| Literature DB >> 25478098 |
Adebayo Erinfolami1, Adekunle Eegunranti2, Olawale Ogunsemi3, Akin Oguntuase4, Abiola Akinbode1, Gloria Erinfolami5.
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence and pattern of Kola nut use among secondary school students in Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria. The study also aimed to determine the association of socio-demographic variables (of the students and their parents) with kola nut chewing. A questionnaire consisting of socio-demographic variables, the stimulant use section of the WHO Students Drug Use Questionnaire was administered on three hundred and eighty-five (385) randomly selected students of the two Local Government Areas of Osogbo. The prevalence rate of kola nut use was calculated and some socio demographic variables were determined. The 30-day prevalence rate of kola nut use was 11.2%. The one-year prevalence of kola nut use was 29.1 percent and the lifetime rate was 74.8 percent. Majority of users started at age 14 years or below. Kola nut use was associated with lower age group, poor school attendance, polygamous background, low education of mother, high education of father and the description of mother as being too permissive. The findings suggest the need to increase the awareness of the dangers of kolanut use among adolescents. Control program are urgently needed to prevent student wastage.Entities:
Keywords: Kolanut; Osogbo.; adolescents; prevalence
Year: 2011 PMID: 25478098 PMCID: PMC4253356 DOI: 10.4081/mi.2011.e6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ment Illn ISSN: 2036-7457
Socio-demographic variables of the respondents (N=385).
| Variable | Frequency | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| 14yrs | 57 | 14.8 |
| 15yrs | 99 | 25.7 |
| 16yrs | 149 | 38.7 |
| 17yrs | 80 | 20.8 |
| Class | ||
| SS 2 | 190 | 49.5 |
| SS 3 | 195 | 50.6 |
| Sex | ||
| Male | 211 | 54.8 |
| Female | 174 | 45.2 |
| Religion | ||
| Christians | 186 | 48.3 |
| Muslims | 199 | 51.7 |
| Religiosity | ||
| Very religious | 113 | 29.4 |
| Just religious | 222 | 57.7 |
| Not religious | 50 | 13.0 |
| Studentship | ||
| Not a student for most of the year | 14 | 3.6 |
| Poor school attendance | 62 | 16.1 |
| Good school attendance | 309 | 80.3 |
| Place of Abode | ||
| With parents | 221 | 57.4 |
| With guardians | 164 | 42.6 |
| Family set-up | ||
| Monogamy | 200 | 51.9 |
| Polygamy | 185 | 48.1 |
Comparison of socio-demographic characteristics of kola nut users and non-users in the past year.
| Parameters | Non-User in thepast year f (%) | User in the past year f (%) | Total | X2 test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age group | ||||
| 14–15 | 103(36.4) | 53(47.3) | 156(40.5) | x2=4.43 |
| 16–17 | 170(63.6) | 59(52.7) | 229(59.5) | |
| P<0.05 | ||||
| Class | ||||
| SS 2 | 135(49.4) | 55(49.3) | 190(49.4) | x2=0.01, |
| SS 3 | 138(50.6) | 57 (50.7) | 195 (50.6) | |
| P>0.05 | ||||
| Sex | ||||
| Male | 147 (53.1) | 64 (57.5) | 211 (54.8) | x2=0.71, |
| Female | 126 (46.9) | 48 (46.5) | 174 (45.2) | |
| P>0.05 | ||||
| Religion | ||||
| Christians | 134 (51.9) | 51 (45.5) | 186 (48.3) | x2=3.22, |
| Muslims | 138 (48.1) | 61 (54.5) | 199 (51.7) | |
| P>0.05 | ||||
| Religiosity | ||||
| Very religious | 84(31.8) | 28(25.3) | 113 (29.4) | x2=2.25, |
| Just religious | 152 (54.8) | 70 (62.3) | 222 (57.7) | |
| Not religious | 36 (13.4) | 14 (12.3) | 50 (13.0) | P>0.05 |
| Place of Abode | ||||
| With parents | 155 (56.9) | 66 (58.2) | 221 (57.4) | x2=0.06 |
| With Guardians | 118 (43.1) | 46 (41.8) | 164 (42.6) | |
| P>0.05 | ||||
| Studentship | ||||
| Not a student for most of the year | 6(1.7) | 8(6.8) | 14 (3.6) | x2=7.35 |
| Poor school attendance | 43(15.5) | 19(17.1) | 62 (16.1) | df=2, |
| Good school attendance | 224(82.8) | 85(76.0) | 309(80.3) | P<0.05 |
| Family set-up | ||||
| Monogamy | 155 (59.4) | 45 (39.7) | 200 (51.9) | x2=14.07 |
| Polygamy | 188 (40.6) | 67 (60.3) | 185 (48.1) | df=1, |
| P<0.01 | ||||
Comparison of sociodemographic parameters concerning parents of kola nut users and non-users in the past year.
| Parameters | Non-user in the past year f (%) | User in the past year f (%) | Total | X2 test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Father's education | ||||
| No formal education | 33 (13.1) | 5(4.8) | 38(9.9) | x2=15.38, |
| Primary | 76 (29.2) | 21 (18.5) | 96 (25.1) | |
| Secondary | 125 (44.5) | 64 (56.8) | 188 (49.2) | P<0.05 |
| Post secondary | 38(13.1) | 22 (19.9) | 60 (15.7) | |
| Mother's education | ||||
| No formal education | 48 (15.7) | 31(27.4) | 77 (20.2) | x2=14.55, |
| Primary | 97 (34.9) | 46(41.8) | 143 (37.5) | |
| Secondary | 95 (37.0) | 25 (22.6) | 120 (31.5) | P<0.05 |
| Post secondary | 31 (12.3) | 10 (8.2) | 41 (10.8) | |
| Parents' relationship | ||||
| Friendly | 148 (76.8) | 85 (75.7) | 233 (76.4) | x2=0.50, |
| Not friendly | 45 (23.2) | 27 (24.3) | 72 (23.6) | |
| P>0.05. | ||||
| Father's description | ||||
| Loving | 86 (39.1) | 23 (20.3) | 109 (32.2) | x2=17.73, |
| Too strict | 58 (25.1) | 34 (30.9) | 92 (27.2) | |
| Kind | 51 (21.4) | 40 (36.6) | 91 (26.9) | P<0.05. |
| Wicked | 18 (8.4) | 6 (4.9) | 24 (7.1) | |
| Too permissive | 13 (6.0) | 9 (7.3) | 22 (6.5) | |
| Mother's description | ||||
| Loving | 87 (37.0) | 37 (33.3) | 124 (35.5) | x2=55.79, |
| Too strict | 71 (32.7) | 10 (8.7) | 81 (23.2) | |
| Kind | 55 (22.7) | 30 (26.8) | 85 (24.4) | P<0.05. |
| Wicked | 13 (5.2) | 10 (8.7) | 23 (6.6) | |
| Too permissive | 11 (2.4) | 25 (22.5) | 36 (10.3) | |