working Group.
Guidelines users must seek out the most recent information that might supersede the diagnostic and treatment recommendations contained within these Guidelines and consider local variations in clinical settings, funding and resources that may impact on the implementation of the recommendations set out in these Guidelines.
The authors of these Guidelines disclaim all liability for the accuracy or completeness of the Guidelines, and disclaim all warranties, express or implied to their incorrect use.
Intended Use
These Guidelines are made available as general information only and do not constitute medical advice. These Guidelines are intended to assist qualified healthcare professionals make informed treatment decisions about the care of individuals with Friedreich ataxia. They are not intended as a sole source of guidance in managing issues related to Friedreich ataxia. Rather, they are designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making.
These Guidelines are not intended to replace clinical judgment and other approaches to diagnosing and managing problems associated with Friedreich ataxia which may be appropriate in specific circumstances. Ultimately, healthcare professionals must make their own treatment decisions on a case-by-case basis, after consultation with their patients, using their clinical judgment, knowledge and expertise.
Guidelines users must not edit or modify the Guidelines in any way – including removing any branding, acknowledgement, authorship or copyright notice.
Funding
The authors of this document gratefully acknowledge the support of the Friedreich Ataxia Research Alliance (FARA). The views and opinions expressed in the Guidelines are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of FARA.