OP0159-HPR IMPACT OF NON-PHARMACOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS TARGETING SLEEP DISTURBANCES OR DISORDERS IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMISED TRIALS

Background: Patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) often present limitations in daily life due to unpredictability, severity and chronicity of the disease, reduced functional ability health-related quality life. Moreover, sleep disturbances or disorders have been reported up 40-90% patients IA [1-3]. Sleep are further associated pain, fatigue, mental well-being disease activity [4]. As chronic us hypnotic drugs tolerance side effects, there is growing interest non-pharmacological management improve sleep. Objectives: With a systematic review meta-analysis, our primary objective was evaluate evidence interventions targeting IA. Primary outcome domains, while secondary objectives were based on core domains for trials harms. Methods: Following protocol closure, search undertaken MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ACR EULAR September 2020. Eligible studies randomised adults concomitant disorders, comparing intervention another intervention, pharmacological standard care. Screening titles, abstracts, subsequent full text assessment conducted independently by two reviewers using Covidence tool. Randomisation, blinding, adequacy analyses assessed Cochrane’s RoB tool overall rated GRADE methodology. Disagreements resolved at consensus meetings last authors. Effect sizes continuous outcomes standardised mean difference (SMD), combined random-effects meta-analysis (all 95% CIs). Results: Six (308 patients) included quantitative synthesis. Two disorder insomnia remaining four disturbances. measured Pittsburgh Quality Index (PSQI) Insomnia Severity index (ISI). Three improvement following foot reflexology, auricular plaster therapy, exercise. The presented figure forest plot self-reported suggests that potentially large effect size -0.80 (95% CI, -1.33 -0.28) However, as corresponding low, given body down twice, serious study inconsistency. Conclusion: Although statistically highly significant, implication clinical practice questionable because evidence. None used contemporary indicated benefit favour disorders. In conclusion, more rigorous research urgently needed, also aimed specific order fully reveal utility these novel treatment options. At this point, promising effective, may potential persistently decrease symptom burden increase References: [1]Li et al., Psychol Health Med. 2019 Sep;24(8):911-924 [2]Haugeberg Arthritis Res Ther. 2020 Aug 26;22(1):198 [3]Wali J Clin Feb 15;16(2):259-265 [4]Løppenthin Rheumatol. 2015 Dec;34(12):2029-39 Disclosure Interests: Kristine Marie Latocha: declared, Katrine Løppenthin: Safa Al-Bazy: Tannie Albrechtsen: Helle Jensen: Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi UCB, Consultant of: BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Hospira, Merck, Novo, Orion, Regeneron, Sandoz, Grant/research support from: Poul Jennum: Bente Appel Esbensen: Robin Christensen: declared