↓ Skip to main content

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of infection prevention and control among healthcare workers during the COVID 19 pandemic: a descriptive cross-sectional study in three Nigerian states

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Knowledge, attitudes and practices of infection prevention and control among healthcare workers during the COVID 19 pandemic: a descriptive cross-sectional study in three Nigerian states
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2023
DOI 10.1186/s12913-023-09218-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bright Orji, Elizabeth Oliveras, Bartholomew Odio, Charity Anoke, Herbert Onuoha, Emmanuel Ugwa, Madeleine Howard, Ibrahim Idris, Edima Akpan, Festus Okoh, Chinyere Nwani, Oniyire Adetiloye, Nwankwo Lawrence, Chioma Oduenyi, Emmanuel Ogharu, Joseph Enne, Folayan W. Abolaji, Rosemary S. Adegbulu, Emily Bryce

Abstract

Emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic created unexpected challenges for health care workers. The global and national supply chain system was disrupted, and affected infection, prevention and control (IPC) practices. This study aimed at documenting health workers knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) on IPC in Nigeria during the COVID-19 pandemic. The descriptive, mixed-methods cross-sectional study was conducted in Ebonyi, Ondo and Niger states in October 2020. A structured questionnaire was administered to the health workers, complemented by semi-structured interviews that were audio recorded, transcribed and analyzed in Atlas.ti. Quantitative data were entered into REDCap and cleaned, transformed and analyzed using descriptive statistics in SPSS version 25.0 Findings from the qualitative interviews were used to explain the trends observed from quantitative study. There were demographic differences between community and facility-based health workers in our population. A greater proportion of facility-based providers reported having IPC training compared to community-based health workers ever (p < 0.01) and during the pandemic (p < 0.05). Health care workers had moderate knowledge of general IPC, and attitudes toward and practice of IPC during COVID-19 pandemic. However, the knowledge of the relative effectiveness of prevention measures was low. The mean knowledge scores were greater among facility-based workers compared to community based healthcare workers (p = 0.001). Self-reported IPC practices increased during the pandemic compared to prior to the pandemic, with the exception of the use of N-95 masks and hand sanitizer. This study found moderate IPC knowledge, attitudes and practices in our study population during the pandemic as compared to pre-pandemic for the study found gaps in correct hand hygienevaried application of different IPC practices to ensure adherence to COVID-19 preventive measures. The study recommends sustained training for IPC and encourages policy makers that budget line specific to COVID-19 response across all the levels of health care delivery will enhance compliance and emergency readiness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 19%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 25 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Unspecified 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 24 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 April 2023.
All research outputs
#14,662,254
of 23,578,918 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,167
of 7,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,302
of 377,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#78
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,578,918 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 377,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.