Adherence to clinical guidelines in management of diabetes and prevention of cardiovascular disease in Qatar
- 603 Downloads
Introduction The prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) in the UK increased in 2009 to 4 %, of which type-2 diabetes accounts for 85–95 % of all cases. In Qatar the prevalence of DM among the adult Qatari population in 2008 was 16.7 %; around four times higher than the prevalence in the UK. The aim of the study was to design and to apply a medication assessment tool (MAT) to determine the level of adherence to internationally recognised guideline recommendations in type-2 diabetes management and in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among type-2 diabetes patients, to quantify any gaps in guideline implementation. Materials and methods 305 patients were included in this study; all diagnosed with type-2 diabetes with no history of CVD. A 38 criteria MAT was designed from published guideline recommendations on the management of type-2 diabetes and combined with recommendations relevant to primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. The MAT comprised 21 criteria assessing control of blood glucose, 5 criteria assessing management of diabetes complications and 12 criteria assessing preventive medication use in CVD. The MAT was validated by a group of practitioners and researchers and field tested in the diabetes outpatient clinic within Hamad General Hospital, Qatar, with electronic and manual access to patients’ medical records. Levels of applicability and adherence to each criterion were calculated individually and the overall adherence was determined. Results The MAT was applied to the whole study sample (11,590 assessed criteria in 305 patients). Application of the MAT identified 19/38 criteria with high levels of adherence (≥80 %), 9/38 criteria with intermediate levels of adherence (≥50 %; <80 %) and 10/38 criteria with low levels of adherence (<50 %). The overall adherence in 305 patients was 68.1 % (95 % CI: 67, 69) in 6,657 applicable criteria. Total non-adherences, both justified and unjustified, were found in 30.8 % (95 % CI: 30, 32) in 2,049 of the applicable criteria in which only 5.8 % (95 % CI: 5, 7) in 118 criteria had a documented justification. Consequently 94.2 % of all non-adherences (95 % CI: 93, 95) in 1,931 criteria had unjustified non-adherence and indicated a need for inclusion in treatment review through an appropriate pharmaceutical care plan. Discussion and conclusion The study identifies levels of adherence to guideline recommendations, the need for additional documentation and criteria with low adherence that might be a focus for an educational intervention and a starting point for targeted pharmaceutical care.
KeywordsCardiovascular disease Clinical audit Clinical guidelines Primary prevention Qatar Type-2 diabetes
The authors would like to acknowledge Hamad Medical Corporation for the financial support and diabetes consultants from Hamad General Hospital who participated in this study.
Mohammad Diab was supported by a studentship from Hamad Medical Corporation, Qatar.
Conflicts of interest
- 1.International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas fourth edition. 2009 [cited 31-8-2011]; Available from: http://www.idf.org/diabetesatlas/.
- 3.Diabetes, UK. Diabetes in the UK 2010: Key statistics on diabetes. 2010 [cited 30-08-2011]; Available from: http://www.diabetes.org.uk/Professionals/Publications-reports-and-resources/Reports-statistics-and-case-studies/Reports/Diabetes-in-the-UK-2010/.
- 5.Diabetes in Scotland. Scottish Diabetes Survey 2008. 2009 [cited 30-08-2011]; Available from: http://www.diabetesinscotland.org.uk/Publications/Scottish%20Diabetes%20Survey%202008.pdf.
- 8.Schramm T, Gislason G, Kober L, Rasmussen S, Rasmussen J, Abildstrom S, et al. Diabetes patients requiring glucose lowering therapy and nondiabetics with a prior myocardial infarction carry the same cardiovascular risk: a population study of 3.3 million people. Circulation. 2008;117:1945–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). The Lancet. 1998;352:837–53.Google Scholar
- 12.Stratton I, Adler A, Andrew H, Neil W, Matthews D, Manley S, et al. (on behalf of the U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group). Association of glycemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ. 2000;321:405–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Scrivener R, Morrell C. Principles for best practice in clinical audit. Oxon: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd; 2002. ISBN 1 85775 976 1.Google Scholar
- 16.Chinwong S, Power A, Kesson C, Hudson S. Prescribing for cardioprevention in type 2 diabetes: Adherence to National Guidelines. American Heart Association. 5th Scientific Forum on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research in Cardiovascular Disease and Stroke. Washington. 2004. (published in Circulation 2004;109(20):P200).Google Scholar
- 18.McAnaw J, Hudson S, McGlynn S. Development of an evidence-based medication assessment tool to demonstrate the quality of drug therapy use in patients with heart failure. Int J Pharm Pract. 2003;11:R17.Google Scholar
- 19.National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Type 2 diabetes (NICE 66). National clinical guideline for management in primary and secondary care (update). London 2008.Google Scholar
- 20.National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Type 2 diabetes. The management of type 2 diabetes (NICE 87) London 2010.Google Scholar
- 21.National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Type 2 diabetes: newer agents (NICE 87). London 2009.Google Scholar
- 22.National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Type 2 diabetes: prevention and management of foot problems (NICE 10). London 2004.Google Scholar
- 23.Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network. Management of diabetes. SIGN 116. Edinburgh 2010.Google Scholar
- 24.Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network. Risk estimation and the prevention of cardiovascular disease. SIGN 97. Edinburgh 2007.Google Scholar
- 25.Al-Taweel D, Awad A, Johnson J. Evaluation of the implementation of international guidelines in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a clinical audit in primary and secondary care settings in Kuwait. Abstract to 40th European Society of Clinical Pharmacy Symposium, Dublin 2011. Int J. Clin Pharm. 2012;34:185.Google Scholar
- 26.Naing L, Winn T, Rusli BN. Practical Issues in Calculating the Sample Size for Prevalence Studies. Archives of Orofacial Sciences. 2006;1:9–14.Google Scholar
- 27.Hope K, Jason L, Valerie F. Improving physician adherence to clinical practice guidelines: barriers and strategies for change. New England Healthcare Institute 2008. [cited 31-8-2011]; Available from: www.nehi.net/uploads/full_report/cpg_report__final.pdf.