Pulmonary hypertension is a potentially fatal disease. Despite pharmacological advances in pulmonary hypertension, fatigue remains common in patients with pulmonary hypertension.A convenience sample of 120 participants at an international patient conference completed the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI)-20 scale. Data on New York Heart Association Functional Class, body mass index, oxygen use and medication type/use were also collected.There was a high prevalence of “severe” to “very severe” fatigue for each dimension: General Fatigue (60%), Physical Fatigue (55.8%), Reduced Activity (41.7%), Reduced Motivation (32.5%) and Mental Fatigue (27.5%). The mean±sd overall MFI-20 score was 58±5.1. Dimensions with the highest averaged levels were General Fatigue (13.40±3.61), Physical Fatigue (13.23±3.67) and Reduced Activity (11.33±4.16). Body mass index correlated with higher fatigue scores. Phosphodiesterase inhibitor plus endothelin receptor antagonist combination negatively predicted General Fatigue, Physical Fatigue, Reduced Motivation and Reduced Activity. Triple therapy was a significant predictor of General Fatigue, Physical Fatigue and Reduced Activity. There were no significant predictors of Mental Fatigue.Multidimensional fatigue is common and severe in patients with pulmonary hypertension. Phosphodiesterase inhibitor plus endothelin receptor antagonist combination resulted in lower scores in most fatigue dimensions. Comprehensive assessment of fatigue should be considered in the clinical care of patients with pulmonary hypertension and clinical research to develop formal interventions that target this disabling symptom.

BackgroundCalcinosis is a disabling, rarely discussed manifestation of SSc for which the natural history and management is poorly understood. This investigation is the 1st phase of a multi-tiered project to understand calcinosis from patients' perspectives creating the groundwork for a SSc-calcinosis PROM.MethodsFive focus groups and individual interviews in the US and UK were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Pathophysiologic and life impact were elicited with: 1. Since developing calcinosis how has your life changed over time? 2. How has calcinosis changed over time? A final probe was a request for questions that a clinician could ask to understand if calcinosis was better, worse or same.Transcripts were analysed by hand (highest method) by an iterative inductive process (content drives coding) by at least 5 independent analysts including at least one patient research partner. Concepts were triangulated until a comprehensive set of concepts emerged. Occurrence was quantified per participant.ResultsTwenty-three patients (29/31 female, 27/31 white, with mean disease duration 18.1 years) were consented and interviewed. Responses spanned broadly to include concepts of self-management strategies and recurrent hypotheses relating calcinosis development to trauma, Raynaud's and cold exposure (tables 1 & 2).Cold exposure and Raynaud's were a perceived association to calcinosis severity - “when they are cold mine always open back up”.A majority of patients engage in strategies to extrude calcinosis with either pressure +/- soaking or at home surgical techniques. “I actually have homemade surgical tools to get these out.”The following anchors were consistently suggested for physicians to assess calcinosis severity: pain level, size, frequency, number and functional impairment. A 2-step question was suggested to help differentiate ulcer, infection and calcinosis symptoms: 1st regarding predomiant wound character and then target the related calcinosis.ConclusionsThese results provide the groundwork for and conclude the 1st steps (item collection) in PROM development. As suggested by patients, a composite of scales anchored in pain, size, frequency, number and related impairment may reasonably serve as an interim instrument for SSc calcinosis. Next steps are validating content with a large subject base and questionniare development with subsequent validation.Very importantly, patients' observations and self-management behavior provide opportunities to learn from and to preemptively educate physicians and patients. Patients are eager for self-management guidance. An essential deliverable of this work will be a patient-physician education guide on calcinosis management.AcknowledgementsIn memory of Anne Mawdsley, founder: Raynaud's & Scleroderma Association UK – tireless engine for education and advocacy raising >£10 million for SSc research.Disclosure of InterestA. Christensen: None declared, S. Khalique: None declared, S. Cenac: None declared, K. Fligelstone: None declared, V. Jaeger: None declared, A. Mawdsley: None declare...

BackgroundSSc is a complex, diffuse, devastating health condition of vascular injury, inflammation and fibrosis resulting in multiple organ involvement with high impact on survival and quality of life.Demonstrated research activity tends to define SSc Centers of Excellence (SCoE) certification. However, SSc complications require coordinated high-level multi-specialty expert care. The Scleroderma Foundation, Scleroderma Australia and Scleroderma Society UK engaged SSc patients and SSc health providers (HPs) in a multi-tiered process to assess priorities in recognition of SCoEs.MethodsA mixed methods design ensured comprehensive item collection in addressing “important qualities and services in a certified SSc Center of Excellence”. A core of 35 patients & SSc HPs from 8 countries initiated the study through an iterative process using nominal group technique with rounds of item revision until saturation and satisfaction of proposed survey content was achieved and subsequently field-tested with a 5 point scale (critical to low importance).Participation was screened and “gate-controlled” with online survey access through a unique one-time link. Telephone interview was offered. Responses from SSc patients and HPs were compared by Pearson's χ2 or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate.ResultsInitial phases yielded a 54 item survey and field-tested in 15 SSc patients & HPs. 400 patients and SSc HPs received surveys of which 299 from 19 countries (75% response rate) were completers. Expert care superseded research as a priority of “critical importance” by HPs & patients respectively at 69% & 48% (p=0.02) and by 94% & 89% (p=0.8) when “critical to very important” were collapsed. 3 questions provided internal cross-validation of this query. “SCoEs should engage in research” received 57% of patients and 48% of HPs (p=0.37) as being critical. Further, education, rehabilitative services and support networks were consistently highly rated items with topics stratified by ratings (tables 1 & 2). Discrepant areas of importance between patients and HPs are highlighted in tables.ConclusionsParticipation was robust in all project stages emphasizing the perceived global importance of this effort. Though research is of clear importance, quality expert care incorporating rehabilitative and educational provisions is a SCoE operational priority. These findings signal the need to redefine SCoE certification standards and provide a roadmap to SCoE development.AcknowledgementsDedicated to the memory of Anne Mawdsley.Disclosure of InterestV. Jaeger: None declared, A. Aubin: None declared, N. Baldwin: None declared, K. Fligelstone: None declared, R. Sims: None declared, J. Welling: None declared, R. Burrill: None declared, K. Connolly: None declared, J. Gordon: None declared, T. Frech: None declared, T. Ngcozana: None declared, M. Kowalczyk: None declared, M. Lammi: None declared, J. Lasky: None declared, U. Walker: None declared, L. A. Saketkoo Grant/research support from: ACR/EULAR Exchange Awardee