ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2190

Characterizing Compensatory Cognitive Strategy Use in People with Systemic Sclerosis

Yen Chen1, Alain Lescoat2, Dinesh Khanna3 and Susan Murphy4, 1University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 2CHU Rennes - University Rennes 1, Rennes, France, 3Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Scleroderma Program, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 4University of Michigan, Grosse Ile, MI

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2022

Keywords: health behaviors, psychosocial factors, Scleroderma, Systemic sclerosis

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 14, 2022

Title: Abstracts: Cognition and Behavior in RA and Systemic Sclerosis

Session Type: Abstract Session

Session Time: 3:00PM-4:00PM

Background/Purpose: Individuals with systemic sclerosis (SSc) report cognitive problems that worsen symptoms and daily activity performance. Compensatory cognitive strategies (CCS) are commonly taught to help people with chronic conditions manage cognitive problems. Evidence demonstrates CCS use improves symptoms and quality of life. However, current self-management programs do not include CCS. Little is known about CCS use in the SSc population. The purposes of this study are: 1) to characterize CCS use, 2) to examine if CCS use differs by demographics and SSc characteristics, and 3) to investigate associations between self-reported cognitive function and symptoms with CCS.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted. The CCS, a 24-item questionnaire, was used to assess how frequently participants use ways to decrease distractions, organize activities, avoid mistakes, and to use technologies to compensate their cognitive problems in everyday lives. The response to each item is rated on a 5-point Liker scale: 0 (never); 1 (rarely); 2 (sometimes); 3 (often); and 4 (all the time). Perceived cognitive function and symptoms (fatigue, pain, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depressed mood) were assessed with PROMIS measures. Independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance were conducted to examine whether CCS use differs by demographics and SSc characteristics. Multiple regression was conducted to examine independent associations of cognitive function and symptoms with CCS.

Results: Of 106 participants (Mean age 55.2 ± 11.5 years), most were female (84%) and White (82%). More than half (58%) had the diffuse cutaneous SSc subtype (Table 1). The most frequently used types of CCS (have the median value of 2 or higher) were organizational strategies, technology, attention strategies, lifestyle strategies, and review and confirm work to avoid mistakes (see Figure 1). The three most frequently used CCS were establishing a routine (86%), using a reminder on an electronic device (82%), and prioritizing a “to do” list (81%) (Table 2). Participants with some college or associate’s degree reported significantly more CCS use compared to people with a high school degree. Participants on work disability reported more CCS use compared to homemakers and full-time employed individuals. Age, sex, race, SSc subtype, and disease duration were not significant associated with CCS. Worse cognitive function (β = -0.26, p < .05) and pain (β = 0.28, p < .05) were significantly independently associated with more CCS use. There were no significant associations of fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, and depressed mood with CCS.

Conclusion: Up to 86% of participants used at least one CCS. Less educated individuals were least likely to report CCS use. Worse cognitive function and pain were associated with CCS, suggesting that it may be important to integrate CCS education in self-management programs. Future longitudinal research should investigate the effectiveness of CCS in people with SSc.

Supporting image 1

Table 1 Sample Characteristics (N = 106)

Supporting image 2

Table 2. Self-reported use in compensatory cognitive strategies (N = 106)

Supporting image 3

Figure 1. Cognitive compensatory strategies diagram showing different types of strategies use in patients with SSc. This diagram only presents strategies that have the median value of 2 or higher. Frequency was rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (never), 1 (rarely), 2 (sometimes), 3 (often), to 4 (all the time).


Disclosures: Y. Chen, None; A. Lescoat, None; D. Khanna, Boehringer Ingelheim, Genentech, Prometheus, Horizon, Chemomab, Talaris, Gesynta, Amgen, Acceleron, Actelion, Bayer, CSL Behring, Paracrine Cell Therapy, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Theraly, Eicos Sciences; S. Murphy, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Chen Y, Lescoat A, Khanna D, Murphy S. Characterizing Compensatory Cognitive Strategy Use in People with Systemic Sclerosis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2022; 74 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/characterizing-compensatory-cognitive-strategy-use-in-people-with-systemic-sclerosis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2022

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/characterizing-compensatory-cognitive-strategy-use-in-people-with-systemic-sclerosis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology