BetaEntity Annotation Prototype
← Back to drugs

Annotated abstract

PO:13:350 Perceptions of live-online fatigue management programmes versus standard care in people with systemic lupus erythematosus: preliminary findings from the FLIP study

lupusscimed · 2026-03-01 · canonical JSON source

19 visible annotations · policy: published · automated confidence ≥ 75.00%

Document resource

Objectives To examine perceptions of fatigue management interventions by people living with SLE in the United Kingdom.Methods We are conducting an ongoing three-armed multi-centre randomised clinical trial called the Fatigue in Lupus Intervention Programmes (FLIP) study, comparing standard care (fatigue management leaflets from Versus Arthritis and Lupus UK) to a 4-week, and a 7-week live-online fatigue management programme (FMP). Following the interventions, each participant was asked (1) if their confidence in managing their fatigue had improved; (2) if they found the intervention helpful; (3) if relevant, did they find the group setting helpful; and (4) which intervention they would prefer if given the choice. We used Fisher’s exact test to compare confidence and effectiveness.Results Participant-reported confidence levels improved in 80% of the 4-Week (4W) FMP Group and 100% of the 7-Week (7W) FMP Group. Both groups were significantly more effective at improving confidence levels than standard care (SC) (4W vs SC p = 0.0011; 7W vs SC p = <0.001). 87% of the 4W FMP participants found the intervention helpful for managing their fatigue, compared with 100% of the 7W FMP. Both FMPs were significantly more effective at supporting participants in their fatigue management than SC (4W vs SC p = 0.0032; 7W vs SC p = 0.0047). 25 of the 26 participants (96%) found the group setting helpful. Equal numbers of participants would have chosen the 4W FMP (43%) or the 7W FMP (43%), and 14% would have chosen standard care.Abstarct PO:13:350 Table 1Confidence levels, perceived helpfulness, and preferences of fatigue management interventionsConclusions FMP participants generally favoured the intervention they had been randomised to in the study, indicating familiarity may have influenced this choice. All of 7W FMP participants would have chosen an FMP and had a higher preference for the 7W programme, while two of the 4W FMP participants would have chosen SC. Interestingly, the SC group had a preference for the shorter, 4W FMP.From a patient perspective, live-online group FMPs are more effective at improving confidence at managing fatigue, and are considered more helpful for fatigue management than standard care. People living with SLE in the UK have a preference for live-online group FMPs than standard care.