| Literature DB >> 33148209 |
Toktam Paykani1, Gregory D Zimet2, Reza Esmaeili1, Amir Reza Khajedaluee3, Mohammad Khajedaluee4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Strong evidence demonstrates that social support plays a key role in facilitating preventive health behaviors. The aim of the current study was to assess the effects of perceived social support on compliance with stay-at-home orders in response to a COVID-19 outbreak during the Persian New Year (Nowruz) holydays, since Nowruz holidays of 2020 coincided with the peak of the coronavirus epidemic in Iran.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Self-isolation; Social distancing; Social support
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33148209 PMCID: PMC7609821 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09759-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Participant characteristics by compliance with stay at home orders (n = 1073)
| Total | good compliance | Poor compliance | (χ2 test, df) or | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N (%) or | N (%) or | N (%) or | ||
| Overall sample | 1073 (100) | 853 (79.5) | 220 (20.50) | |
| Age (year) | 38 (30,51) | 39 (30,52) | 36 (30,48) | 1.88 |
| Female | 547 (50.98) | 472 (43.99) | 75 (6.99) | (31.58,1) |
| Male | 526 (49.02) | 381 (35.51) | 145 (13.51) | |
| Married/couple | 826 (76.98) | 647 (60.30) | 179 (16.68) | (4.98,2), |
| Single | 181 (16.87) | 147 (13.70) | 34 (3.17) | |
| Divorced/Separated/Widowed | 66 (6.15) | 59 (5.50) | 7 (0.65) | |
| Illiterate | 58 (5.41) | 54 (5.03) | 4 (0.37) | (17.42,5), |
| Primary education | 144 (13.42) | 127 (11.84) | 17 (1.58) | |
| secondary education | 155 (14.44) | 117 (10.90) | 38 (3.54) | |
| Post-secondary non-tertiary education | 379 (35.32) | 290 (27.03) | 89 (8.29) | |
| First stage of tertiary education | 282 (26.28) | 220 (20.50) | 62 (5.78) | |
| Second stage of tertiary education | 55 (5.13) | 45 (4.19) | 10 (0.93) | |
| 1 (Lowest level) | 83 (7.74) | 65 (6.06) | 18 (1.68) | (0.99, 4), |
| 2 | 289 (26.93) | 230 (21.44) | 59 (5.50) | |
| 3 | 565 (52.66) | 446 (41.57) | 119 (11.09) | |
| 4 | 122 (11.37) | 101 (9.41) | 21 (1.96) | |
| 5 (Highest level) | 14 (1.30) | 11 (1.03) | 3 (0.28) | |
| Upper | 17 (1.58) | 13 (1.21) | 4 (0.37) | (16.74, 4), |
| Upper-middle | 312 (29.08) | 257 (23.95) | 55 (5.13) | |
| lower middle | 383 (35.69) | 282 (26.28) | 101 (9.41) | |
| Working | 206 (19.20) | 179 (16.68) | 27 (2.52) | |
| Lower | 155 (14.45) | 122 (11.37) | 33 (3.08) | |
| Housewife | 376 (35.04) | 329 (30.66) | 47 (4.38) | |
| Self-employed | 336 (31.31) | 244 (22.47) | 92 (8.57) | |
| Employee | 128 (11.93) | 85 (7.92) | 43 (4.01) | |
| Retired | 87 (8.11) | 73 (6.80) | 14 (1.30) | |
| Worker | 59 (5.50) | 42 (3.91) | 17 (1.58) | (49.98, 7), |
| Student | 45 (4.19) | 42 (3.91) | 3 (0.28) | |
| Unemployed | 28 (2.61) | 25 (2.33) | 3 (0.28) | |
| Others | 14 (1.30) | 13 (1.21) | 1 (0.09) | |
| Family | 20 (19,21) | 20 (19,21) | 20 (18,21) | 3.34, |
| Friends | 18 (16,20) | 18 (16,20) | 19 (17,20) | −2.77, |
| Significant Other person | 20 (19,21) | 20 (19,21) | 20 (18,21) | 2.60, |
P values are based on χ2 test for the categorical variables and Mann-Whitney U test for the continuous variables, df Degree of freedom
Logistic regression models predicting odds of being non-compliant with self –isolation
| Independent variable | Model 1 | Model 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Age (centered at mean) | .985 (.973–998)** | .988 (.976–1.001)* |
| Female (ref) | ||
| Male | 2.457 (1.792–.3.368)*** | 2.464 (1.789–3.394)*** |
| Single (unmarried, divorced, widow) (ref) | ||
| Married/couple | 1.715 (1.139–2.580)** | 1.782 (1.176–2.698)*** |
| Low | .739 (.492–1.112) | .727 (.477–1.108) |
| Medium (ref) | ||
| High | .959 (.664–1.385) | 1.002 (.687–1.461) |
| 1 (Lowest level) | 1.214 (.676–2.182) | 1.277 (.701–2.326) |
| 2 | .916 (.634–1.324) | .964 (.662–1.403) |
| 3 (ref) | ||
| 4 | .822 (.478–1.414) | .908 (.524–1.572) |
| 5 (highest level) | .989 (.261–3.747) | .897 (.234–3.433) |
| Low | 1.371 (.953–1.971)* | 1.370 (.948–1.979)* |
| High (ref) | ||
| Family | .874 (.803–.950) *** | |
| Friends | 1.147 (1.076–1.222)**** | |
| Significant other person | .926 (.849–1.010) * | |
Odds ratio with 95% confidence interval are displayed
*P < .1 **P < .05 *** p < .005 **** P < .001
Fig. 1Marginal plots of the effect of perceived social support from family and friends on the poor compliance with stay at home orders