Ibadan Urban Dwellers’ Perception on the Use of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions for COVID-19

O. Oyamakin, A. Adegbayibi
{"title":"Ibadan Urban Dwellers’ Perception on the Use of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions for COVID-19","authors":"O. Oyamakin, A. Adegbayibi","doi":"10.36108/gjoboh/2202.10.0160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SARS coronavirus cases have been reported all across the world in the previous two years. The rate of transmission has been steadily increasing over time. This study examines residents’ knowledge, attitudes, and preventive activities for SARS-CoV-2 prevention in five local government areas in Ibadan’s urban zone (total population: 1,886,800 inhabitants, census 2016).During the months of November and December, 2021, a cross-sectional survey based on the health belief model was conducted with a simple random sample of 355 respondents from densely populated regions of urban Ibadan. SARS-CoV-2 was known by a total of 262 people. Only 33.5% of the total respondents were concerned about SARS coronavirus. A small percentage (4.5%) had previously been diagnosed with SARS coronavirus, 66.7% considered a SARS-CoV-2 infection to be serious, yet only 33.5% were concerned about SARS coronavirus. The results are inconsistent in reporting preventive practices, either community-level interventions (e.g., quarantining/self-isolating after returning from travel, 23.9%; actively maintaining a certain distance between myself and people outside, 31.8%) or personal preventive behaviours (e.g., use of alcohol-based hand sanitizers, 53.2%). Participants who reported willingness to accept a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were more likely to perceive the risk of contracting it as higher (aOR = 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01–1.04), as well as knowing if a friend had previously been diagnosed with SARS coronavirus (aOR = 2.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.62–5.55), according to a multivariate analysis using stepwise binary logistic regression which had a 77.27% predictive accuracy, using a test-train, confusion matrix split. In conclusion, the findings of this study suggest that future interventions promoting SARS-CoV-2 prevention among inhabitants of urban Ibadan should focus on individuals’ views of SARS coronavirus vulnerability, highlighting the benefits of personal protective behaviors.","PeriodicalId":368795,"journal":{"name":"GET Journal of Biosecurity and One Health","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GET Journal of Biosecurity and One Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36108/gjoboh/2202.10.0160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

SARS coronavirus cases have been reported all across the world in the previous two years. The rate of transmission has been steadily increasing over time. This study examines residents’ knowledge, attitudes, and preventive activities for SARS-CoV-2 prevention in five local government areas in Ibadan’s urban zone (total population: 1,886,800 inhabitants, census 2016).During the months of November and December, 2021, a cross-sectional survey based on the health belief model was conducted with a simple random sample of 355 respondents from densely populated regions of urban Ibadan. SARS-CoV-2 was known by a total of 262 people. Only 33.5% of the total respondents were concerned about SARS coronavirus. A small percentage (4.5%) had previously been diagnosed with SARS coronavirus, 66.7% considered a SARS-CoV-2 infection to be serious, yet only 33.5% were concerned about SARS coronavirus. The results are inconsistent in reporting preventive practices, either community-level interventions (e.g., quarantining/self-isolating after returning from travel, 23.9%; actively maintaining a certain distance between myself and people outside, 31.8%) or personal preventive behaviours (e.g., use of alcohol-based hand sanitizers, 53.2%). Participants who reported willingness to accept a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were more likely to perceive the risk of contracting it as higher (aOR = 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01–1.04), as well as knowing if a friend had previously been diagnosed with SARS coronavirus (aOR = 2.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.62–5.55), according to a multivariate analysis using stepwise binary logistic regression which had a 77.27% predictive accuracy, using a test-train, confusion matrix split. In conclusion, the findings of this study suggest that future interventions promoting SARS-CoV-2 prevention among inhabitants of urban Ibadan should focus on individuals’ views of SARS coronavirus vulnerability, highlighting the benefits of personal protective behaviors.
伊巴丹城市居民对COVID-19使用非药物干预措施的看法
在过去的两年里,世界各地都报告了SARS冠状病毒病例。随着时间的推移,传播率一直在稳步上升。本研究调查了伊巴丹市市区五个地方政府区域(总人口:1,886,800人,2016年人口普查)居民对SARS-CoV-2预防的知识、态度和预防活动。在2021年11月和12月期间,根据健康信念模型对来自伊巴丹城市人口稠密地区的355名受访者进行了简单随机抽样调查。SARS-CoV-2共有262人知道。只有33.5%的受访者担心SARS冠状病毒。一小部分人(4.5%)曾被诊断为SARS冠状病毒,66.7%的人认为SARS- cov -2感染很严重,但只有33.5%的人担心SARS冠状病毒。报告预防措施的结果不一致,要么是社区一级的干预措施(例如,从旅行返回后进行隔离/自我隔离,23.9%;主动与外界保持一定距离(31.8%)或个人预防行为(例如使用含酒精的洗手液,53.2%)。根据使用测试训练、混淆矩阵分裂的逐步二元logistic回归的多因素分析,报告愿意接受SARS- cov -2疫苗的参与者更有可能认为感染该病毒的风险更高(aOR = 1.02, 95%可信区间[CI] = 1.01-1.04),以及知道朋友之前是否被诊断为SARS冠状病毒(aOR = 2.92, 95%可信区间[CI] = 1.62-5.55),预测准确率为77.27%。总之,本研究的结果表明,未来在伊巴丹城市居民中促进SARS- cov -2预防的干预措施应侧重于个人对SARS冠状病毒脆弱性的看法,强调个人防护行为的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信