This chapter presents the results of the study. It starts with the demographic characteristics of the respondents followed by the summary findings of the knowledge, attitude, practice questions result and misconception. Finally, it presents the main findings of the association analysis between dependent and independent variables.
308 students selected for the study, 302 were participated, yielding a response rate of 98.5%. Out of the 302 respondents 51% were males and (49%) are females. Mean age of the respondents was 20.42yrs (SD 2.873). The percentage of respondents in descending order by zone was Maekel (54.4%) followed by Debub (20.4%), Anseba (12.9%), Gash Barka (9.2%), Northern Red sea (1.7%), and Southern Red Sea (1.4%). With regard to ethnicity, 87.4% of the respondents were from Tigrigna and the rest from Tigre, Saho, Bilen, Hidareb, and Kunama ethnicities. Majority of the respondents were degree students 67.9% and second year students 49.7%. (Table 1)
Table 1 shows the socio-demographic characteristics of the students. (n=302)
Variables
|
Frequency (n)
|
Percent (%)
|
Age
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
16
|
5.3
|
|
19
|
94
|
31.1
|
|
20
|
92
|
30.5
|
|
21
|
51
|
16.9
|
|
22
|
21
|
7
|
|
23
|
16
|
5.3
|
|
>24
|
11
|
3.6
|
Sex
|
|
|
|
|
Male
|
154
|
51
|
|
Female
|
148
|
49
|
Respondents study program
|
|
|
|
Diploma
|
97
|
32.1
|
|
Degree
|
205
|
67.9
|
Year of study
|
|
|
|
2nd
|
150
|
49.7
|
|
3rd
|
82
|
27.2
|
|
4th
|
63
|
20.9
|
|
5th
|
7
|
2.3
|
Permanent Address of Respondents
|
|
|
Maekel
|
160
|
53
|
|
Debub
|
60
|
19.9
|
|
Anseba
|
38
|
12.6
|
|
G/Barka
|
27
|
8.9
|
|
NRS
|
5
|
1.7
|
|
SRS
|
4
|
1.3
|
Respondents Ethnic group
|
|
|
|
Tigrigna
|
264
|
87.4
|
|
Tigre
|
17
|
5.6
|
|
Afar
|
1
|
0.3
|
|
Saho
|
6
|
2
|
|
Bilen
|
11
|
3.6
|
|
Hidareb
|
2
|
0.7
|
|
Kunama
|
1
|
0.3
|
Table 2: Knowledge of existence of malaria as disease and knowing of s/s of malaria (n=302)
Variables
|
Yes (%)
|
No (%)
|
|
|
Existence of malaria as a disease
|
|
300(99.3%)
|
1(0.003%)
|
|
S/S of Malaria
|
Fever
|
284(94.4%)
|
17(5.6%)
|
|
Headache
|
218(72.4%)
|
83(27.6%)
|
|
Chills
|
243(80.7%)
|
58(19.3%)
|
|
Thirsty/poor Appetite
|
167(55.5%)
|
134(44.5%)
|
|
Joint pain
|
171(56.8%)
|
130(43.2%)
|
|
Nausea &vomiting
|
112(37.2%)
|
189(62.8%)
|
|
Diarrhea
|
36(12%)
|
265(88%)
|
|
Knowledge of respondents on malaria
Almost all the respondents (99.3%) were aware of the existence of malaria as a disease. With regard to the malaria symptoms, fever was the most frequently reported by participant accounts 94.4%, followed by headache (72 %,) and chills (80.2%). And 12% of the respondents reported diarrhea as a symptom of malaria. (Table 2
Out of those who knew malaria as a transmittable disease (n=255), 235 (92.5%) mentioned mosquito bite as a means of malaria transmission, however (11.3%) stated by breathing, (1.96%) by housefly and (1.96%) by body contact. With regard to the knowledge of mosquito breeding sites and biting time, 202(66.8 %) of the respondents mentioned stagnant water and waste material as mosquito breeding site, and 95 (31.5%) stated mosquito breed in running water. With regard to knowledge on mosquito bite 293(97%) mentioned mosquito bites during the night and 3 (1%) during the day. (Table3)
Table 3: Knowledge of malaria transmission and mosquito breeding site
Variables
|
Yes %
|
No %
|
|
|
Malaria is transmittable Disease
|
255(85%)
|
46(15.3%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Malaria mode
Transmission (n=255)
|
|
Mosquito bite
|
235(92.5%)
|
19(7.5%)
|
|
Breathing
|
29(11.3%)
|
225(98%)
|
|
Housefly
|
5(1.96%)
|
250(98.4%)
|
|
Mosquito breeding site(n=300)
|
|
Body contact
Stagnant water
|
5(1.96%)
299(99%)
|
250(98.4%)
1(0.3%)
|
|
Running Water
|
95(31.5%)
|
205(67.9%)
|
|
West material
|
202(66.9%)
|
98(32.5%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The table 4 result shows, 94.7% of the study group stated that, use of mosquito bed net is the most preventive method to prevent malaria infection, 69.5% by using indoor residual spry (IRS), (92.4%) by draining stagnant water, 76.8% by Clear vegetation, however, 28.5 % and 21.5% of our study group mentioned IRS and clearing vegetation is not preventing malaria infection.
Table 4: respondent knowledge on malaria preventive measures
Variables
|
Yes %
|
No %
|
|
|
Is Malaria preventable(N=302)
|
|
299(99%)
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mode of prevention (N=299)
|
|
Use Mosquito net
|
286(94.7%)
|
11(3.6%)
|
|
IRS
|
210(69.5%)
|
86(28.5%)
|
|
Draining stagnant water
|
279(92.4%)
|
18(6%)
|
|
Clear vegetation
|
232(76.8%)
|
65(21.5%)
|
|
Taking tablet
|
233(77.2%)
|
64(21.2%)
|
|
Close window &doors
|
175(57.9%
|
122(40.4%)
|
|
Computed knowledge score of respondent
Generally, according to our finding from all those computed variables on assessing knowledge, above 60%of the respondents found to have fairly good knowledge.
Attitude of respondent towards malaria
The result of the attitude toward malaria prevention shows that, 228 (77.55%) of the respondents perceive malaria as serious diseases only if it remains untreated, 53 (18.03%) as a serious disease and 13 (4.42%) as an ordinary disease. (Figure 4.1)
Computed attitude score of respondent
Generally, according to our finding of the result we found the computed attitude from all the computed variables is fairly poor which about 50% on malaria prevention.
Practice of respondents towards malaria prevention
Regarding malaria practice and preventive measures, 212 (70.1%) of respondents said they went to health facility if they get sick, followed by pharmacy 135 (44.7%), traditional healers 8 (2.6%), use leftover drugs 10 (3.3%) and use home remedies 22 (7.4%). With regard to the ownership of ITN, 257/302 (85.1%) of the respondents owned ITN. However, utilization of ITNs during the last night was 204 (69.2%). For those who did not used ITNs (n = 91), did not used ITN last night because, not suitable to hung 29 (31.9%), don’t believe it prevents from mosquito bite 4(4.3%), no mosquito last night 14 (15.1%),6 (6.1%) due to hot weather and 39 (41.9%) of the respondents missed to answer.
Computed practices score of respondent
Generally, according to our finding, the computed practice variable on malaria prevention and health seeking behavior of the respondents is fairly poor which about 50%.
Misconception of respondents on malaria treatment seeking behavior
According the table 5 result shows the misconception of the study group, when the age of the students increased the misconception regarding health seeking behavior of the students in using traditional healers increased from 2.4% to 9.09% among the age group of >24 years, however in use traditional remedy at how (7.9%) and 3.6% used others leftover drugs to treat malaria in age group of 18-23.
Table 5: respondents’ misconception
Variables
|
Traditional Healers
|
Use others left overs drugs
|
Use Traditional Remedies At Home
|
Age
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-23
|
2.40%
|
3.46%
|
7.90%
|
|
|
>24
|
9.09%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
Sex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Male
|
3.90%
|
5.20%
|
7.80%
|
|
|
Female
|
1.40%
|
1.40%
|
6.80%
|
|
Study Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
1.30%
|
3.30%
|
5.30%
|
|
|
3
|
6.10%
|
6.10%
|
15%
|
|
|
4
|
0%
|
0%
|
3.10%
|
|
|
5
|
14.20%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
Level of Education
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Degree
|
1.90%
|
2.90%
|
6.80%
|
|
|
Diploma
|
4.10%
|
4.10%
|
8.20%
|
|
Zoba
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maekel
|
3.30%
|
1.80%
|
7.50%
|
|
|
Debub
|
5%
|
3.30%
|
6.60%
|
|
|
Anseba
|
2.60%
|
2.60%
|
7.80%
|
|
|
Gash Barka
|
0%
|
3.70%
|
3.70%
|
|
|
NRS
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
|
SRS
|
25%
|
25%
|
25%
|
|
Ethinic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tigrgna
|
2.60%
|
3.03%
|
7.20%
|
|
|
Tige
|
0%
|
6.25%
|
0%
|
|
|
Afar
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
|
|
Saho
|
0%
|
0
|
16.60%
|
|
|
Bilen
|
0%
|
0%
|
9%
|
|
|
Hidareb
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
|
Kunama
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
With regard sex of the respondent misconception on health seeking behavior was found more in male than female. Among the students attending in 5th year (14.2%) shown more
Misconception of respondents’ knowledge factors that associated with malaria
The major finding (table 6) revealed that, the misconceptions of the students on factors that associated with malaria infections. Among the age group 18-23 the students mentioned that malaria is associated with eating maize stalk (27.9%), cloudy weather (24.4%) and cold weather (30.4%), followed by in age group of > 24, (54.4%) eating maize stalk, (54.4%) cloudy weather and (45.4%) cold weather.
Table 6: Misconception of respondents’ knowledge factors that associated with malaria
Variables
|
Eating maize stalk
|
Cloudy weather
|
Cold weather
|
Age
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-23
|
27.90%
|
24.47%
|
30.40%
|
|
|
>24
|
54.50%
|
54.50%
|
45.40%
|
|
Sex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Male
|
33.50%
|
28.90%
|
28.90%
|
|
|
Female
|
23.90%
|
21.90%
|
32.80%
|
|
Study Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
23.10%
|
23.10%
|
31.90%
|
|
|
3
|
34.50%
|
30.80%
|
34.50%
|
|
|
4
|
33.30%
|
25.30%
|
26.90%
|
|
|
5
|
42.80%
|
28.50%
|
0%
|
|
Level of Education
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Degree
|
27.70%
|
22.70%
|
24.70%
|
|
|
Diploma
|
31.20%
|
31.20%
|
43.70%
|
|
Zoba
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maekel
|
21.00%
|
25.40%
|
30.50%
|
|
|
Debub
|
38.30%
|
31.60%
|
35%
|
|
|
Anseba
|
42.20%
|
15.70%
|
26.30%
|
|
|
Gash Barka
|
41%
|
1.50%
|
34.60%
|
|
|
NRS
|
0%
|
40%
|
20%
|
|
|
SRS
|
25%
|
50%
|
25%
|
|
Ethinic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tigrgna
|
28.10%
|
24.60%
|
30.30%
|
|
|
Tige
|
29.40%
|
29.40%
|
23.50%
|
|
|
Afar
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
|
|
Saho
|
33.30%
|
66.60%
|
33.30%
|
|
|
Bilen
|
45.40%
|
18.10%
|
45.40%
|
|
|
Hidareb
|
0.00%
|
0%
|
50%
|
|
|
Kunama
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
With regard to place of origin those who came from Anseba zone accounts (42%) by eating maize stalk, (15.7%) by cloudy weather and (26.3%) by cold weather were mentioned as associating factors, followed by (38.3%), eating maize stalk, (31.6%) cloudy weather and (35%) cold weather from Debub region. With regard ethnicity of the respondents, (100%) of those who came from Afar ethnic group believe that malaria is associated with eating maize stalk, cloudy and cold weather, followed by (45.4%), eating maize stalk, (18.1%) cloudy weather and (45.4%) cold weather from Bilen ethnic group. (table 6)
4.2. Determinants of KAP of malaria
4.2.1. Association between background variables and respondents’ knowledge
The association between knowledge of vulnerable groups with age and year of study of respondents were analyzed. The association between age of respondent and level of knowledge was found to be statistically significant with OR ranging from 3.9 up to 37.5 for the differ age groups. With regard to year of study and level of knowledge, being third year student was a predictor to have a lower knowledge as compared to the reference second year students (OR 0.365 (CI, 0.145-0.921)) (P=0.033). However, there were no statistical significant difference between the other years of study and the reference category, second year. (Table: 7)
Table 7: association between knowledge of vulnerable groups with age and year of study of respondents
Variable
|
|
Adequate n (%)
|
In Adequate n (%)
|
OR(95%CI)
|
P-Value
|
Age
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18a
|
2(12.5%)
|
14(87.5%)
|
1
|
|
|
19
|
21(22.3%)
|
73(77.7%)
|
3.921(1.304-11.788)
|
0.015**
|
|
20
|
26(28.3%)
|
66(71.7%)
|
6.894(1.910-24.880)
|
0.003***
|
|
21
|
15(29.6%)
|
36(70.6%)
|
6.497(1.516-27.843)
|
0.012**
|
|
22
|
2(9.5%)
|
19(90.6%)
|
37.560(2.770-509.186)
|
0.006**
|
|
23
|
2(12.5%)
|
14(87.5%)
|
7.353 (1.213-44.560)
|
0.03**
|
Study year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2a
|
39(26%)
|
111(74%)
|
|
|
|
3
|
20(24.4%)
|
62(75.6%)
|
0.365(0.145-0.921)
|
0.033**
|
|
4
|
11(17.5%)
|
52(82.5%)
|
1.071(0.299-3.839)
|
0.915
|
|
5
|
1(14.3%)
|
6(85.7%)
|
0.143(0.0153-1.334)
|
0.088
|
*** Highly significant, ** medium significant and * low significant ‘a’= reference category
5.3.1. Association between background variables and respondents practice
The association between bed net utilization with age and place of residence was assessed using logistic regression. The results revealed that practice of mosquito bed net utilization to be significantly associated with the age and permanent address of the respondents. The predictors was found to be age 20 (OR18.49, (CI 1.227-278.87) (P=0.035) and being resident of Zoba Debub (OR 0.094, (CI, 0.014-0.607)) (0.013) and Zoba Gash Barka (OR 0.027(CI, 0.02-0.258) (P=0.002). For the other variables are no association shown. (Table: 6)
Table 6: logistic regression analysis practice on bed net utilization on demographic characteristics of the respondents
|
Yes n (%)
|
No n (%)
|
OR (95% CI)
|
P-Value
|
Age
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
1
|
|
19
|
85(90.4%)
|
6(6.4%)
|
0.795(0.098-6.442)
|
0.831
|
20
|
85(90.4%)
|
1(1.08%)
|
18.49(1.227-278.87)
|
0.035**
|
21
|
48(94.1%)
|
2(3.9%)
|
3.55(0.170-74.276)
|
0.413
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zoba
|
|
|
|
|
Maekel
|
|
|
1
|
|
Debub
|
55(92%)
|
4(7%)
|
0.094(0.014-0.607)
|
0.013**
|
Anseba
|
36(95%)
|
2(5%)
|
0.165(0.020-1.347)
|
0.093
|
GashBarka
|
24(89%)
|
3(11%)
|
0.027(0.02-0.258)
|
0.002***
|
*** Highly significant, ** medium significant and * low significant a= reference category