Community based cross-sectional study on knowledge, attitudes and practices towards rabies in Munesa District, Arsi Zone, Southeastern Ethiopia

Abstract

Rabies, one of the oldest and deadliest diseases known to human, is incurable and neglected viral zoonosis which has been threatening the human life for many years despite being entirely preventable. Community awareness play significant role in preventing this fatal disease. Therefore, this cross sectional study was conducted from November to December 2016 with the objective to assess the community knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding rabies in Munesa district, Arsi zone, south eastern Ethiopia. A multistage sampling technique was employed for selection of sample unit and data were collected from 150 household by face-to-face interview using a semi structured pretested questionnaire. Logistic regression was used for assessing the association of independent variable with KAP score. Out of 150 participants interviewed 59.3% of them were males and 40.7% were females. The respondents from urban, peri-urban and rural residence comprise about 32.7%, 30% and 37.3% of total participants, respectively. Almost all (99.3%) participants had heard about rabies and 88.7% of them knew its zoonotic significance which is a good Knowledge. However, knowledge gap was observed regarding the cause, transmission, incubation period and prevention methods. The overall KAP result revealed that 57.3% and 42.3% of participants had a good and poor KAP score, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that good KAP score was significantly higher in male than female (OR= 3.14, CI=1.01 -9.79, P = 0.048), in those who experienced dog bite than those who were not bitten by dog (OR=7.37, CI=1.83-29.61, P=0.005), in dog owners than non-dog owners (OR=7.53, CI=2.01-28.19, p=0.003) and in trained participants than untrained (OR= 18.62, CI=1.56-222.47, p= 0.021). Furthermore, education level (p=0.021) and residence (p=0.031) participants were also significantly associated with a higher good KAP score. This study showed that community in munesa district has good general information about rabies. However, there is a need for further awareness creation which requires the collaborative effort of government authority, medical and veterinary professionals.

Assessment of knowledge, attitude, and practice of respondents’ towards Rabies and associated risk factors in Shone Town, Hadiya Zone, Southern Ethiopia

“…Regarding the causative agent of rabies, the majority of respondents were found to have misperceptions, which were starvation and thirst. This result is consistent with a study in Munesa District, Arsi Zone, Southeastern Ethiopia [20] that reported misperceptions of starvation and thirst as causes of rabies. Similar misperceptions were reported by several scholars from different areas of Ethiopia [21-23].…”

Knowledge, attitudes and prevention practices related to dog-mediated rabies in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational epidemiological studies from inception to 2023

“…Twelve of the studies were published in the previous five years (2018–2023 Gregorian Calendar) ( 28 , 30 , 31 , 34–36 , 38 , 40 , 42 , 47 , 48 , 52 ). Eleven of the studies were conducted in the Amhara region ( 20 , 28 , 31 , 35 , 39 , 41 , 44 , 45 , 47 , 51 , 52 ), 9 in the Oromia region ( 29 , 30 , 33 , 38 , 42 , 46 , 49 , 50 ); 3 in Addis Ababa the capital of Ethiopia’s ( 37 , 43 , 53 ); 2 in the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region (SNNPR) ( 34 , 54 ), 1 each in Tigray ( 40 ), and Somalia ( 36 ) regions. The individual study estimates range from 7.50% ( 39 ) to 99.25% ( 51 ) for a good level of knowledge about rabies, 12.55% ( 53 ) to 95.57% ( 49 ) for a favorable level of attitudes, and 4.69% ( 52 ) to 85.68% ( 28 ) for a good level of practices towards rabies prevention ( Table 1 ).…”

“…From the 27 studies included in the quantitative synthesis, three studies (11.11%) reported factors associated with KAP ( 29–31 ). According to a research report by Abdela et al, being male, living in a peri-urban area, attending formal school, having experienced dog bites, owning a dog, and being trained about rabies were associated with higher KAP scores ( 29 ).…”

“…From the 27 studies included in the quantitative synthesis, three studies (11.11%) reported factors associated with KAP ( 29–31 ). According to a research report by Abdela et al, being male, living in a peri-urban area, attending formal school, having experienced dog bites, owning a dog, and being trained about rabies were associated with higher KAP scores ( 29 ). Furthermore, a good level of rabies prevention practices was influenced by a good level of knowledge and attitude toward rabies, having a dog, and getting information from social media, health workers, or training ( 30 , 31 ) ( Table 4 ).…”

“…As a result, 24 articles ( 20 , 28 , 33–54 ) were evaluated by two authors (AYG and GK) against the following constructs: (1) appropriateness of the sample frame to address the target population, (2) appropriateness of participant sampling, (3) study size adequacy, (4) whether the study subjects and the setting were described in detail, (5) whether valid methods were employed to identify the domain, (6) whether the domain was measured in a reliable and standard way for all participants, (7) the presence of appropriate statistical analysis, and (8) whether the response rate was adequate and if not, how it was managed ( Supplementary File S3 ). The remaining three primary articles ( 29–31 ) were evaluated by an eight-construct JBI critical checklist tool designed for analytical cross-sectional epidemiological study design. Thus, the main components included the following: (1) whether the eligibility criteria were defined, (2) whether study settings and subjects were described in detail, (3) whether the exposure was measured accurately, (4) whether the measurements used were standard and objective, (5) whether the confounding factors were identified, (6) whether addressing the confounding factor was described in detail, (7) whether the outcome was measured accurately and (8) whether statistical methods were appropriate ( Supplementary File S4 ).…”