Twitter James Bateman @jamesbateman Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the local patient participation groups and the Hibbs Lupus Trust for their input into the study and piloting the SMS technology.

Objectives We sought to gain insight into the prevalence of COVID-19 and the impact stringent social distancing (shielding) has had on a large cohort of rheumatology (RD) follow-up patients from a single large UK centre. Methods We linked COVID-19-related deaths, screening and infection rates to our RD population (1.2.20-1.5.20) and audited active rheumatology follow-up patients through survey data communicated via a linked mobile phone SMS message. We assessed epidemiology, effect of stringent social distancing (shielding) and quality of life (HRQoL) by Short Form 12 (SF12). Results There were 10,387 active follow-up patients, 7911 had linked mobile numbers. 12/10,387 RD patients died from COVID-19 (0.12%); local population 4131/7,415,149 (0.12%). For patients with mobile phones, 1693/7911 (21%) responded and of these, 1605 completed the SF12. Inflammatory arthritis predominated 1174/1693 (69%); 792/1693 (47%) were shielding. Advice on shielding/distancing was followed by 1372/1693(81%). 61/1693 (4%) reported COVID-19 (24/61 shielding); medication distribution was similar in COVID and non-COVID patients. Mental SF12 (MCS) but not physical (PCS) component scores were lower in COVID (60) vs. non-COVID (1545), mean differences: MCS, − 3.3; 95% CI − 5.2 to − 1.4, P < 0.001; PCS, − 0.4; 95% CI, − 2.1 to 1.3). In 1545 COVID-negative patients, those shielding had lower MCS (− 2.1; 95% CI − 2.8 to − 1.4) and PCS (− 3.1, 95% CI − 3.7 to − 2.5), both P < 0.001. Conclusions Our full RD cohort had no excess of COVID deaths compared to the general local population. Our survey data suggest that shielding adversely affects both mental and physical health in RD. These data broaden our understanding of shielding, indicating need for further study.

Fibroblast-like synoviocytes (FLS) play an important role in maintaining joint homeostasis and orchestrating local inflammatory processes. When activated during injury or inflammation, FLS undergo transiently increased bioenergetic and biosynthetic demand. We aimed to identify metabolic changes which occur early in inflammatory disease pathogenesis which might support sustained cellular activation in persistent inflammation. We took primary human FLS from synovial biopsies of patients with very early rheumatoid arthritis (veRA) or resolving synovitis, and compared them with uninflamed control samples from the synovium of people without arthritis. Metabotypes were compared using NMR spectroscopy-based metabolomics and correlated with serum C-reactive protein levels. We measured glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation by Seahorse analysis and assessed mitochondrial morphology by immunofluorescence. We demonstrate differences in FLS metabolism measurable after ex vivo culture, suggesting that disease-associated metabolic changes are long-lasting. We term this phenomenon ‘metabolic memory’. We identify changes in cell metabolism after acute TNFα stimulation across disease groups. When compared to FLS from patients with early rheumatoid arthritis, FLS from patients with resolving synovitis have significantly elevated mitochondrial respiratory capacity in the resting state, and less fragmented mitochondrial morphology after TNFα treatment. Our findings indicate the potential to restore cell metabotypes by modulating mitochondrial function at sites of inflammation, with implications for treatment of RA and related inflammatory conditions in which fibroblasts play a role.

Objectives During the COVID-19 pandemic, face-to-face rheumatology follow-up appointments were mostly replaced with telephone or virtual consultations in order to protect vulnerable patients. We aimed to investigate the perspectives of rheumatology patients on the use of telephone consultations compared with the traditional face-to-face consultation. Methods We carried out a retrospective survey of all rheumatology follow-up patients at the Royal Wolverhampton Trust who had received a telephone consultation from a rheumatology consultant during a 4-week period via an online survey tool. Results Surveys were distributed to 1213 patients, of whom 336 (27.7%) responded, and 306 (91.1%) patients completed all components of the survey. Overall, an equal number of patients would prefer telephone clinics or face-to-face consultations for their next routine appointment. When divided by age group, the majority who preferred the telephone clinics were &lt;50 years old [χ2 (d.f. = 3) = 10.075, P = 0.018]. Prevalence of a smartphone was higher among younger patients (&lt;50 years old: 46 of 47, 97.9%) than among older patients (≥50 years old: 209 of 259, 80.7%) [χ2 (d.f. = 3) = 20.919, P &lt; 0.001]. More patients reported that they would prefer a telephone call for urgent advice (168, 54.9%). Conclusion Most patients interviewed were happy with their routine face-to-face appointment being switched to a telephone consultation. Of those interviewed, patients &gt;50 years old were less likely than their younger counterparts to want telephone consultations in place of face-to-face appointments. Most patients in our study would prefer a telephone consultation for urgent advice. We must ensure that older patients and those in vulnerable groups who value in-person contact are not excluded. Telephone clinics in some form are here to stay in rheumatology for the foreseeable future.