Cargando…

Quality of Care for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Dubai: A HEDIS-Like Assessment

Objective. As little data are available on the quality of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) care in the Arabian Gulf States, we estimated the proportion of patients receiving recommended monitoring at the Dubai Hospital for T2DM over one year. Methods. Charts from 150 adults with T2DM were systematica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Szabo, Shelagh M., Osenenko, Katherine M., Qatami, Lara, Korenblat Donato, Bonnie M., Korol, Ellen E., Al Madani, Abdulrazzaq A., Al Awadi, Fatheya F., Al-Ansari, Jaber, Maclean, Ross, Levy, Adrian R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4458297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26089885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/413276
Descripción
Sumario:Objective. As little data are available on the quality of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) care in the Arabian Gulf States, we estimated the proportion of patients receiving recommended monitoring at the Dubai Hospital for T2DM over one year. Methods. Charts from 150 adults with T2DM were systematically sampled and quality of care was assessed during one calendar year, using a Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set- (HEDIS-) like assessment. Screening for glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), blood pressure, retinopathy, and nephropathy was considered. Patients were classified based on their most recent test in the period, and predictors of receiving quality care were examined. Results. Mean age was 58 years (standard deviation (SD): 12.4 years) and 33% were males. Over the year, 98% underwent HbA1c screening (50% had control and 28% displayed poor control); 91% underwent LDL screening (65% had control); 55% had blood pressure control; 30% had retinopathy screening; and 22% received attention for nephropathy. No individual characteristics examined predicted receiving quality care. Conclusion. Some guideline monitoring was conducted for most patients; and rates of monitoring for selected measures were comparable to benchmarks from the United States. Greater understanding of factors leading to high adherence would be useful for other areas of preventive care and other jurisdictions.