II.

Background:We have just experienced an exceptional period of time and it seemed interesting to know what this particular time of isolation in a population of rheumatologists has brought aboutObjectives:To analyze what the doctor felt in his personal and professional life as a result of the crisis. To determine the reactions, feelings and attitudes that may have emerged during these weeks of confinement.Methods:38 private practice rheumatologists from the Ile-de-France region, average age 63 yo, 58% male (M). 13 questions, 9 appendices, ranking of the most frequently cited reactionsResults:3 feelings stand out: anger 71-84%, fear of being contaminated and of transmitting M 91/F 69%, concern about an unknown pandemic M 86/F69%.Anger at the indifference to the exposure of doctors in the city 84%, the unpreparedness of the authorities M 95/F 62%, the mortality in EHPAD (Nursing homes) 81%, the media cacophony 79%, the hidden reality 71%.On a personal level, according to 61%, the Rh is not anxious about the world after, has no psychological repercussions (sleep, melancholy, etc.) 58% and his degree of commitment was guilt-free 55%.Professionally: perplexity in the face of the contradictions of experts and scientific journals 79%, wide acceptance of constraints in the practice (10h/d mask wearing, 92%, spaced reception of patients 95%, education of barrier gestures 97%), adaptation of the exercise (teleconsultation, telephone consultation) 78%, fear of abandoning treatment or diagnostic delay M82/F62%, financial arrangements necessary M86/F53%.For M: worries about the pandemic, anger and uncertainty about what will happen next predominate in this order. For F, anger (untruths and lack of means) is the main feeling. Anger, fear and uncertainty are the most frequently cited feelingsConclusion:The Rh at the end of this period of confinement is worried M>F and anger especially in front of the sanitary unpreparedness M>F. On a personal level the private life has been little affected F>M and he has been able to adapt professionally. Nevertheless, the de-confinement has not been a banal return to normal 63% M= F.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.

Objectives Our patients are influenced by all medical information, and even rumours. The aim of this study is to analyse their habits and reactions concerning dairy products and calcium. Methods 305 patients completed a questionnaire in the waiting room of non-hospital-based rheumatologists. 90% were women, while the average age was 62 years and 97% were from the île-de-France region. 33.6% took osteoporosis medication or a vitamin and calcium supplement. 66% underwent a bone densitometry test (17.4% for osteopenia, 13% for osteoporosis). 24% had a history of non-traumatic fracture and 13% had another osteoporosis risk factor. 32% practised a weight-bearing sport, while 12.5% had lost more than 8kg through diet. Results 80% of those questioned did not know the body’s calcium or nutritional requirements apart from dairy products in content, but believe they have a sufficient intake. Nutritional calcium intake is mainly via yoghurts (37%). 56.4% have a nutritional calcium intake of <900 mg/day. 22% of patients drink calcium-enriched water. 25% of those questioned think that soya milk has the same benefits as cow’s milk and use it instead of cow’s milk half the time. Those with a BMI of less than 19 have the lowest nutritional calcium intake (740 mg/day on average). 40-60-year-old patients are the most responsive to rumours and lectures on milk. They are the ones who change their nutritional habits with regard to dairy products. Before the age of 40 years, patients are less responsive to medical advice and are influenced by the cost of dairy products and advertising. Less than 10% of those questioned have no dairy intake because of taste, fat content, high cholesterol concerns and intolerances. In 25% of cases, lectures and rumours created a mistrust of dairy products due to contradictory advice. Two thirds consider them useful while one third fear them. Calcium is not dangerous (63%) but can lead to disorders if taken in excess. The dairy products-calcium-osteoporosis relationship is well-understood, yet the onset of a fracture does not change people’s habits concerning calcium (71%). Bone density measurement results and medical advice have a strong impact (91%). The effects of tobacco, alcohol and salt on bones is not well-known. 52% are ignorant of the role of vitamin D for the bones, but do relate it to calcium. Conclusions While campaigns for the consumption of dairy products have helped promote their relevance in bone health, they have not dispelled any concerns over gaining weight or worsening cholesterol levels. Calcium is widely approved <73%>89%> whatever the age to maintain bone quality (41%) and fight osteoporosis (28%). Osteoporosis and the risk of fracture are well-understood, which presupposes that there is a determination to fight both. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

No abstract

Background:In order to study the state of mind of patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease (CRD) regarding physical/sports activity, excluding household activities despite their quantifiable energy value (MET), the CREER group produces this study.Objectives:Analyze a population in the Ile-de-France region with CRD practicing a physical activity (their motivations, expectations, nature and rhythm). Determine the place of physical activity in the management of an CRD by the rheumatologist (Rh).Methods:207 patients, 53 yo average, 56% between 50 and 70 years, 60% are women; 97% of the CRD, Rheumatoid arthritis (RA): 57%) or Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS): 40%, low or moderate activity (66%).10 years evolution (RA) and 11.5 years (AS), corticosteroids RA/AS as follows (34/5 %), NSAIDs (15/52 %), conventional DMARDS (84/30%) or biotherapies (21/43%).Co-morbidities are found for RA/AS in 55% vs 44%, includes high blood pressure 20%, overweight 21%, tobacco 13.5%, other 19%.Results:7/10 patients are encouraged to engage in physical activity, regardless of gender, age, RA or AS. The most common activity proposed is walking (53%), followed by swimming and/or aquagym (40%) and gym (19%). The practice is regular in 60% more by women, RA=AS, more before 40 yo and after 60 years old (70%).The activity actually practiced is: 1- walking 46.4%, 2- aquatic activities 37%, 3- cycling 29%, 4- home sports 19%.Once/week minimum is good for cycling and swimming, insufficient for walking, very good for sport at home.50% have been practicing for 3 years. 60% adapt the rhythm to rheumatism. Their motivations are: to maintain one’s health, to de-stress.A discordance exists between Rh/General physician that advise sport 8 times/10 vs 4.5/10. Nevertheless 50% ignore whether he or she is getting worse or better, hence the need for information.Rh needs to communicate more about the interest of physical activity and the absence of deleterious effect on CRD which one patient over two ignores.If 60% of patients modify their activity with CRD, many do not participate in sports because no time, no need, no desire RA=AS.If the activity is supervised, adapted, prescribed is well-known, its application is confidential due to lack of coaches, and of qualified centers.Conclusion:If the main activity practiced by patients and advocated by Rh is walking, the patients go beyond this framework by mobilizing for cycling, walking, swimming and gym. But the reluctance persists and we must, through therapeutic education convince of the benefits of the activity on CRD and its co-morbidities, unknown to 50% of patients. To map lesions, judge the ability and desires are necessary to set goals for duration and frequency of activity. Using connected tools improves compliance. Finally, walking which does not require neither schedule nor equipment (otherwise a cane) should become a first-line prescription.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.