Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://repository.kln.ac.lk/handle/123456789/24944
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiyanage, A.
dc.contributor.authorChandrasena, N.
dc.contributor.authorGunathilaka, N.
dc.contributor.authorSanjeewa, R.
dc.contributor.authorPremaratna, R.
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-26T06:58:31Z
dc.date.available2022-07-26T06:58:31Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationAsian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine. 2022; 15(5); 206-212en_US
dc.identifier.issn1995-7645
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.kln.ac.lk/handle/123456789/24944
dc.descriptionIN Indexed in Scopus; SCI Expanded; Not in PUBMED/MEDLINEen_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: To assess public knowledge, practices and perceptions on typhus fevers in Sri Lanka. Methods: A descriptive study was done in four selected typhus- prone areas in Southern Sri Lanka. A mixed-method was employed using face-to-face interviews and questionnaire-based surveys among confirmed cases of typhus and at-risk populations, respectively. Frequencies, percentages, and means were used to characterize socio-demography and evaluate disease awareness. Results: The lay terms for typhus fevers reported in the studied region were “peacock fever”, “tick fever” and “bird fever”. A total of 499 subjects participated [mean±SD, (45±16) years] in the questionnaire-based survey, and 13.6% (n=68) reported past experience of typhus fever, 1.2% (n=6) identified the disease as “typhus” while 58.7% (n=293) and 11.8% (n=59) knew it as ‘peacock fever’ and ‘tick fever’, respectively. The etiological agent was unknown to 95.2% (n=475), but 53.5% ((n=267) were aware that it was vector-borne. Fever (57.3%, n=286), eschar (35.7%, n=178), headache (22.0%, n=267) and myalgia (19.2%, n=96) were identified as key symptoms. Past disease experience was significantly associated with higher awareness of the main disease symptoms (fever: χ2=15.713, P<0.001; headache: χ2=19.447, P<0.001; lymphadenopathy: Fisher’s exact test, P=0.023; eschar: χ2=12.049, P<0.001). None knew of any disease prevention methods. Participants with a past history of typhus fever had sought treatment at state hospitals (55.9%, 38/68) and private sector hospitals (5.9%, 4/68). Conclusions: Public awareness on preventive practices for typhus fevers was rare among the participants though vector-borne aspect was known to many. Clinical disease awareness was deficient among those without past experience of typhus fever. Community sensitization on vector avoidance strategies is highly recommended.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer Medknow Publicationsen_US
dc.subjectTyphus feversen_US
dc.titlePublic knowledge, practices and perceptions on typhus fevers in Southern Sri Lankaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.creator.corporateauthorHainan Medical Universityen
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
APJTM 2022-15-206.pdf410.64 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.