OBJECTIVES: To measure the level of COVID-19 information overload (COVIO) and assess the association between COVIO and sociodemographic characteristics among the general public.
METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted between April and May 2020 using a modified Cancer Information Overload scale. The survey was developed and posted on four social media platforms. The data were only collected from those who consented to participate. COVIO score was classified into high vs. low using the asymmetrical distribution as a guide and conducted a binary logistic regression to examine the factors associated with COVIO.
RESULTS: A total number of 584 respondents participated in this study. The mean COVIO score of the respondents was 19.4 (± 4.0). Sources and frequency of receiving COVID-19 information were found to be significant predictors of COVIO. Participants who received information via the broadcast media were more likely to have high COVIO than those who received information via the social media (adjusted odds ratio ([aOR],14.599; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.608-132.559; p = 0.017). Also, participants who received COVID-19 information every minute (aOR, 3.892; 95% CI, 1.124-13.480; p = 0.032) were more likely to have high COVIO than those who received information every week.
CONCLUSION: The source of information and the frequency of receiving COVID-19 information were significantly associated with COVIO. The COVID-19 information is often conflicting, leading to confusion and overload of information in the general population. This can have unfavorable effects on the measures taken to control the transmission and management of COVID-19 infection.
Methods: The proposed study will be conducted in three phases: Phase I will involve the development of the item-pool to be included in the tool, followed by a face, content validity and construct validity. The tool reliability, readability and difficulty index will be determined. Phase II will involve the utilization of the tool to assess baseline SAV knowledge among the HCPs followed by an educational intervention. Multiple Linear Regression analysis will be used to determine the factors associated with SAV knowledge among the HCPs. Lastly, Phase III which will be a repeat of Phase II to assess and evaluate the knowledge after the intervention.
Discussion: The study design and findings may guide future implementation and streamline the intervention of improving SAV knowledge in HCPs training and practice.
Lay Summary: Knowledge assessment and educational intervention of snake antivenom among healthcare practitioners in northern Nigeria: a study protocol Snakebite envenoming (SBE) is an important occupational and public health hazard especially in sub-Saharan Africa. For optimum management of SBE, adequate knowledge of snake antivenom (SAV) is very critical among the healthcare practitioners. The baseline knowledge SAV dosage, mode of administration, availability, and logistics is very relevant among healthcare professionals, particularly those that are directly involved in its logistics. It is paramount that SAV is handled and used appropriately. The efforts and advocacy for the availability for more SAV will be in vain if not handled appropriately before they are used. This study protocol aims to develop a tool, to assess SAV knowledge and effects of educational interventions among healthcare professionals (HCPs) in northern Nigeria. This protocol suggests conducting studies in three phases: (a) Development and validation of SAV knowledge assessment tool, (b) Baseline assessment of SAV knowledge assessment tool among HCPs, and (c) Development, implementation and evaluation of an educational intervention to improve SAV knowledge among HCPs in northern Nigeria.
Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study involving eligible HCPs from different healthcare settings in northern Nigeria. The participants were recruited into the study using a combination of online (via Google Form) and face-to-face paper-based survey methods. The ASV knowledge of the respondents was measured using a validated anti-snake venom knowledge assessment tool (AKAT). Inadequate overall knowledge of ASV was defined as scores of 0-69.9%, and 70-100% were considered adequate overall knowledge scores. The predictors of ASV knowledge were determined using multiple logistic regression.
Results: Three hundred and thirty-one (331) eligible HCPs were included in the study analysis (310 from online and 21 from paper-based survey). Overall, an estimated 12.7% of the participants had adequate knowledge of ASV. Adequate ASV knowledge was higher among physicians compared with other HCPs (21.7%; χ2 = 8.1; p = 0.04). Those without previous training on ASV (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-0.73; p = 0.004) and who have not previously administered/dispensed ASV (aOR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15-0.63; p