CONCLUSIONS: Median perceived prevalence of counterfeit medicines was 10.00% but only 2.30% were aware of counterfeit medicine dispensing. Out of 343 pharmacists, 332 (96.79%) mentioned that action should be taken against those pharmacists knowingly dispensing counterfeit medicines and 338 (98.54%) stated that there should be strong law against counterfeit medicines.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational study was conducted on attendants who accompanied patients (n = 400) visiting various outpatient departments of the General Hospital and two peripheral clinics in Melaka between August and October 2007. The participants answered a questionnaire (Malay and English versions) which included demographic profile, awareness of eye donation, knowledge regarding facts of eye donation, and willingness to donate eyes. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed at 5% level of significance.
RESULTS: Awareness of eye donation was observed in 276 (69%) participants. Multivariate analysis showed that awareness was more among females when compared to males (P = 0.009). Of the 276 participants who were aware of eye donation, only 34.42% were willing to donate eyes. Willingness was more among the Indian race (P = 0.02) and males (P = 0.02). Educational status did not influence the willingness to donate eyes.
CONCLUSIONS: Although majority of participants were aware of eye donation, willingness to donate eyes was poor.
METHODS: This baseline study was conducted in two urban municipalities of Lalitpur district as preparation for a larger intervention study (Mahalaxmi municipality will be the intervention and Godawari the comparison/control area). The study population was women belonging to the mother's groups of 45 female community health volunteers (FCHVs) from each municipality. The study was done from September 2023 to January 2024. A total of 1207 individuals (580 in Mahalaxmi and 627 in Godawari) were involved. Data on demographics, knowledge, attitude, practice, and adherence was collected using a pre-validated structured questionnaire.
RESULTS: The average age, educational status, monthly income, occupation, presence of respiratory disease, chronic diseases and communicable diseases were found to be not different among the two municipalities. Work experience, presence of respiratory disease and of health worker in the household was different in the baseline survey among the two locations. Knowledge was higher in Mahalaxmi municipality, but adherence was higher in Godawari municipality (p <0.0001). No significant difference was seen in attitude and practice scales. Knowledge, attitude, practice and adherence scores among different subgroups of respondents in the two municipalities were found to be significantly different for occupation (p <0.0001), and education (p <0.0001). The attitude scores were also significantly different according to presence/absence of respiratory disease in the household (p = 0.027).
CONCLUSION: At baseline the two study sites were broadly comparable in terms of participants' demographic characteristics. There was higher knowledge and lower adherence in Mahalaxmi municipality. An educational intervention to improve KAP and adherence is required and will be conducted.