Dietetic Practice in the United Arab Emirates: Assessment, Intervention, Collaboration, and Digital Tool Utilization

Given the rising global prevalence of diet-related noncommunicable diseases, aligning dietetic practice with standards of practice is essential for the effective prevention and management of these conditions. This study aimed to examine characteristics of dietetic practice in the United Arab Emirates, such as assessment, intervention, collaboration and digital tool utilization, in light of standards of practice.

This study used a cross-sectional design. A national sample of practicing dietitians (n = 220) filled a web-based questionnaire that assessed various characteristics of their practice, including nutritional assessment methods, dietary interventions for cardiometabolic conditions, interprofessional collaboration, and use of digital tools in practice. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data.

Most dietitians used anthropometric measurements (91.3%) for nutritional assessment, with less frequent use of biochemical data (77.6%), technology-assisted body composition analysis (73.8%), and nutrition-focused physical exams (46.4%). While a large proportion recommended the DASH (90.9%) and to a lesser extent the Mediterranean diet (64.6%) for cardiometabolic conditions, many dietitians also recommended intermittent fasting (62.3%) and detox diets (24.1%), despite limited supporting evidence. Dietitians collaborated primarily with physicians (81.8%) and nurses (69.5%), but less often with other healthcare professionals (< 26%). Social media use in practice was common among dietitians (66%), and some utilized diet-related mobile apps (55.5%), yet scientific validity in selecting these apps was often not prioritized (68%).

This study identified strengths and gaps in dietetic practice in the UAE. Despite the common use of standard assessment tools and evidence-based interventions, limitations such as lack of comprehensive assessment, use of less-supported diets, limited collaboration, and inadequate evaluation of digital tools highlight the need for clearer guidelines, enhanced professional training, and stronger alignment with professional standards.