5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      COVID-19 preventive measures in Rohingya refugee camps: An assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Although many studies were conducted on COVID-19 knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) among the general population in many countries, very little is known about refugees, particularly Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar. A vast array of risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) interventions were implemented in Cox’s Bazar with the intent of reducing disease transmission by empowering the community to adopt public health measures.

          Objectives

          The study aimed to assess the level of knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of COVID-19 preventive measures among the Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar, and to identify their socio-demographic determinants.

          Materials and methods

          A cross-sectional study was conducted with 500 Rohingya individuals. Participants in the study were Rohingya refugees residing in five randomly selected camps where International Organization for Migration (IOM) Health was operating. Using a structured questionnaire, skilled community health workers surveyed the Rohingya population. In addition to the survey on knowledge, attitude, and practice, the study gathered information on the perspectives and relevance of sociodemographic factors that influence KAP.

          Results

          The study findings indicate that the mean scores for knowledge, attitude, and practice were 9.93, 7.55, and 2.71 respectively. Association was found between knowledge and practice level and age group–the elderly age group (>/ = 61 years) had less level of knowledge (AOR 0.42, P value = 0.058) and the late mid-age group (46–60 years) had better practice level (AOR 2.67, P value <0.001).

          Conclusions

          Our study found that the Rohingya refugee community in Cox’s Bazar has improved knowledge and attitude toward COVID-19 preventive measures. However, the practice level of these measures remains low compared to the knowledge and positive attitude. The reason behind the poor practice of preventive measures needs to be identified and addressed engaging the community in similar future outbreaks.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          WHO Declares COVID-19 a Pandemic

          The World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, has declared the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic (1). At a news briefing, WHO Director-General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, noted that over the past 2 weeks, the number of cases outside China increased 13-fold and the number of countries with cases increased threefold. Further increases are expected. He said that the WHO is “deeply concerned both by the alarming levels of spread and severity and by the alarming levels of inaction,” and he called on countries to take action now to contain the virus. “We should double down,” he said. “We should be more aggressive.” Among the WHO’s current recommendations, people with mild respiratory symptoms should be encouraged to isolate themselves, and social distancing is emphasized and these recommendations apply even to countries with no reported cases (2). Separately, in JAMA, researchers report that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was most often detected in respiratory samples from patients in China. However, live virus was also found in feces. They conclude: “Transmission of the virus by respiratory and extrarespiratory routes may help explain the rapid spread of disease.”(3). COVID-19 is a novel disease with an incompletely described clinical course, especially for children. In a recente report W. Liu et al described that the virus causing Covid-19 was detected early in the epidemic in 6 (1.6%) out of 366 children (≤16 years of age) hospitalized because of respiratory infections at Tongji Hospital, around Wuhan. All these six children had previously been completely healthy and their clinical characteristics at admission included high fever (>39°C) cough and vomiting (only in four). Four of the six patients had pneumonia, and only one required intensive care. All patients were treated with antiviral agents, antibiotic agents, and supportive therapies, and recovered after a median 7.5 days of hospitalization. (4). Risk factors for severe illness remain uncertain (although older age and comorbidity have emerged as likely important factors), the safety of supportive care strategies such as oxygen by high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive ventilation are unclear, and the risk of mortality, even among critically ill patients, is uncertain. There are no proven effective specific treatment strategies, and the risk-benefit ratio for commonly used treatments such as corticosteroids is unclear (3,5). Septic shock and specific organ dysfunction such as acute kidney injury appear to occur in a significant proportion of patients with COVID-19–related critical illness and are associated with increasing mortality, with management recommendations following available evidence-based guidelines (3). Novel COVID-19 “can often present as a common cold-like illness,” wrote Roman Wöelfel et al. (6). They report data from a study concerning nine young- to middle-aged adults in Germany who developed COVID-19 after close contact with a known case. All had generally mild clinical courses; seven had upper respiratory tract disease, and two had limited involvement of the lower respiratory tract. Pharyngeal virus shedding was high during the first week of symptoms, peaking on day 4. Additionally, sputum viral shedding persisted after symptom resolution. The German researchers say the current case definition for COVID-19, which emphasizes lower respiratory tract disease, may need to be adjusted(6). But they considered only young and “normal” subjecta whereas the story is different in frail comorbid older patients, in whom COVID 19 may precipitate an insterstitial pneumonia, with severe respiratory failure and death (3). High level of attention should be paid to comorbidities in the treatment of COVID-19. In the literature, COVID-19 is characterised by the symptoms of viral pneumonia such as fever, fatigue, dry cough, and lymphopenia. Many of the older patients who become severely ill have evidence of underlying illness such as cardiovascular disease, liver disease, kidney disease, or malignant tumours. These patients often die of their original comorbidities. They die “with COVID”, but were extremely frail and we therefore need to accurately evaluate all original comorbidities. In addition to the risk of group transmission of an infectious disease, we should pay full attention to the treatment of the original comorbidities of the individual while treating pneumonia, especially in older patients with serious comorbid conditions and polipharmacy. Not only capable of causing pneumonia, COVID-19 may also cause damage to other organs such as the heart, the liver, and the kidneys, as well as to organ systems such as the blood and the immune system. Patients die of multiple organ failure, shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, heart failure, arrhythmias, and renal failure (5,6). What we know about COVID 19? In December 2019, a cluster of severe pneumonia cases of unknown cause was reported in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. The initial cluster was epidemiologically linked to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan, although many of the initial 41 cases were later reported to have no known exposure to the market (7). A novel strain of coronavirus belonging to the same family of viruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), as well as the 4 human coronaviruses associated with the common cold, was subsequently isolated from lower respiratory tract samples of 4 cases on 7 January 2020. On 30 January 2020, the WHO declared that the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak constituted a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, and more than 80, 000 confirmed cases had been reported worldwide as of 28 February 2020 (8). On 31 January 2020, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that all citizens returning from Hubei province, China, would be subject to mandatory quarantine for up to 14 days. But from China COVID 19 arrived to many other countries. Rothe C et al reported a case of a 33-year-old otherwise healthy German businessman :she became ill with a sore throat, chills, and myalgias on January 24, 2020 (9). The following day, a fever of 39.1°C developed, along with a productive cough. By the evening of the next day, he started feeling better and went back to work on January 27. Before the onset of symptoms, he had attended meetings with a Chinese business partner at his company near Munich on January 20 and 21. The business partner, a Shanghai resident, had visited Germany between January 19 and 22. During her stay, she had been well with no signs or symptoms of infection but had become ill on her flight back to China, where she tested positive for 2019-nCoV on January 26. This case of 2019-nCoV infection was diagnosed in Germany and transmitted outside Asia. However, it is notable that the infection appears to have been transmitted during the incubation period of the index patient, in whom the illness was brief and nonspecific. The fact that asymptomatic persons are potential sources of 2019-nCoV infection may warrant a reassessment of transmission dynamics of the current outbreak (9). Our current understanding of the incubation period for COVID-19 is limited. An early analysis based on 88 confirmed cases in Chinese provinces outside Wuhan, using data on known travel to and from Wuhan to estimate the exposure interval, indicated a mean incubation period of 6.4 days (95% CI, 5.6 to 7.7 days), with a range of 2.1 to 11.1 days. Another analysis based on 158 confirmed cases outside Wuhan estimated a median incubation period of 5.0 days (CI, 4.4 to 5.6 days), with a range of 2 to 14 days. These estimates are generally consistent with estimates from 10 confirmed cases in China (mean incubation period, 5.2 days [CI, 4.1 to 7.0 days] and from clinical reports of a familial cluster of COVID-19 in which symptom onset occurred 3 to 6 days after assumed exposure in Wuhan (10-12). The incubation period can inform several important public health activities for infectious diseases, including active monitoring, surveillance, control, and modeling. Active monitoring requires potentially exposed persons to contact local health authorities to report their health status every day. Understanding the length of active monitoring needed to limit the risk for missing infections is necessary for health departments to effectively use resources. A recent paper provides additional evidence for a median incubation period for COVID-19 of approximately 5 days (13). Lauer et al suggest that 101 out of every 10 000 cases will develop symptoms after 14 days of active monitoring or quarantinen (13). Whether this rate is acceptable depends on the expected risk for infection in the population being monitored and considered judgment about the cost of missing cases. Combining these judgments with the estimates presented here can help public health officials to set rational and evidence-based COVID-19 control policies. Note that the proportion of mild cases detected has increased as surveillance and monitoring systems have been strengthened. The incubation period for these severe cases may differ from that of less severe or subclinical infections and is not typically an applicable measure for those with asymptomatic infections In conclusion, in a very short period health care systems and society have been severely challenged by yet another emerging virus. Preventing transmission and slowing the rate of new infections are the primary goals; however, the concern of COVID-19 causing critical illness and death is at the core of public anxiety. The critical care community has enormous experience in treating severe acute respiratory infections every year, often from uncertain causes. The care of severely ill patients, in particular older persons with COVID-19 must be grounded in this evidence base and, in parallel, ensure that learning from each patient could be of great importance to care all population,
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards COVID-19 among Chinese residents during the rapid rise period of the COVID-19 outbreak: a quick online cross-sectional survey

            Unprecedented measures have been adopted to control the rapid spread of the ongoing COVID-19 epidemic in China. People's adherence to control measures is affected by their knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) towards COVID-19. In this study, we investigated Chinese residents' KAP towards COVID-19 during the rapid rise period of the outbreak. An online sample of Chinese residents was successfully recruited via the authors' networks with residents and popular media in Hubei, China. A self-developed online KAP questionnaire was completed by the participants. The knowledge questionnaire consisted of 12 questions regarding the clinical characteristics and prevention of COVID-19. Assessments on residents' attitudes and practices towards COVID-19 included questions on confidence in winning the battle against COVID-19 and wearing masks when going out in recent days. Among the survey completers (n=6910), 65.7% were women, 63.5% held a bachelor degree or above, and 56.2% engaged in mental labor. The overall correct rate of the knowledge questionnaire was 90%. The majority of the respondents (97.1%) had confidence that China can win the battle against COVID-19. Nearly all of the participants (98.0%) wore masks when going out in recent days. In multiple logistic regression analyses, the COVID-19 knowledge score (OR: 0.75-0.90, P<0.001) was significantly associated with a lower likelihood of negative attitudes and preventive practices towards COVID-2019. Most Chinese residents of a relatively high socioeconomic status, in particular women, are knowledgeable about COVID-19, hold optimistic attitudes, and have appropriate practices towards COVID-19. Health education programs aimed at improving COVID-19 knowledge are helpful for Chinese residents to hold optimistic attitudes and maintain appropriate practices. Due to the limited sample representativeness, we must be cautious when generalizing these findings to populations of a low socioeconomic status.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Toward COVID-19 Among the Public in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

              Background: Saudi Arabia has taken unprecedented and stringent preventive and precautionary measures against COVID-19 to control its spread, safeguard citizens and ensure their well-being. Public adherence to preventive measures is influenced by their knowledge and attitude toward COVID-19. This study investigated the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the Saudi public, toward COVID-19, during the pandemic. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study, using data collected via an online self-reported questionnaire, from 3,388 participants. To assess the differences in mean scores, and identify factors associated with knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward COVID-19, the data were run through univariate and multivariable regression analyses, respectively. Results: The majority of the study participants were knowledgeable about COVID-19. The mean COVID-19 knowledge score was 17.96 (SD = 2.24, range: 3–22), indicating a high level of knowledge. The mean score for attitude was 28.23 (SD = 2.76, range: 6–30), indicating optimistic attitudes. The mean score for practices was 4.34 (SD = 0.87, range: 0–5), indicating good practices. However, the results showed that men have less knowledge, less optimistic attitudes, and less good practice toward COVID-19, than women. We also found that older adults are likely to have better knowledge and practices, than younger people. Conclusions: Our finding suggests that targeted health education interventions should be directed to this particular vulnerable population, who may be at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. For example, COVID-19 knowledge may increase significantly if health education programs are specifically targeted at men.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Project administrationRole: SupervisionRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Project administrationRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                PLOS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                24 January 2024
                2024
                : 19
                : 1
                : e0282558
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Migration Health Division, International Organization for Migration (IOM), Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh
                [2 ] College of Health Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
                [3 ] Global Health Institute, North South University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
                University for Development Studies, GHANA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The author(s) declared that they have no conflicts of interest in any steps of this research.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4862-7745
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9205-7810
                Article
                PONE-D-23-04848
                10.1371/journal.pone.0282558
                10807836
                53e64249-41ce-4905-bb0b-b1d7305d0820
                © 2024 Halder et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 18 February 2023
                : 8 October 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 6, Pages: 16
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004425, Asian Development Bank;
                There was no specific funding for this research. However, article processing charge of the research was supported by the funding from Asian Development Bank. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Viral Diseases
                Covid 19
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Psychological Attitudes
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Psychological Attitudes
                People and Places
                Demography
                Refugees
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Age Groups
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Infectious Disease Control
                Vaccines
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Medical Risk Factors
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Human Families
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Virus Testing
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.
                COVID-19

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article