INTRODUCTION:

Contagions are not new. They have existed throughout the history, and one might say the perception that your neighbour will one day infect you has interfered with social intercourse throughout time. Infectors are perceived as dirty, unkempt secret germ factories.

They are not people we love easily.¹An infectious disease is a clinically evident illness resulting from the presence of pathogenic microbial agents, including pathogenic viruses, pathogenic bacteria, fungi, protozoa; multi cellular parasites. In humans, infections caused by micro-organisms are the commonest cause of disease. According to a 1990s World Health Report prepared by the World Health Organization, 17 million deaths (one-third of the total number) occur as a result of infectious diseases.² Worldwide, infectious disease are the leading killer of children and young adults and are responsible for half of all death in developing countries.³The word Influenza comes from the Italian language, meaning "influence" and refers to the cause of the disease. In April 2009 a novel flu strain evolved that combined genes from human, pig, and bird flu, initially dubbed "swine flu" and also known as influenza A/H1N1, emerged in Mexico, the United States, and several other nations. In virus classification influenza viruses are RNA viruses that make up three of the five genera of the family Orthomyxoviridae: Influenza virus A, Influenza virus B, Influenza virus C.⁴ The Spanish flu virus emerged in 1918 the same way all variations on the influenza virus do. The H1N1 swine flu strain that is causing the current pandemic was formed by slight genetic change, by which a mixing of viral particles from swine, bird and human influenza virus. A major human influenza pandemic seems to occur on average three to four times each country.In any case the virus spread more and more quickly, zooming around the globe again, this time true pandemic again.⁵ Influenza is truly international disease. It occurs in all countries and affects millions of people every year. The World Health Organization officially declared the outbreak to be a pandemic on June 11, 2009. The WHO's declaration of a pandemic level was an indication of spread, not severity, the strain actually having a lower mortality rate than common flu outbreaks.⁶Incubation period ranges from 1-7 days. The most common symptoms of the disease are chills, fever, sore throat, muscle pains, severe headache, coughing, weakness/fatigue and general discomfort. Sore throat, fever and coughs are the most frequent symptoms. In more serious cases, influenza causes pneumonia, which can be fatal, particularly for the young and the elderly. Typically swine flu is transmitted through the air by coughs or sneezes, creating aerosols containing the virus or through contact with contaminated surfaces. Airborne aerosols have been thought to cause most⁷. The first swine flu in India was reported on May 13, 2009. The said country’s first case of swine flu was reported when a man, who just boarded off the plane at the Hyderabad airport. Thereafter, swine flu cases in India had increased in it’s fastest speed rate sometime in the month of August.⁸ The ongoing H1N1 virus pandemic is expected to affect large portion of the general population; it mainly affects older children and youths. Early identification and prompt treatment with antiviral drugs in high risk individuals with severe infection is advised to prevent worsening of the disease and death.The outbreak of pandemic swine flu took thousands of lives in the year 2009. As a part of health care provider it is our responsibility that plays a major role in the awareness of swine flu and its prevention among youth. Knowledge regarding swine flu and its prevention enable the youths to adopt preventive measures and healthy life style practices in controlling this disease. The history of the human species, it has been said, is the history of infectious disease”. Over the centuries, humans have been exposed to a vast amount and array of contagious conditions, including the Black Death and other forms of plague, typhoid fever, cholera, malaria, influenza, and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, or AIDS.⁹The H1N1 form of swine flu is one of the descendants of the Spanish flu that caused a devastating pandemic in humans during 1918 -1919. It would have been persisting in pigs and was then circulated into humans during the 20th century, contributing to the normal seasonal epidemics of influenza. In the year 2009 H1N1 has rapidly became a serious threat worldwide. The pandemic calls for urgent preparedness to mitigate its impact as much as possible.¹⁰Influenza A is unique among the major pandemic threats in that it could potentially infect 30% of the world’s population within a matter of months. Even at a conservative overall mortality rate of 2%, it would result in around 135 million deaths worldwide within the first year of a new pandemic outbreak. This is about 4 times the total mortality attributed to HIV-1 in the last 30 years.The World Health Organization (WHO) said on that the H1N1 flu pandemic was the fastest-moving pandemic ever and that it was now pointless to count every case. “The 2009 influenza pandemic has spread internationally with unprecedented speed. In past pandemics, influenza viruses have needed more than six months to spread as widely as the new H1N1 virus has spread in less than six weeks,” it said in a statement on the new strain, commonly known as swine flu.The WHO 2009 worldwide figures for H1N1 have at least brought out one consensus among experts-the youth is more affected by it. 41.6% of the people who tested positive for H1N1 in India are from metros. Of the deaths in Bengaluru from swine flu, mostly are from the late 20s.¹¹

OBJECTIVES:

1. To assess the knowledge of youths regarding swine flu and it’s prevention.

2. To associate the knowledge of youths regarding swine flu and it’s prevention with selected demographic variables.

3. To develop and provide and information booklet on swine flu and it’ s prevention.

METHODOLOGY:

A descriptive design was adopted. The study subjects were selected from PHC area, Bangalore south. A sample consists of youths between the age group of 18-34(male and female) residing at Kenchanahally, Bangarappa Nagar PHC area, Bengaluru south. The sample size comprises of 100 youths.The non probability purposive sampling type was adopted for selecting samples for the present study. The tool consists of a structured questionnaire schedule. It is divided into 2 parts, they are as follows. Part I: This part of the tool consists of questions related to demographic data and it consists of 9 items. Part II: This part of the tool consists of items related to knowledge of youths regarding swine flu and it’s prevention. It consists of 30 items and those are objective type multiple choice questions that help in assessing their knowledge. Each correct answer was given a score of ‘one’ and wrong answer a score of ‘zero’ respectively.

RESULTS:

Table – 1. Distribution of respondents N=100

Characteristics	Category	Respondents
Characteristics	Category	Number	Percent
Age Group	18-26	56	56.0
Age Group	27-34	44	44.0
Gender	Male	38	38.0
Gender	Female	62	62.0
Educational status	Primary	24	24.0
	Middle	21	21.0
	High school	12	12.0
	PUC	27	27.0
	Graduation and above	16	16.0
Occupational status	Government	09	09.0
	Private	39	39.0
	Self employed	12	12.0
	Business	14	14.0
	unemployed	26	26.0
Marital status	Bachelor	58	58.0
Marital status	Married	42	42.0
Type of family	Nuclear	60	60.0
	Joint	40	40.0
	Extended	00	00.0
Family monthly income	Rs.2000-6000	63	63.0
Family monthly income	Rs.6001-10000	37	37.0
Previous exposure with person suffering from Swine flu	Yes	00	0.0
Previous exposure with person suffering from Swine flu	No	100	100.0
Source of Information	Print media	26	26.0
	Electronic media	43	43.0
	Health care centers	06	06.0
	Family members/Relatives	03	03.0
	Friends/Neighbors	11	11.0
	Health Personnel	11	11.0
Total		100	100.0

Table 1 shows that Out of 100 respondents 56% (56) of the respondents are in the age of 18-26 years where as 44% (44) of the respondents are in between the age of 27-34 years. Gender- Out of 100 respondents 62% (62) of the respondents were females as compared to 38% (38) of male respondents, 27% (27) of the respondents have studied up to PUC, 24% (24) up to primary school, 21% (21) up to middle school. 16% (16) were graduated and 12% (12) of the respondent had high school education. 39% (39) had private job, 26% (26) were unemployed, 14% (14) from business, 12% (12) were self employed and the remaining 9.0% (09) of the respondents had government occupation. Table 3 shows classification of respondents by marital status, type of family and family monthly income. Out of 100 respondents 58% (58) of the respondents’ were bachelor and 42% (42) respondents were married. Out of 100 respondents Majority 60% (60) of the respondents were from nuclear family followed by 40% (40) were from nuclear family. Further out of 100 respondents majority 63% (63) of the respondents had family monthly income of Rs. 2000-6000 and 37% (37) had family income between Rs. 6001-10000. Out of 100 respondents none o f respondents had previous exposure with person suffering from swine flu. It also shows that out of 100 respondents Majority of the respondents 43% (43) received information on swine flu through electronic media, 26% (26) of the respondents received from print media, 11% (11) got information from friends and neighbors, 11% (11) received from health personnel and 3% got information from family members and relatives.

Table – 2. Classification of Respondents by overall knowledge level on swine flu and it’s prevention

Knowledge Level	Category	Respondents
Knowledge Level	Category	Number	Percent
Inadequate	≤ 50 % Score	48	48.0
Moderate	51-75 % Score	52	52.0
Adequate	> 75 % Score	00	0.0
Total		100	100.0

Table 2 depicts classification of respondents by knowledge level on swine flu and it’s prevention. It represents that out of 100 respondents 48% of the respondents had inadequate knowledge, 52% of the respondents had moderate knowledge and none of the respondents had adequate knowledge on swine flu and its prevention

Table -3. Aspect wise mean knowledge scores of respondents on swine flu and it’s prevention N =100

No.	Knowledge Aspects	Statements	Max. Score	Respondents Knowledge
No.	Knowledge Aspects	Statements	Max. Score	Mean	SD	Mean (%)	SD (%)
I	Meaning and causes	6	6	3.10	1.3	51.7	21.1
II	Mode of transmission	6	6	3.31	1.0	55.2	16.0
III	Signs and symptoms	6	6	2.93	1.4	48.8	23.7
IV	Treatment and prevention	12	12	6.24	2.2	52.0	18.2
	Combined	30	30	15.58	4.4	51.9	14.6

Table 3 depicts the aspect wise mean knowledge score of respondents on swine flu and it’s prevention The total mean knowledge score was found to be 51.9% with SD of 14.6% on Swine flu and it’s Prevention. The aspect wise mean knowledge score of respondents was ranged between 48.8% and 55.2%. The highest (55.2%) mean knowledge score was found in the aspect of mode of transmission followed by treatment and prevention (52 %), meaning and causes (51.7%), and in the signs symptoms aspect (48.8%). (fig.12)

Table – 4. Over all mean knowledge of respondents on swine flu and it’s prevention N =100

Aspects

Max.

Score

Range Score

Respondents Knowledge

Mean

Mean (%)

SD (%)

Overall knowledge

15.58

7-22

15.58

4.4

51.9

14.6

Table -6. Aspect wise mean knowledge level of respondents on swine flu and it’s prevention N =100

S. No.	Knowledge Aspects	Knowledge Level
		Inadequate		Moderate		Adequate		Total
		N	%	N	%	N	%	N	%
I	Meaning and causes	60	60.0	22	22.0	18	18.0	100	100.0
II	Mode of transmission	59	59.0	32	32.0	09	9.0	100	100.0
III	Signs and symptoms	62	62.0	23	23.0	15	15.0	100	100.0
IV	Treatment and prevention	51	51.0	45	45.0	04	4.0	100	100.0
	Combined	48	48.0	52	52.0	00	0.0	100	100.0

Table – 7. Association between age group and knowledge level of respondents on swine flu and it’s prevention N =100

Variables	Sample	Knowledge Level				Χ ²Value
		Inadequate		Moderate
		N	%	N	%
Age in yrs: 18-26	56	32	57.1	24	42.9	4.262*
27-34	44	16	36.4	28	63.4
Sex: Male	38	12	31.6	26	68.4	6.62*
Female	62	36	57.1	26	41.9	6.62*
Education: Primary	24	17	70.8	07	29.2	32.48*
Middle	21	18	85.7	03	14.3
High school	12	05	41.7	07	58.3
PUC	27	04	14.8	23	85.2
Graduation and above	16	04	25.0	12	75.0
Occupation:Government	9	03	33.3	06	66.7	5.60 NS
Private	39	18	46.1	21	53.9
Self employed	12	08	66.7	04	33.3
Business	14	04	28.6	10	71.4
Unemployed	26	15	57.7	11	42.3
Marital status:Bachelor	58	33	56.9	25	43.1	4.38*
Married	42	15	35.7	27	64.3	4.38*
Type of family:Nuclear	60	28	46.7	32	53.3	0.168 NS
Joint	40	17	42.5	23	57.5
Extended	00	00	00.0	00	00
Income:Rs.2,000-6000	63	35	55.6	28	44.4	3.89*
Rs.6001-10000	37	13	35.1	24	64.9	3.89*
Source of information:Print media	26	11	42.3	15	57.7	6.26 NS
Electronic media	43	17	39.5	26	60.5
Health care centers	06	05	83.3	01	16.7
Family members/Relatives	03	02	66.7	01	33.3
Friends/Neighbors	11	07	63.6	04	36.4
Health Personnel	11	06	54.5	05	45.5

*Significant at 5% level X ² (0.05, 1df) = 3.84

Table 5 shows overall mean knowledge of respondents on swine flu and it’s prevention. The overall mean knowledge score of respondents on swine flu and it’s prevention was found to be 51.9 % and SD as 14.6 %.

Table -6 depicts aspect wise mean knowledge level of respondents on Swine flu and it’s Prevention. It showed that out of 100 respondents 60% had inadequate knowledge on meaning and causes of swine flu, 22% had moderate knowledge and only 18% had adequate knowledge. While in the aspect of mode of transmission 59% had inadequate knowledge, 32% moderate knowledge and only95 had enough knowledge. In case of signs and symptoms 62% of respondents had inadequate knowledge and 23% had moderate knowledge and 15% had adequate knowledge. In the treatment and prevention aspect 51% had inadequate knowledge and 45% had moderate knowledge and only 4% of the respondent had adequate knowledge.

It shows that among 56 respondents in the age group of 18-26 years, 57.1% (32) had inadequate knowledge level and 42.9% (24) respondent had moderate knowledge level. Further, among 44 respondents between the age group 27-34 years, 36.4% (16) had inadequate knowledge level, 63.4% (28) had moderate knowledge level. Among 24 respondents educated till primary school, 70.8% (17) had inadequate knowledge and 29.2 % (07) had moderate knowledge. Among 21 respondents educated till middle school, 85.7% (18) had inadequate knowledge level, 14.3% (03) respondents had moderate knowledge level. Among 12 respondents with high school qualification, 41.7% (05) had inadequate knowledge level and 58.3% (07) had moderate knowledge level. Among 27 respondents with PUC qualification, 14.8% (04) had inadequate knowledge and 85.2% (23) had moderate knowledge. Further, 16 graduated respondents 25% (04) had inadequate knowledge and 75.0% (12) had moderate knowledge. Among 9 respondents with Government occupation, 33.3 % (03) had inadequate knowledge and 66.7% (06) had moderate knowledge. Among 39 respondents with private job 46.1% (18) had inadequate knowledge level, 53.9% (21) respondents had moderate knowledge level. Among 12 self employed respondents 66.7% (08) had inadequate knowledge level and 33.3% (04) had moderate knowledge level. In case of 14 respondents with business as occupation, 28.6% (04) had inadequate knowledge and 71.4 (10) had moderate knowledge. Further, among 26 unemployed respondents, 57.7% (15) inadequate knowledge level and 42.3% (11) had moderate knowledge level. Among 58 bachelor respondents 56.9% (33) respondents were found to be having inadequate knowledge level and 43.1% (25) of bachelor respondents possessed moderate knowledge level. Further among 42 married respondents 35.7 % (15) respondents who possessed inadequate knowledge while 64.3% (27) of married respondents found to have moderate knowledge. Among 60 respondents from nuclear family, 46.7% (28) had inadequate knowledge level and 53.3% (32) had moderate knowledge level. Further among 40 respondents from joint family 42.5% (17) had inadequate knowledge level while 57.5% (23) had moderate knowledge. Among 63 respondents with family income between 2000- 6000, 55.6% (35) had inadequate knowledge level while 44.4% (28) had moderate knowledge level. Further, among 37 respondents with family income between Rs. 6001-10000, 35.1% (13) respondents had inadequate knowledge level and 64.9% (24) had moderate knowledge level. Among 26 respondents with print media as source of information, 42.3% (11) had inadequate knowledge and 57.7% (15) had moderate knowledge. Among 43 respondents with electronic media as source of information 39.5% (17) had inadequate knowledge level, 60.5% (26) respondents had moderate knowledge level. While among 6 respondents with health care centre as source of information 83.3% (05) had inadequate knowledge level and 16.7 % (01) had moderate knowledge level. In case of 3 respondents with family members and relatives as source of information, 66.7% (02) had inadequate knowledge and 33.3% (01) had moderate knowledge. Further, among 11 respondents with friends and neighbors’ as a source of information, 63.6% (07) inadequate knowledge level and 36.4% (04) had moderate knowledge level. Among 11 respondents with health person as a source of health information 54.5% (06) had inadequate and 45.5% (05) had moderate knowledge level. Hence the value of x² is found to be non- significant at 5% level (x² = 6.26^ns, p>0.05). It indicates that there is no significant association between knowledge and the respondent’s income.

CONCLUSION:

The youths willingly participated in the study. The study was based on the Health promotion model. It provides a comprehensive systematic framework to assess knowledge of youths regarding swine flu and it’s prevention. The present investigation offer infinite scope and potential implications for nursing practice, administration and research aspects of swine flu and it’s prevention.

REFERENCES:

1. Marc Siege. Swine Flu: The New Pandemic. John Wiley and Sons, [online]2009[cited2010 Nov 12]; Available from: URL: http:/www.google.com

2. Infectious disease. Wikipedia [Online]. 2009 [cited 2010 Oct 07]; Available from:URL: http://www.answers.com/topic/infectious-disease.

3. Stanhope, Lancaster. Public health nursing, population centered health care in the community. 7th ed.USA: Mosby publishers; 2008. P. 861-62.

4. Influenza. Wikipedia [Online]. 2009 [cited 2010 Oct 07]; Available from:URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza

5. Influenza. Wikipedia [Online]. 2009 [cited 2010 Oct 07]; Available from: URL: http:/www.google.com

6. Worldwide Statistics of Swine Flu Death. [Online]. 2009 [cited 2010 Dec 10]; Available from: URL: http://www.suite101.com/content/h1n1-statistics-1-november-2009-a166667

7. Archana PB. H1N1 infection in children. Prism’s Nursing Practice. Journal of clinical nursing education, training and career development. 2009 jul-sept; 4(3):80

8. 2009 flu pandemic. Wikipedia [Online]. 2010 [cited 2010 Dec 10]; Available from: URL: http:/www.google.com

9. McGraw-Hill. Infectious disease. Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms, Sci-Tech Dictionary 2003. [Online].2003[cited 2009 Dec 09]; Available from: URL:http://www.answers.com/topic/infectious-diseas.html

10. Swine influenza history. Wikipedia [Online]. 2009 [cited 2009 Dec 07]; Available from: URL: http:/www.google.com

11. Derek Gatherer. The 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak in its historical context. Journal of Clinical Virology. [Serial online] 2010 Dec 17 [cited 2010 Jun 7]; Available from: URL:http://download.thelancet.com/flatcontentassets/H1N1flu/surveillance/surveill ance-24.pdf

Received on 21.07.2022 Modified on 05.09.2022

Int. J. Nur. Edu. and Research. 2022; 10(4):372-376.

DOI: 10.52711/2454-2660.2022.00085