Selected article for: "Chi squared test and Mann Whitney test"

Author: Liyanage, Guwani; Dewasurendra, Madushika; Athapathu, Ashan; Magodarathne, Lakmini
Title: Hand hygiene behavior among Sri Lankan medical students during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Cord-id: ib92zi1s
  • Document date: 2021_6_8
  • ID: ib92zi1s
    Snippet: BACKGROUND: Poor compliance with hand hygiene practices among medical students poses a risk for cross-infection. It has become more critical during the COVID-19 pandemic than ever before. This study aimed to determine the knowledge, attitudes, practices of hand hygiene among final-year medical students. It also explored reported hand hygiene behavior before the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for educational strategies to correct the deficiencies. METHODS: A concurrent mixed-method approach was u
    Document: BACKGROUND: Poor compliance with hand hygiene practices among medical students poses a risk for cross-infection. It has become more critical during the COVID-19 pandemic than ever before. This study aimed to determine the knowledge, attitudes, practices of hand hygiene among final-year medical students. It also explored reported hand hygiene behavior before the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for educational strategies to correct the deficiencies. METHODS: A concurrent mixed-method approach was used. In the quantitative strand, a cross-sectional online survey was carried out via a Google form. Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-squared test were used for comparisons. In the qualitative strand, twelve participants were interviewed, based on a semi-structured interview guide and audio recorded. Transcribed data were evaluated with thematic content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 225 final-year medical students were studied in the quantitative strand. Most were females. The mean score for knowledge was 3.35 ± 0.795 out of six. Of them, 31.6 % of participants scored below 3 points (< 50 % of the total). Most (78.9 %) had positive attitudes (score of > 80 %). Only 36.4 % reported “adequate” hand hygiene performance in all eight dimensions of the behavior domain. Noticeably, fewer participants reported to clean their hands after checking blood pressure (55.6 %), and only 66.2 % stated carrying a hand sanitizer in their pocket. Significant correlations were not found between reported behavior and attitudes (p = 0.821) or knowledge (p = 0.794). The qualitative strand with 12 respondents revealed the positive influence of both hierarchical and non-hierarchal role models. Time constraints, skin irritation, and workload pressures were the main barriers. Frequent reminders, supervision, and interactive teaching were suggested as methods to improve hand hygiene compliance. They also stated that increased enthusiasm was noted on hand hygiene during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the participants had positive attitudes towards hand hygiene. Yet, a considerable gap between attitudes and knowledge and reported hand hygiene behavior was evident. Coupling educational programs that use cognitive and behavioral methods, including role modeling, supervision, and frequent reminders, is recommended to bridge the knowledge-attitude-behavior gap. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-021-02783-9.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • academic staff and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3
    • academic staff and logistic regression analysis: 1, 2
    • acceptable behavior and address need: 1
    • additional file and local national: 1
    • additional file and logistic regression: 1
    • additional file and logistic regression analysis: 1
    • address need and local national: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
    • address need and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • address need and logistic regression analysis: 1, 2
    • adequate amount and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3
    • adequate amount and logistic regression analysis: 1
    • adequate supervision and logistic regression: 1, 2
    • local national and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
    • local national and logistic regression analysis: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
    • local national and low availability: 1
    • logistic regression analysis and low availability: 1
    • logistic regression analysis and low percentage: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • logistic regression and low availability: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
    • logistic regression and low percentage: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11