Background: Diabetes mellitus is a universal health problem with a global prevalence of 1.3%. India is known as the "Diabetes capital of the world" as it harbours the largest number of diabetes patients. There is lack of awareness about the existing interventions for preventing diabetes and for the management of the complications. One of the barriers in the way of seeking health care advice is the misconception about the disease, which revolves around all the aspects of diabetes, which include its prevention, control and treatment.
Objectives:1. To determine the various misconceptions about the management of Diabetes mellitus in the study area.
2.To find out the association of various misconceptions with the socio-demographic factors.
Material and Methods:A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Urban Health Centre (UHC) Ariankuppam, Pondicherry. A total of 406 adult patients were interviewed. A pretested, semi-structured interview schedule was developed in the local language, and it was utilized to collect the data. The collected interview schedules were scrutinized for the accuracy of the information which was provided and for any lacunae. The compilation and analysis were carried out with the help of the EpiInfo software. The T test and the Chi-square test were used according to the distribution of the data, to see the associations of the different factors.
Results:The commonest misconceptions were "Diabetes can be cured by herbal treatment" (46.6%) and "Bitter foods reduce the elevated blood sugar levels" (46.6%). The misconception, "The treatment should be stopped if the diabetes is controlled for few months" significantly decreased with advancing age. There were no significant differences between females and males when the various misconceptions were compared. The commonest misconception among females was "Bitter foods reduce the elevated blood sugar levels" (49.4%) and among males, it was "Diabetes can be cured by herbal treatment" (47.9%). When the misconceptions were compared, it was found that there were significant differences between the subjects who belonged to different religions.
The low-and-middle-income country (LMIC) context is volatile, uncertain and resource-constrained. India, an LMIC, has put up a complex response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Using an analytic approach, we have described India’s response to combat the pandemic during the initial months (from 17 January to 20 April 2020). India issued travel advisories and implemented graded international border controls between January and March 2020. By early March, cases started to surge. States scaled up movement restrictions. On 25 March, India went into a nationwide lockdown to ramp up preparedness. The lockdown uncovered contextual vulnerabilities and stimulated countermeasures. India leveraged existing legal frameworks, institutional mechanisms and administrative provisions to respond to the pandemic. Nevertheless, the cross-sectoral impact of the initial combat was intense and is potentially long-lasting. The country could have further benefited from evidence-based policy and planning attuned to local needs and vulnerabilities. Experience from India offers insights to nations, especially LMICs, on the need to have contextualised pandemic response plans.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.