7.2.R5 Recommendation
Specific diet
- Strength of recommendation:
- Neither intervention nor comparison
- 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 cannot recommend any specific diet over usual diet to assist in managing fatigue in individuals with Friedreich ataxia.
Question
Should a specific diet (i.e., vitamins, coffee, Mediterranean, ketogenic) versus usual diet be used for all individuals who report fatigue with Friedreich ataxia?
Justification
There is insufficient evidence and clinical experience to support the use of specific diets to manage fatigue in individuals with Friedreich ataxia.
Subgroup consideration
This recommendation is for individuals with Friedreich ataxia who report fatigue.
Evidence to recommendation table (PDF)
Part of 7.2 Management of fatigue
References (21)
1. da Silva CB, Chevis CF, D'Abreu A, Lopes-Cendes I, Franca MC, Jr. Fatigue is frequent and multifactorial in Friedreich's ataxia. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2013;19(8):766-7.
2. Bogosian A, Chadwick P, Windgassen S, Norton S, McCrone P, Mosweu I, et al. Distress improves after mindfulness training for progressive MS: A pilot randomised trial. Mult Scler. 2015;21(9):1184-94.
3. Cavalera C, Rovaris M, Mendozzi L, Pugnetti L, Garegnani M, Castelnuovo G, et al. Online meditation training for people with multiple sclerosis: A randomized controlled trial. Mult Scler. 2019;25(4):610-7.
4. Hoogerwerf AEW, Bol Y, Lobbestael J, Hupperts R, van Heugten CM. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for severely fatigued multiple sclerosis patients: A waiting list controlled study. J Rehabil Med. 2017;49(6):497-504.
5. Levin AB, Hadgkiss EJ, Weiland TJ, Marck CH, van der Meer DM, Pereira NG, et al. Can meditation influence quality of life, depression, and disease outcome in multiple sclerosis? Findings from a large international web-based study. Behav Neurol. 2014;2014:916519.
6. Okkersen K, Jimenez-Moreno C, Wenninger S, Daidj F, Glennon J, Cumming S, et al. Cognitive behavioural therapy with optional graded exercise therapy in patients with severe fatigue with myotonic dystrophy type 1: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(8):671-80.
7. Pilutti LA, Dlugonski D, Sandroff BM, Klaren R, Motl RW. Randomized controlled trial of a behavioral intervention targeting symptoms and physical activity in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2014;20(5):594-601.
8. van den Akker LE, Beckerman H, Collette EH, Knoop H, Bleijenberg G, Twisk JW, et al. Cognitive behavioural therapy for MS-related fatigue explained: A longitudinal mediation analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2018;106:13-24.
9. Veenhuizen Y, Cup EHC, Jonker MA, Voet NBM, van Keulen BJ, Maas DM, et al. Self-management program improves participation in patients with neuromuscular disease: A randomized controlled trial. Neurology. 2019;93(18):e1720-e31.
10. Bulguroglu I, Guclu-Gunduz A, Yazici G, Ozkul C, Irkec C, Nazliel B, et al. The effects of mat pilates and reformer pilates in patients with multiple sclerosis: A randomized controlled study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2017;41(2):413-22.
11. Burschka JM, Keune PM, Oy UH, Oschmann P, Kuhn P. Mindfulness-based interventions in multiple sclerosis: beneficial effects of Tai Chi on balance, coordination, fatigue and depression. BMC Neurol. 2014;14:165.
12. Carter A, Daley A, Humphreys L, Snowdon N, Woodroofe N, Petty J, et al. Pragmatic intervention for increasing self-directed exercise behaviour and improving important health outcomes in people with multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled trial. Mult Scler. 2014;20(8):1112-22.
13. Hasanpour Dehkordi A. Influence of yoga and aerobics exercise on fatigue, pain and psychosocial status in patients with multiple sclerosis: a randomized trial. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2016;56(11):1417-22.
14. Sangelaji B, Nabavi SM, Estebsari F, Banshi MR, Rashidian H, Jamshidi E, et al. Effect of combination exercise therapy on walking distance, postural balance, fatigue and quality of life in multiple sclerosis patients: a clinical trial study. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2014;16(6):e17173.
15. Gervasoni E, Cattaneo D, Bertoni R, Grosso C, Bisio A, Rovaris M, et al. Effect of arm cycling and task-oriented exercises on fatigue and upper limb performance in multiple sclerosis: a randomized crossover study. Int J Rehabil Res. 2019;42(4):300-8.
16. Gonzales B, Chopard G, Charry B, Berger E, Tripard J, Magnin E, et al. Effects of a training program involving body cooling on physical and cognitive capacities and quality of life in multiple sclerosis patients: A pilot study. Eur Neurol. 2017;78(1-2):71-7.
17. Miller E, Kostka J, Wlodarczyk T, Dugue B. Whole-body cryostimulation (cryotherapy) provides benefits for fatigue and functional status in multiple sclerosis patients. A case-control study. Acta Neurol Scand. 2016;134(6):420-6.
18. Bitarafan S, Harirchian MH, Nafissi S, Sahraian MA, Togha M, Siassi F, et al. Dietary intake of nutrients and its correlation with fatigue in multiple sclerosis patients. Iran J Neurol. 2014;13(1):28-32.
19. Coe S, Axelsson E, Murphy V, Santos M, Collett J, Clegg M, et al. Flavonoid rich dark cocoa may improve fatigue in people with multiple sclerosis, yet has no effect on glycaemic response: An exploratory trial. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2017;21:20-5.
20. Katz Sand I, Benn EKT, Fabian M, Fitzgerald KC, Digga E, Deshpande R, et al. Randomized-controlled trial of a modified Mediterranean dietary program for multiple sclerosis: A pilot study. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;36:101403.
21. Larson RD. Psychometric properties of the modified fatigue impact scale. Int J MS Care. 2013;15(1):15-20.
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.