| Literature DB >> 34660408 |
Naseer Ahmed1, Sundas Ijaz2, Sommaya Manzoor2, Sana Sajjad2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The trend of combating minor ailments at home in children is a common practice in Indonesia. When it comes to very smaller children like those of age under-five. AIMS: Consequences can be worse if not managed well. Self-medication among these children is not well studied in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. MATERIALS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Prevalence; Yogyakarta; self-medication; under five-year child
Year: 2021 PMID: 34660408 PMCID: PMC8483128 DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_2457_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Family Med Prim Care ISSN: 2249-4863
Sample of items used in questionnaire
| Question | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| When did you brought your kid last time in the hospital? | Last week | Last month. | 6month ago. | Last year. | Never |
| Your kid often suffers from: | Never before. | Fever or headache. | Abdominal pain, vomit, diarrhea. | Flu | Cough or sore throat. |
| When your kid gets sick you prefer to give him medicine: | As your doctor prescribes. | By using old prescriptions | With the help of advertisements. | Whatever, your relatives or friends told you. | By your own personal experience. |
Prevalence of Self-medication
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid | ||||
| What? | 2 | 3.9 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| I Don’t Know | 5 | 9.8 | 10.0 | 14.0 |
| Its good practice but consult doctor | 20 | 39.2 | 40.0 | 54.0 |
| It’s not a good practice so must avoid | 16 | 31.4 | 32.0 | 86.0 |
| It’s a good practice & nothing wrong | 7 | 13.7 | 14.0 | 100.0 |
| Total | 50 | 98.0 | 100.0 | |
| Missing | ||||
| System | 1 | 2.0 | ||
| Total | 51 | 100.0 |
Figure 1Prevalence of self-medications
Figure 2Graphical representation of mother educations
Mothers’ education
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid | ||||
| Illiterate | 2 | 3.9 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Elementary School | 3 | 5.9 | 6.0 | 10.0 |
| High-Senior High School | 18 | 35.3 | 36.0 | 46.0 |
| Bachelor | 11 | 21.6 | 22.0 | 68.0 |
| Master and Above | 16 | 31.4 | 32.0 | 100.0 |
| Total | 50 | 98.0 | 100.0 | |
| Missing | ||||
| System | 1 | 2.0 | ||
| Total | 51 | 100.0 |
Economic status of Respondents
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid | ||||
| 1000K-1500K | 8 | 15.7 | 16.0 | 16.0 |
| 1600K-2000K | 12 | 23.5 | 24.0 | 40.0 |
| 2100K-2500k | 14 | 27.5 | 28.0 | 68.0 |
| 2600K-3000K | 16 | 31.4 | 32.0 | 100.0 |
| Total | 50 | 98.0 | 100.0 | |
| Missing | ||||
| System | 1 | 2.0 | ||
| Total | 51 | 100.0 |
Figure 3Income of mothers
Figure 4Urban and rural population
Residential areas
| Frequency | Percent | Valid percent | Cumulative percent | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid | ||||
| Urban | 20 | 39.2 | 40.0 | 40.0 |
| Rural | 30 | 58.8 | 60.0 | 100.0 |
| Total | 50 | 98.0 | 100.0 | |
| Missing | ||||
| System | 1 | 2.0 | ||
| Total | 51 | 100.0 |