Table 5 Multiple logistic regression analysis of factors that associate with personal hygiene practice
Characteristics | aPersonal hygiene practice | cCOR (95 % CI) | dAOR (95 % CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Inactive N (%) | Active N (%) | |||
Gender | ||||
Male | 402(87.2) | 59(12.8) | 1 | 1 |
Female | 426(76.2) | 133(32.8) | 2.13(1.52, 2.98) | 2.17(1.48, 3.18) |
Age | ||||
15-24 | 131(91.6) | 12(8.4) | 1 | 1 |
25-49 | 281(80.8) | 67(19.3) | 2.60(1.36, 4.98) | 4.81(1.37, 16.89) |
50-64 | 293(80.7) | 70(19.3) | 2.61(1.37, 4.98) | 4.46(1.25, 15.95) |
≧65 | 123(74.1) | 43(25.9) | 3.82(1.92, 7.58) | 6.19(1.60, 23.99) |
Marital status | ||||
Single | 305(85.9) | 50(14.1) | 1 | |
Married | 521(78.6) | 142(21.4) | 1.66(1.17, 2.36) | |
Occupation | ||||
White collar | 332(80.8) | 79(19.2) | 1 | 1 |
Blue collar | 90(93.8) | 6(6.3) | 0.28(0.12, 0.66) | 0.27(0.11, 0.68) |
Housewife, retired or Unemployed | 300(76.3) | 93(23.7) | 1.30(0.93, 1.83) | 0.82(0.52, 1.29) |
Student | 95(89.6) | 11(10.4) | 0.49(0.25, 0.95) | 1.97(0.53, 7.29) |
Religion | ||||
No | 547(83.6) | 107(16.4) | 1 | |
Yes | 280(76.7) | 85(23.3) | 1.55(1.13, 2.14) | |
Chronic disease | ||||
No | 679(83.5) | 134(16.5) | 1 | 1 |
Yes | 148(71.8) | 58(28.2) | 1.99(1.39, 2.83) | 1.84(1.20, 2.82) |
Household type | ||||
Public housing | 322(83.2) | 65(16.8) | 1 | |
Subsidized home ownership housing | 139(86.9) | 21(13.1 | 0.75(0.44, 1.27) | |
Private permanent housing | 351(77.1) | 104(22.9) | 1.47(1.04, 2.07) | |
Vulnerable members | ||||
No | 330(84.4) | 61(15.6) | 1 | |
Yes | 497(79.1) | 131(20.9) | 1.43(1.02, 1.99) | |
Area of residence | ||||
Suburb Districts | 448(85.0) | 79(15.0) | 1 | 1 |
Densely Populated Districts | 247(80.2) | 61(19.8) | 1.40(0.97, 2.02) | 1.59(1.06, 2.37) |
Wealthy Districts | 133(71.9) | 52(28.1) | 2.22(1.49, 3.31) | 2.58(1.65, 4.05) |
bAttitude towards hygiene practice | ||||
Inactive | 177(90.8) | 18(9.2) | 1 | 1 |
Active | 651(78.9) | 174(21.1) | 2.63(1.57, 4.39) | 2.83(1.60, 5.01) |
Anxiety score | ||||
Very low (STAI < 1.50) | 234(84.5) | 43(15.5) | 1 | 1 |
Low (STAI 1.50-1.99 | 243(85.3) | 42(14.7) | 0.94(0.59, 1.49) | 0.82(0.49, 1.34) |
Medium (STAI 2.00-2.49) | 216(80.0) | 55(20.0) | 1.39(0.89, 2.15) | 1.19(0.73, 1.94) |
High (STAI >2.49) | 131(72.4) | 50(27.6) | 2.08(1.31, 3.29) | 1.73(1.03, 2.92) |
Believed Hong Kong is susceptible to infectious diseases outbreaks | ||||
No | 415(84.5) | 76(15.5) | 1 | |
Yes | 412(78.2) | 115(21.8) | 1.52(1.11, 2.10) | |
Believed H7N9 will be capable of human-to-human transmission this year | ||||
Not likely | 730(83.3) | 146(16.7) | 1 | 1 |
Likely | 96(68.1) | 45(31.9) | 2.34(1.58, 3.48) | 1.85(1.17, 2.93) |
Have very high chance to be infected by H7N9 | ||||
Not likely | 777(82.0) | 171(18.0) | 1 | |
Likely | 51(71.8) | 20(28.2) | 1.78(1.04, 3.07) | |
Impact of H7N9 affecting your health | ||||
Low impact | 620(83.4) | 120(16.6) | 1 | |
High impact | 220(75.3) | 72(24.7) | 1.64(1.18, 2.28) | |
Impact of H7N9 to Hong Kong | ||||
Low impact | 540(84.9) | 96(15.1) | 1 | 1 |
High impact | 287(74.9) | 96(25.1) | 1.88(1.37, 2.58) | 1.67(1.16, 2.41) |
Perceived knowledge to combat H7N9 outbreak | ||||
Not enough | 602(84.0) | 115(16.0) | 1 | 1 |
Enough | 225(74.8) | 76(25.3) | 1.77(1.27, 2.45) | 1.68(1.17, 2.43) |