Chronic disease services may be improved if care management processes (CMPs), such as disease‐specific flowsheets and chronic disease registries, are used. The newly industrialized Gulf state health service has underdeveloped primary care but higher diabetes prevalence. This paper's aim is to investigate care management processes in United Arab Emirates (UAE) primary care clinics to explore these issues.
A cross‐sectional survey using self‐administered questionnaires given to family physicians and nurses attending a UAE University workshop was used to collect data.
All 38 participants completed the questionnaire: 68 per cent were women and 81 per cent physicians. Care management processes in use included: medical records, 76 per cent; clinical guidelines, 74 per cent; chronic disease care rooms, 74 per cent; disease‐specific flowsheets, 61 per cent; medical record audits, 57 per cent; chronic disease nurse‐educators, 58 per cent; electronic medical records (EMR), 34 per cent; and incentive plans based on clinical performance, 21 per cent. Only 62 per cent and 48 per cent reported that flowsheets and problem lists, respectively, were completed by physicians. Responses to the open‐ended question included using traditional quality improvement (QI) approaches such as continuing education and staff meetings, but not proactive systems such as disease registries and self‐management.
The study used a small, non‐random sample and the survey instrument's psychometric properties were not collected.
Chronic disease care CMPs are present in UAE clinics but use is limited. Quality improvement should include disease registries, reminder‐tracking systems, patient self‐management support and quality incentives.
This report highlights the lag regarding adopting more effective CMPs in developing countries.
Jawad Hashim, M., Prinsloo, A. and Mirza, D. (2013), "Quality improvement tools for chronic disease care – more effective processes are less likely to be implemented in developing countries", International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 14-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/09526861311288604Download as .RIS
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2013, Emerald Group Publishing Limited