Background: Using directives have been the standard approach of changing public behavior. But studies have shown that directives fail because people hate being told what to do. Telling individuals to use limited resources and other social amenities in rural areas to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection may lead to skepticism in practice of public health recommendations on COVID-19 prevention. Even non-availability of basic hand washing facilities (soap and clean water) which form fundamental mechanism to prevent COVID-19 can expose people to infection. Study assesses factors and conditions that influence the practice of Center for disease control (CDC) preventive measures against COVID-19 in rural areas.Methods: This is a qualitative study that utilized information from 36 health care professionals under the aegis of committee for COVID-19 prevention. These committee members are working together in partnership with state government to provide services to control, prevent and cushion effects of COVID-19 pandemic.Results: Findings from 36 health care professionals made up of 10 (27.8%) females and 26 (72.2%) males showed that factors such as denial of existence of the virus, labeling virus as only urban limited, poor knowledge of mode of transmission, terming virus as ploy politicians use to siphon resources meant for rural development contributed to non-observation of CDC guidelines for COVID-19 prevention.Conclusions: Denying existence of COVID-19 and not observing CDC guidelines will increase community transmission thereby, expose people in communities to infection. Therefore, education is needed to enlighten people in communities on benefits of observing CDC guidelines.

Background: Helpful strategies to prevent human immuno-deficiency virus (HIV) and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) among adolescents remain the greatest challenge in developing countries including Nigeria. In Nigeria, interventions for preventing HIV and AIDS for in-school adolescents are limited. This study used class-room instruction (CI) and drama (DR) for HIV and AIDS prevention among in-school adolescents in Orlu Senatorial Zone.Methods: A quasi-experimental design using 165 students from three randomly selected co-educational secondary schools was adopted. Two experimental groups (CI and DR) and a control group were used for the study. Baseline data were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire with 29-point knowledge and 9-point attitudinal scales. Knowledge was analysed using the scores <15 and ≥15 for low and high knowledge respectively. For attitude, scores of <5 and ≥5 were categorised as negative and positive respectively. The results for baseline studies were used to design interventions that were implemented for 8 weeks. Also, mid-term and follow-up evaluations were conducted during the study. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, t-test and ANOVA at p=0.05.Results: The mean ages of the respondents in CI, DR and control groups were 13.4±1.2, 13.9±1.5 and 13.8±1.2 years respectively. Knowledge scores on HIV and AIDS at baseline were 20.5±2.7, 20.4±2.6 and 21.1±2.7 for CI, DR and Control groups respectively. These scores increased to 22.7±2.7, 22.6±1.8 and 21.2±0.3 at mid-term for CI, DR and control, respectively. At follow-up, scores for CI and DR increased to 23.9±1.8 and 24.5±1.4 respectively while the score for the control dropped to 20.0±2.8. Scores for attitude for CI, DR and control groups during baseline study were 5.3±1.4, 4.9±1.5 and 5.3±1.0 respectively. For mid-term, attitude scores were 5.1±1.2, 5.0±0.9 and 4.7±1.5 for CI, DR and control respectively while scores for follow-up were 5.3±1.2, 5.6±0.7 and 4.5±1.2, indicating greater increase among the intervention groups than that of control.Conclusions: Based on the results of the study, drama yielded more positive outcomes in both knowledge gained and in attitudinal change among in-school adolescents than classroom instruction. Drama intervention is therefore, an important HIV and AIDS prevention strategy for in- school adolescents.

Background: Many people in communities especially children and elderly are at risk of losing their lives to pneumonia, diarrhoeal diseases, malaria, HIV and other preventable diseases unless urgent action is taken to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.  For instance, disruptions in immunization services for fear of getting infected with the virus will result in more children dying from pneumonia, which already kills many children in rural areas. Limited resources in rural areas may result to lack of basic hand washing facilities at home which form the fundamental mechanism to prevent COVID-19, thereby, expose   already vulnerable people in rural areas to infection.  Study assessed the extent to which individuals in rural areas effectively practiced preventive measures of COVID-19   infection as outlined by centre for disease control (CDC).Methods: This is   qualitative study that utilized   collaborative information from   36 health care professionals under the aegis of members of COVID-19 committee working together in partnership with   state government to ensure that best quality services are available to control, prevent and cushion   effects of COVID-19 during and after the COVID-19 crisis. This study is therefore, snapshot of activities individuals in rural areas take to prevent COVID-19 infection. Results: Findings showed that   preventive measures like lockdown and social distancing rules, wearing of face mask, hand washing with soap, and environmental cleanliness were slightly observed   thereby, exposing the rural areas to COVID-19 infection.  The study observed that   public and private life like sexual life, marital life, income, education, employment and social interaction were negatively affected.Conclusion: From the findings of the study, governments’ financial support during the lockdown was insignificant. Therefore, there is need for the governments to provide social amenities to alleviate the numerous socio-economic problems of individuals in the rural areas.