Knowledge and use of prevention measures related to dengue in northern Thailand

Abstract

Summaryobjective To determine the frequency and determinants of knowledge of dengue infection in three sites in northern Thailand, and to compare prevention measures of people with and without knowledge of dengue.methods In May 2001 we conducted an epidemiological survey among 1650 persons living in three areas in northern Thailand. Knowledge of dengue and the use of prevention measures were measured by means of a structured questionnaire. Differences in knowledge of dengue and the use of prevention measures between risk groups were calculated by chi-square test. Logistic regression was used to identify determinants of knowledge.results Of the 1650 persons, 67% had knowledge of dengue. Fever (81%) and rash (77%) were the most frequently mentioned symptoms. Persons with knowledge of dengue reported a significantly higher use of prevention measures than persons without knowledge of dengue. In multivariate analyses, knowledge of dengue significantly differed by age, sex, occupation and site (P < 0.05). Younger people knew more about dengue than older persons: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 6.75 [95% confidence interval (CI): 4.32-10.6] for the 15-29 age group compared with people aged 60 and older. In comparison with farmers (reference group), knowledge of dengue was significantly higher among students (aOR: 10.6, 95% CI: 4.27-26.4), but lower among housewives or unemployed persons (aOR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.31-0.64).conclusion The overall knowledge of dengue was high, but housewives, unemployed and old persons had relatively little knowledge of dengue. Therefore, these groups may need special attention in future dengue education programmes. Persons with knowledge of the disease more frequently reported the use of preventive measures, indicating the value of education programmes as a tool in dengue prevention.

Knowledge, awareness and practices regarding dengue fever

“…10 Bota et al found that ages ranged from 17-29 years. This was contrast to our study where majority (63%) were between 25-40 years 12 In our study, out of 200 respondents, 80 (40%) were graduates, 42 (21%) were postgraduates, 32 (16%) had their education till 12 th standard, 20 (10%) were illiterate, 20 (10%) had their education till 10 th standard while 6 (3%) respondents had their education of primary level.…”

“…9 Benthem claimed that people with higher knowledge on dengue reported a higher use of preventive measure than people with low knowledge. 10 Preventive measures for dengue fever are mosquito bed net, repellent cream on the skin, wearing long sleeves and pants for additional protection, window and door screens and air-conditioning.…”

Dengue Fever: A Statistical Analysis Regarding Awareness about Dengue among University Students in Azad Kashmir

“…Several studies recommend that better knowledge of dengue leads to better prevention techniques adopted by people to prevent dengue. It is reported that people having high level of knowledge regarding dengue, use better prevention practices in order to avoid dengue [7,8]. Begonia et al [9], conducted a study to know knowledge of people about dengue fever.…”

Cross-Sectional Survey on the Dengue Knowledge, Attitudes and Preventive Practices Among Students and Staff of a Public University in Malaysia

“…Yet, Al-Dubai et al 11 and Juni et al 12 did not reveal any association between ethnicity and dengue preventive behaviour. Findings regarding the association of dengue preventive behavior with age and income level are also conflicting [12][13][14][15][16][17] .…”

“…The questionnaires used in the studies differed greatly from each other. Thus, in some studies, the dengue knowledge component of the questionnaire included questions on disease transmission and dengue signs and symptoms 14 while others focused exclusively on mosquito biting and breeding habits 18,19 . Several studies reported that they applied convenience sampling 11,16,20 , and some studies did not specify a sampling method 12,14 , which might have compromised the generalizability of the findings.…”