Table 4 Summarized attitudes of the study populations towards dengue
Factor | Kandy (%) | Colombo (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control n (%) | Positive n (%) | P-value (χ2)a | Control n (%) | Positive n (%) | P-value (χ2) | ||
Case frequency | Frequent | 533 (53.3) | 469(46.9) | 0.02* | 847 (84.7) | 685 (68.5) | 0.04* |
Occasionally | 435 (43.5) | 526 (52.6) | 153 (15.3) | 315 (31.5) | |||
None | 12 (1.2) | 5 (0.5) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |||
Need more awareness | Yes | 623 (62.3) | 779 (77.9) | 0.13 | 825 (82.5) | 652 (65.2) | 0.16 |
No | 377 (37.7) | 221 (22.1) | 175 (17.5) | 348 (34.8) | |||
If yes, in which aspects | Symptoms and treatments of DHF | 686 (68.6) | 468 (46.8) | 0.03* | 825 (82.5) | 558 (55.8) | 0.02* |
Controlling | 651 (65.1) | 539 (53.9) | 785 (78.5) | 395 (39.5) | |||
Solid Waste Management (SWM) | 447 (44.7) | 299 (29.9) | 645 (64.5) | 387 (38.7) | |||
Attitudes on community based vector management | Yes | 757 (75.7) | 576 (57.6) | 0.03* | 855 (85.5) | 645 (64.5) | 0.04* |
No | 243 (24.3) | 424 (42.4) | 145 (14.5) | 355 (35.5) | |||
Have there been adequate steps taken to control dengue? | Yes | 289 (28.9) | 141 (14.1) | 0.03* | 455 (45.5) | 205 (20.5) | 0.01* |
No | 711 (71.1) | 859 (85.9) | 545 (54.5) | 795 (79.5) | |||
The responsible party for management of dengue | Government | 659 (65.9) | 851 (85.1) | 0.04* | 750 (75.0) | 897 (89.7) | 0.03* |
Non-governmental organizations (NGO) | 120 (12.0) | 48 (4.8) | 355 (35.5) | 188 (18.8) | |||
Community | 255 (25.5) | 165 (16.5) | 71 (7.10) | 11 (1.1) | |||
Role of the Public Health Inspector (PHI) | Excellent | 291 (29.1) | 65 (6.5) | 0.005** | 355 (35.5) | 205 (20.5) | 0.04* |
Satisfactory | 298 (29.8) | 42 (4.2) | 225 (22.5) | 170 (17.0) | |||
Moderate | 339 (33.9) | 153 (15.3) | 282 (28.2) | 305 (30.5) | |||
Unsatisfactory | 72 (7.2) | 740 (74.0) | 138 (13.8) | 320 (32.0) | |||