The Impact of Dietary Interventions on the Symptoms of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review.

Diet may be a successful part of the treatment plan for improving outcome in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This study aimed to systematically review all published clinical trials evaluating the effects of a regular diet on symptoms of IBD. Three medical databases were searched for clinical trials evaluating an intervention that involved dietary manipulation using a regular diet on adults with IBD whose symptoms were objectively measured before and after the intervention. The most common types of regular diet interventions that we observed in the literature fell into the following three categories: low residue/low fiber diets, exclusion diets, or other specific diets. Of all included studies, the few that were of higher quality and that observed a statistically significant improvement in symptoms in the diet group compared to the control group fell under the exclusion diet group or the other specific diet group. We were able to identify several high quality clinical trials evaluating dietary manipulations on symptoms of IBD. Exclusion diets and the low FODMAP diet are two areas identified in this review that show promise for having therapeutic benefits for patients with IBD.

Self-management and biomedical outcomes of a cooking, and exercise program for patients with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Limited research has been done on integrating cooking and exercise classes into the routine care of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. The main purpose of the research was to determine whether the addition of these services would slow the progression of certain CKD parameters. METHODS: The study evaluated 5 endpoints, at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months: urinary protein, blood pressure, urinary sodium, glomerular filtration rate, and total cholesterol between 2 groups (control group receiving CKD standard care and experimental group receiving standard care plus cooking and exercise classes). Eighty percent of the experimental group was hypothesized to improve in 4 out of the 5 endpoints versus ≤50% in the control group with a P-value of 0.05. An overall difference of 30% was anticipated between the 2 groups. The research also compared self-efficacy and health status outcomes using a self-management questionnaire. RESULTS: Forty randomly assigned patients participated in the study (17 controls and 23 experimental). In the control group, 2 of 17 people improved in at least 4 of the 5 endpoints. In the experimental group, 14 of 23 people improved in at least 4 of the 5 endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Sixty-one percent of experimental subjects showed improvements in 4 of 5 endpoints, showing a significant difference overall when compared with the control group (12% improved in 4 out of 5 endpoints). In looking at the trend in qualitative measures from the comparison of the self-management questionnaire, the overall trend showed more improved answers with the experimental group versus the control group.