This cross-sectional study assesses adherence to diabetes management guidelines among prescribers, suggesting improvement strategies.
Background Clinical guidelines are essential tools for standardizing and improving the quality of care, particularly in chronic illnesses such as diabetes mellitus. However, one of the significant challenges is adherence to these clinical guidelines by healthcare providers in low and middle-income countries. Objective To assess the level of adherence to Diabetes mellitus Standard treatment guidelines among prescribers in Southwestern Uganda. Methods A cross-sectional design was employed involving 75 prescribers, including doctors and clinical officers. Data was collected using a structured questionnaire and analyzed using IBM SPSS version 26. Results Findings revealed that only 16% of prescribers demonstrated high adherence to UCG, while 75% exhibited low adherence. Lifestyle modification was the most consistently applied aspect (48%), while patient monitoring and follow-up had the lowest adherence (12%). Key barriers to adherence included limited availability of recommended medications, patient-related challenges, lack of knowledge about the guidelines, and workload/time constraints. Multivariate logistic regression showed that male gender (aOR = 11.60, p = 0.006) and prior training on the UCG (aOR = 25.73, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with higher adherence. Education level and years of experience were not significant predictors in the multivariate model. Conclusion The study concludes that adherence to UCG for diabetes management among prescribers is suboptimal, potentially compromising patient outcomes. To improve adherence, it recommends regular training programs, better dissemination of the guidelines, strengthening of the drug supply chain, and enhanced institutional support. These interventions could significantly improve the quality and consistency of diabetes care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Immaculate et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: