Study population
A total of 733 caregivers were included in this study (Tables 1 and 2).
Table 1: Socio-demographic characteristics, knowledge and sars-cov 2 serology
Characteristics
|
total (%)
|
nbr + (%)
|
P value
|
Characteristics
|
total (%)
|
nbr + (%)
|
P value
|
Region
|
|
|
0.043
|
Vaccinated
|
|
|
0.258
|
Dosso
|
100 (13.6%)
|
100
|
|
No
|
178 (24.3%)
|
162 (91.0%)
|
|
Niamey
|
633 (86.4%)
|
608 (96.1%)
|
|
Yes
|
555 (75.7%)
|
519 (93.5%)
|
|
District
|
|
|
|
Vaccine
|
|
|
|
I
|
122 (16.6%)
|
|
|
AstraZeneca
|
116 (21%)
|
110 (94.8%)
|
|
II
|
172 (23.5%)
|
|
|
Johnson and Johnson
|
127 (22.8%)
|
1 (100.0%)
|
|
III
|
101 (13.8%)
|
|
|
Sinopharm
|
312 (56.2%)
|
115 (91.3%)
|
|
IV
|
170 (23.19%)
|
|
|
N-Miss
|
178
|
162
|
|
V
|
68 (9.3%)
|
|
|
Dose
|
|
|
0.394
|
Dosso
|
100 (13.64%)
|
|
|
1st dose
|
140 (25.4%)
|
129 (92.1%)
|
|
Gender
|
|
|
0.410
|
2nd dose
|
412 (74.6%)
|
388 (94.2%)
|
|
Female
|
628 (85.7%)
|
608 (96.8%)
|
|
N-Miss
|
181
|
164
|
|
Male
|
105 (14.3%)
|
100 (95.2%)
|
|
Reason for not vaccinated
|
|
0.562
|
Marital status
|
|
|
0.473
|
Needs more informations
|
49 (27.4%)
|
45 (91.8%)
|
|
Currently married
|
573 (78.2%)
|
552 (96.3%)
|
|
Fear of vaccine side effects
|
98 (54.7%)
|
87 (88.8%)
|
|
Not currently married
|
160 (21.8%)
|
156 (97.5%)
|
|
Not convinced by efficacy
|
9 (5.0%)
|
9 (100.0%)
|
|
Age trance
|
|
|
0.902
|
Vaccine not offered
|
14 (7.8%)
|
14 (100.0%)
|
|
18-39 years
|
343 (46.8%)
|
331 (96.5%)
|
|
Others
|
9 (5.0%)
|
8 (88.9%)
|
|
40 and over
|
390 (53.2%)
|
377 (96.7%)
|
|
N-Miss
|
554
|
518
|
|
Function
|
|
|
0.798
|
Wearing a mask in the ward
|
|
|
Nurses
|
323 (44.1%)
|
311 (96.3%)
|
|
Not always
|
433 (59.1%)
|
404 (93.3%)
|
0.615
|
Laboratory staff
|
34 (4.6%)
|
32 (94.1%)
|
|
Always
|
300 (40.9%)
|
277 (92.3%)
|
|
Midwife
|
111 (15.1%)
|
108 (97.3%)
|
|
Wearing a mask outside the ward
|
|
0.620
|
Others
|
265 (36.2%)
|
257 (97.0%)
|
|
Not always
|
596 (81.4%)
|
596 (81.4)
|
|
Pregnancy
|
|
|
0.774
|
Always
|
136 (18.6%)
|
135 (18.4)
|
|
No
|
335 (91.3%)
|
321 (95.8%)
|
|
Wearing a mask at time of collect
|
|
0.878
|
Yes
|
32 (8.7%)
|
31 (96.9%)
|
|
No
|
374 (51.0%)
|
348 (51.10.0%)
|
|
N-miss
|
366
|
|
|
Yes
|
359 (49.0%)
|
333 (48.90%)
|
|
Medical ATCDs
|
|
|
0.238
|
Wearing a mask / colleagues
|
|
|
No
|
476 (64.9%)
|
457 (96.0%)
|
|
Yes almost all
|
175 (23.9%)
|
159 (90.9%)
|
0.226
|
Yes
|
257 (35.1%)
|
251 (97.7%)
|
|
No all
|
558 (76.1%)
|
522 (93.5%)
|
|
Clinical signs
|
|
|
|
Patient wearing a mask
|
|
|
|
arthrosis
|
2
|
|
|
Yes almost all
|
139 (19.0%)
|
126 (90.6%)
|
0.249
|
headache
|
2
|
|
|
No all
|
594 (81.0%)
|
555 (93.4%)
|
|
abdominal pain
|
4
|
|
|
Has already taken Covid-test
|
|
|
fever
|
1
|
|
|
No
|
676 (92.2%)
|
629 (93.0%)
|
0.607
|
goiter
|
1
|
|
|
Yes
|
57 (7.8%)
|
52 (91.2%)
|
|
hemorroïds
|
1
|
|
|
Respect for hygiene rules
|
|
|
0.908
|
infection
|
7
|
|
|
Not always
|
245 (33.4%)
|
228 (93.1%)
|
|
gastric ulcer
|
52
|
|
|
Always
|
488 (66.6%)
|
453 (92.8%)
|
|
Signs of Covid_19
|
|
0.726
|
Alcohol use for hands
|
|
|
|
No
|
596 (81.3%)
|
575 (96.5%)
|
|
No always
|
305 (41.6%)
|
283 (92.8%)
|
0.916
|
Yes
|
137 (18.7%)
|
133 (97.1%)
|
|
Always
|
428 (58.4%)
|
398 (93.0%)
|
|
Contact with Covid-19+
|
|
0.918
|
Soap use for hands
|
|
|
|
No
|
693 (94.5%)
|
644 (92.9%)
|
|
Not always
|
280 (38.2%)
|
261 (93.2%)
|
0.798
|
Yes
|
40 (5.5%)
|
37 (92.5%)
|
|
Always
|
453 (61.8%)
|
420 (92.7%)
|
|
Trained on Covid-19
|
|
|
Consult a doctor when sick
|
|
0.414
|
No
|
260 (35.5%)
|
|
|
No
|
67 (100.0%)
|
59 (88.1%)
|
|
Yes
|
473 (64.5%)
|
|
|
Yes
|
143 (100.0%)
|
131 (91.6%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
N-Miss
|
523
|
491
|
|
Table 2 : Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of participants in Dosso and Niamey
|
Dosso
|
Niamey
|
Total
|
Gender
|
F
|
H
|
tot
|
F
|
H
|
tot
|
|
Total
|
90
|
11
|
101
|
540
|
94
|
634
|
735
|
Class of age
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-29
|
23
|
|
23
|
111
|
29
|
140
|
163
|
29-49
|
55
|
6
|
61
|
324
|
39
|
363
|
424
|
>50
|
12
|
5
|
17
|
103
|
24
|
127
|
144
|
N-miss
|
|
|
|
2
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
Vaccinated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-29
|
52%
|
|
52%
|
59%
|
62%
|
59%
|
58%
|
29-49
|
65%
|
83%
|
67%
|
81%
|
85%
|
82%
|
79%
|
>50
|
33%
|
100%
|
53%
|
88%
|
88%
|
88%
|
84%
|
total
|
58%
|
91%
|
61%
|
78%
|
78%
|
78%
|
76%
|
Type of job (Nbr)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
administrative staff
|
|
|
|
12
|
2
|
14
|
14
|
ward aide
|
|
|
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
4
|
welfare assistance
|
1
|
|
1
|
11
|
3
|
14
|
15
|
nurse
|
60
|
6
|
66
|
223
|
36
|
259
|
325
|
lab technician
|
9
|
|
9
|
22
|
3
|
25
|
34
|
medical doctor
|
4
|
1
|
5
|
4
|
2
|
6
|
11
|
maid
|
8
|
2
|
10
|
102
|
13
|
115
|
125
|
Nutritionist
|
|
|
|
13
|
4
|
17
|
17
|
cashier
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
6
|
2
|
8
|
10
|
midwife
|
4
|
|
4
|
106
|
1
|
107
|
111
|
other
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
30
|
25
|
55
|
59
|
trainee
|
|
|
|
8
|
2
|
10
|
10
|
Comorbidities (%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diabetes
|
1,11%
|
9,09%
|
1,98%
|
10,93%
|
0%
|
9,31%
|
8,30%
|
Cancer
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0,74%
|
0%
|
0,63%
|
0,54%
|
heart problem
|
3,33%
|
0%
|
2,97%
|
0,37%
|
0%
|
0,32%
|
0,68%
|
hypertension
|
16,67%
|
0%
|
14,85%
|
14,63%
|
0%
|
12,46%
|
12,79%
|
asthma
|
17,78%
|
0%
|
15,84%
|
3,89%
|
1,06%
|
3,47%
|
5,17%
|
pulmonary problem
|
7,78%
|
0%
|
6,93%
|
0,37%
|
0%
|
0,32%
|
1,22%
|
hepatic problem
|
1,11%
|
9,09%
|
1,98%
|
0,19%
|
0%
|
0,16%
|
0,41%
|
hematology problem
|
7,78%
|
0%
|
6,93%
|
1,30%
|
0%
|
1,10%
|
1,90%
|
pregnacy
|
8,89%
|
0%
|
7,92%
|
4,26%
|
0%
|
3,63%
|
4,35%
|
HIV
|
1,11%
|
0%
|
0,99%
|
0,00%
|
0%
|
0,00%
|
0,14%
|
Marital status
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
single
|
10
|
|
10
|
56
|
31
|
87
|
97
|
divorced
|
1
|
|
1
|
17
|
1
|
18
|
19
|
married
|
64
|
10
|
74
|
439
|
61
|
500
|
574
|
widow
|
15
|
1
|
16
|
28
|
1
|
29
|
45
|
vaccinated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
single
|
60,0%
|
|
60,0%
|
57,1%
|
67,7%
|
60,9%
|
60,8%
|
divorced
|
100,0%
|
|
100,0%
|
88,2%
|
100,0%
|
88,9%
|
89,5%
|
married
|
62,5%
|
90,0%
|
66,2%
|
80,2%
|
82,0%
|
80,4%
|
78,6%
|
widow
|
33,3%
|
100,0%
|
37,5%
|
78,6%
|
100,0%
|
79,3%
|
64,4%
|
total
|
57,8%
|
90,9%
|
61,4%
|
78,0%
|
77,7%
|
77,9%
|
75,6%
|
Most of them came from health structures in Niamey (86.4%), the rest from Dosso, 139 km from the capital. In Niamey, health workers from communes II and IV (25.5% and 9.3% respectively) were the most represented of the five communes.
Females were most represented in this study (85.7%). More than half of the staff were over 40 years old (53.2%). Nurses represented 44.1% of the total staff surveyed, followed by other paramedical staff (36.2%), midwives (15.1%) and laboratory staff (4.6%). Most of the women were nurses (44.9%), cleaners (17%) and midwives (17%). The men were nurses (40%), cleaners (14%) or had other functions. No clear difference emerged according to the age group of those employed, depending on where they worked.
A significant proportion had pre-existing comorbidities (257, 35%). These could potentially expose them to a severe form of Covid-19. The most common of these comorbidities were high blood pressure (12.79%), diabetes (8.30%) and asthma (5.17%). At the time of enrolment, 10% of the 317 women under the age of 40 were pregnant. Interestingly, 50% of laboratory technicians and administrative staff reported at least one comorbidity. This was followed by paramedics (40%).
Signs consistent with COVID-19 occurred in 18.7% of the health workers. At enrolment, 14.8% and 20.9% of people in Dosso and Niamey, respectively, had signs potentially associated with COVID. There was no significant difference according to age. These signs were more common in women than in men (15.5 % vs. 9 %, 21.3 % vs. 5.3 % in Dosso and Niamey, respectively). They were also more frequent in patients with no co-morbidities (Table 3) and in those who reported being in personal contact with COVID+ patients.
However, despite this evidence, only 57 caregivers (7.77%) performed a COVID-19 diagnostic test at least once since the beginning of the epidemic.
Table 3 : Factors associated with the presence of signs of Covid-19 at enrolment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dosso
|
Niamey
|
Total
|
signs of covid
|
no
|
yes
|
total
|
% pos
|
no
|
yes
|
total
|
% pos
|
Nbr
|
% pos
|
Age
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-29
|
20
|
3
|
23
|
13%
|
119
|
21
|
140
|
15%
|
163
|
15%
|
29-49
|
51
|
10
|
61
|
16%
|
288
|
75
|
363
|
21%
|
424
|
20%
|
>50
|
15
|
2
|
17
|
12%
|
101
|
26
|
127
|
20%
|
144
|
19%
|
ATCD+
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no
|
36
|
11
|
47
|
23%
|
162
|
48
|
210
|
23%
|
257
|
23%
|
yes
|
50
|
4
|
54
|
7%
|
350
|
74
|
424
|
17%
|
478
|
16%
|
Gender
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Female
|
76
|
14
|
90
|
16%
|
423
|
117
|
540
|
22%
|
630
|
21%
|
Male
|
10
|
1
|
11
|
9%
|
89
|
5
|
94
|
5%
|
105
|
6%
|
vaccine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no
|
34
|
5
|
39
|
13%
|
115
|
25
|
140
|
18%
|
179
|
17%
|
yes
|
52
|
10
|
62
|
16%
|
397
|
97
|
494
|
20%
|
556
|
19%
|
Total
|
86
|
15
|
101
|
15%
|
512
|
122
|
634
|
19%
|
735
|
19%
|
This low use of diagnostic testing was not correlated with employment, age, sex of the participant or use of other protective measures. On the contrary, it may be related to a very low perception of risk related to COVID, as only 5.5% of the participants thought they had been in contact with infected patients. Logistic regression analysis to determine the variables influencing the use of the Covid-19 test showed that age group of persons over 50 (P=0.01), married (p=0.03), widowed (p=0.04), occupation as a laboratory technician (p=0.03), and preventive measures such as wearing a mask (p=0.02) and contact with a Covid-19 patient (6.5*10e-5) are factors significantly influencing the use of the Covid-19 test (Table 4).
Table 4 : Variables influencing the use of the Covid-19 test
Variables
|
Test Covid-19
|
|
n(%)
|
OR
|
IC
|
p
|
Male
|
105(14,32)
|
0,6
|
[0,21-1,69]
|
0,33
|
Class of age
|
|
|
|
|
29-49 ans
|
426(58,12)
|
4,9
|
[1,51-16,44]
|
0,008
|
>50
|
172(23,47)
|
5,8
|
[1,5-22,61]
|
0,01
|
Marital status
|
|
|
|
|
Divorced
|
19(2,59)
|
0,2
|
[0,01-1,59]
|
0,11
|
Married
|
573(78,17)
|
0,4
|
[0,13-0,94]
|
0,03
|
widower
|
45(6,14)
|
0,2
|
[0,02-0,98]
|
0,04
|
Profession
|
|
|
|
|
Nurse
|
323(44,07)
|
1,5
|
[0,75-3,11]
|
0,23
|
Laborantin
|
34(4,64)
|
3,4
|
[1,01-10,55]
|
0,03
|
Midwife
|
111(15,14)
|
1,1
|
[0,41-2,72]
|
0,91
|
Antécédents
|
|
|
|
|
Asthma
|
33(4,50)
|
1,8
|
[0,60-5,28]
|
0,29
|
Autres antécédents
|
8(1,09)
|
6,4
|
[1,27-32,29]
|
0,02
|
Diabetes
|
37(5,05)
|
1,5
|
[0,48-4,85]
|
0,47
|
HTA
|
63(8,59)
|
1,5
|
[0,57-3,70]
|
0,42
|
Wearing a mask
|
359(48,98)
|
2,1
|
[1,12-4,05]
|
0,02
|
Patient does not wear a mash every day
|
594(81,04)
|
1,6
|
[0,71-3,54]
|
0,25
|
Contact with a Covid-19 patient
|
40(5,46)
|
5,2
|
[2,32-11,72]
|
6,5*10e-5
|
Respect for hand hygiene always
|
488(66,58)
|
1
|
[0,53-1,92]
|
0,96
|
Which protections?
Equipment for the prevention and control of COVID-19 infection was used very inconsistently by healthcare workers. (Table II). Only 66.6% (488/733) of the participants stated that they always complied with the hygiene measures against COVID-19 (Table 1 and 5).
Table 5 : Use of safety procedures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dosso
|
Niamey
|
Total
|
%
|
|
F
|
H
|
total
|
%
|
F
|
H
|
Total
|
%
|
|
|
Total
|
90
|
11
|
101
|
|
540
|
94
|
634
|
|
735
|
|
other staff wearing mask in ward
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
almost none
|
28
|
2
|
30
|
0,297
|
11
|
|
11
|
0,0174
|
41
|
6%
|
sometime
|
48
|
8
|
56
|
0,5545
|
391
|
71
|
462
|
0,7287
|
518
|
70%
|
yes almost ever
|
14
|
1
|
15
|
0,1485
|
138
|
23
|
161
|
0,2539
|
176
|
24%
|
patient wearing a mask in ward
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
almost none
|
45
|
3
|
48
|
48%
|
12
|
1
|
13
|
2%
|
61
|
8%
|
sometime
|
45
|
7
|
52
|
51%
|
412
|
70
|
482
|
76%
|
534
|
73%
|
yes almost ever
|
|
1
|
1
|
1%
|
116
|
23
|
139
|
22%
|
140
|
19%
|
wearing a mask in ward
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No
|
9
|
|
9
|
9%
|
6
|
4
|
10
|
2%
|
19
|
3%
|
rarely
|
15
|
|
15
|
15%
|
8
|
|
8
|
1%
|
23
|
3%
|
sometime
|
19
|
4
|
23
|
23%
|
111
|
27
|
138
|
22%
|
161
|
22%
|
frequently
|
25
|
5
|
30
|
30%
|
178
|
22
|
200
|
32%
|
230
|
31%
|
ever
|
22
|
2
|
24
|
24%
|
237
|
41
|
278
|
44%
|
302
|
41%
|
wearing mask outside ward
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No
|
45
|
2
|
47
|
47%
|
64
|
10
|
74
|
12%
|
121
|
16%
|
rarely
|
14
|
3
|
17
|
17%
|
24
|
4
|
28
|
4%
|
45
|
6%
|
sometime
|
15
|
2
|
17
|
17%
|
229
|
35
|
264
|
42%
|
281
|
38%
|
frequently
|
11
|
2
|
13
|
13%
|
115
|
22
|
137
|
22%
|
150
|
20%
|
ever
|
5
|
2
|
7
|
7%
|
107
|
23
|
130
|
21%
|
137
|
19%
|
respects of hygien rules
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no answer
|
2
|
|
2
|
2%
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
0%
|
4
|
1%
|
no
|
4
|
|
4
|
4%
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
0%
|
7
|
1%
|
sometime
|
11
|
2
|
13
|
13%
|
18
|
7
|
25
|
4%
|
38
|
5%
|
most of time
|
13
|
4
|
17
|
17%
|
144
|
36
|
180
|
28%
|
197
|
27%
|
ever
|
60
|
5
|
65
|
64%
|
375
|
49
|
424
|
67%
|
489
|
67%
|
hand washing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No
|
19
|
1
|
20
|
20%
|
8
|
2
|
10
|
2%
|
30
|
4%
|
sometime
|
46
|
6
|
52
|
51%
|
44
|
12
|
56
|
9%
|
108
|
15%
|
yes ever
|
25
|
4
|
29
|
29%
|
487
|
79
|
566
|
89%
|
595
|
81%
|
hand washing with alcool
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no answer
|
4
|
1
|
5
|
5%
|
15
|
7
|
22
|
3%
|
27
|
4%
|
no
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
3%
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
0%
|
6
|
1%
|
sometime
|
5
|
1
|
6
|
6%
|
36
|
11
|
47
|
7%
|
53
|
7%
|
most of time
|
16
|
3
|
19
|
19%
|
171
|
30
|
201
|
32%
|
220
|
30%
|
ever
|
63
|
5
|
68
|
67%
|
316
|
45
|
361
|
57%
|
429
|
58%
|
hand washing with soap
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no answer
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2%
|
7
|
3
|
10
|
2%
|
12
|
2%
|
no
|
|
|
|
0%
|
4
|
|
4
|
1%
|
4
|
1%
|
sometime
|
4
|
|
4
|
4%
|
22
|
7
|
29
|
5%
|
33
|
4%
|
most of time
|
14
|
5
|
19
|
19%
|
175
|
37
|
212
|
33%
|
231
|
31%
|
ever
|
71
|
5
|
76
|
75%
|
332
|
47
|
379
|
60%
|
455
|
62%
|
The use of alcohol and soap for hand cleaning was reported by 58% and 61% of participants, respectively. During the present study, 59% of them stated that they didn't wear a mask in the ward and only 49% of them really wore a mask during the registration process of the study. At the same time, 81% said that patients didn't wear masks during consultations and 76% said that their own colleagues didn't wear masks. No significant differences in awareness and use of protection were found between men and women or by age.
Most participants reported having been vaccinated against COVID (75.7%, 555). Of these, 74.6% (412/555) had received two doses. Sinopharm vaccines were the most commonly used, followed by Johnson & Johnson vaccines. Among those who had not been vaccinated, 49% (87/178) of the participants said that they had not done so because they were afraid of the side effects of the vaccine and 25.2% (45/178) needed more time to decide (Table 1). A proportion of women were less vaccinated than men, i.e. those living in rural areas (57%) or living alone (widow or single) (Table 2). The youngest participants were also the least vaccinated (on average 58%) and the oldest were the most vaccinated (on average 84%) (Table 2). Analysis of factors associated with Covid-19 vaccination among health workers showed that age over 50 years (p=0.001), married status (p=0.002), laboratory technician (p=0.003) and midwife (p=0.002) were statistically associated with vaccination.
Serological prevalence and risk factors
In this study, 708 or 96.58% of health workers were positive for COVID-19 serology (96.1% in Niamey and 100% in Dosso). No statistical difference in age, sex, employment, presence of clinical signs of Covid-19 or marital status was observed because of this high rate. Most nurses (90.4%), midwives (87.4%) and laboratory workers (76.5%) had had SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was no significant difference between having clinical symptoms and having anti-SARS-CoV-2.
In fact, 48.90% of those who wore a mask at the time of sampling, 92.3% of those who always wore a mask at the health center and 94.8% of those who always complied with hygiene measures had positive SARS-CoV-2 serologies (Table 5). This situation reflects the idea that contamination may have occurred outside the facility, in a community setting, and most importantly, that the study took place after the virus had spread in the community.
Risk factor analysis was performed only on 178 (24.28%) unvaccinated individuals. Among them, the rates of positive serology for IgM and IgG were 1.12% and 91.01%, respectively.
Factors associated with positive serology in unvaccinated health workers were: age group (OR 3.84 CI95% [1.16 50.40]), history of tuberculosis (OR 3.45 CI95% [0.85, 24.3]) and marital status with higher risk for unmarried (7.56, CI95% [1.40, 141]). After adjustment for age, district and employment, safety equipment, employment, type of health structures, etc. were not found to be a risk factor in either Niamey or Dosso (Table 6).
Table 6: Factors associated with positive serology among unvaccinated health personnel in health facilities in Niamey and Dosso.
Characteristics
|
N
|
Unajusted
|
Ajusted for age and district.
|
Ajusted for age, district, function.
|
|
|
OR (95%-CI)
|
OR (95%-CI)
|
OR (95%-CI)
|
District
|
178
|
|
|
|
Dosso
|
|
|
|
|
Niamey
|
|
0.00
|
-
|
-
|
Age
|
178
|
|
|
|
18-39 years
|
|
—
|
|
|
40 et +
|
|
1.16 (0.40, 3.84)
|
|
|
Gender
|
178
|
|
|
|
Female
|
|
—
|
|
|
Male
|
|
0.58 (0.17, 2.67)
|
0.74 (0.21, 3.44)
|
0.60 (0.15, 3.00)
|
Marital statuts
|
178
|
|
|
|
married
|
|
—
|
|
|
Not married
|
|
7.50 (1.46, 137)
|
7.74 (1.46, 143)
|
7.56 (1.40, 141)
|
Function
|
178
|
|
|
|
Nurses
|
|
—
|
|
|
Laboratory satff
|
|
0.51 (0.10, 3.79)
|
0.35 (0.06, 2.86)
|
|
Midwide
|
|
0.66 (0.18, 2.75)
|
0.88 (0.23, 3.70)
|
|
Others
|
|
1.05 (0.28, 4.29)
|
1.08 (0.27, 4.85)
|
|
Medical ATCDs
|
178
|
|
|
|
No
|
|
—
|
|
|
Yes
|
|
3.70 (0.99, 24.1)
|
2.91 (0.75, 19.2)
|
3.45 (0.85, 24.3)
|
Contact with a person with Covid-19
|
178
|
|
|
|
No
|
|
—
|
|
|
Yes
|
|
0.68 (0.11, 13.1)
|
0.76 (0.12, 15.0)
|
0.71 (0.11, 14.0)
|
Wearing a mask in the ward
|
178
|
|
|
|
Not Always
|
|
—
|
|
|
Always
|
|
0.95 (0.34, 2.93)
|
1.29 (0.45, 3.99)
|
1.22 (0.42, 3.82)
|
Wearing a mask outside the ward
|
177
|
|
|
|
Not Always
|
|
—
|
|
|
Always
|
|
1.60 (0.42, 10.6)
|
1.97 (0.51, 13.1)
|
1.82 (0.46, 12.2)
|
Wearing a mask during enrolment
|
178
|
|
|
|
No
|
|
—
|
|
|
Yes
|
|
0.74 (0.25, 2.08)
|
0.83 (0.28, 2.36)
|
0.76 (0.24, 2.27)
|
Wearing a mask by other agents
|
178
|
|
|
|
Not Almost
|
|
—
|
|
|
Yes Almost all
|
|
0.92 (0.30, 3.44)
|
1.28 (0.41, 4.83)
|
1.21 (0.38, 4.62)
|
Respect the hygiene rules
|
178
|
|
|
|
Not Always
|
|
—
|
|
|
Always
|
|
1.17 (0.38, 3.31)
|
1.22 (0.39, 3.52)
|
1.31 (0.41, 3.95)
|
Use of alcohol for hands
|
178
|
|
|
|
Not Always
|
|
—
|
|
|
Always
|
|
0.94 (0.31, 2.67)
|
0.86 (0.28, 2.46)
|
0.94 (0.29, 2.91)
|
Use of soap for hands
|
178
|
|
|
|
Not always
|
|
—
|
|
|
Always
|
|
0.84 (0.25, 2.42)
|
0.77 (0.23, 2.27)
|
0.82 (0.24, 2.52)
|