ARTICLE INFO | ABSTRACT | |
ORIGINAL ARTICLE | Background: Observance of food hygiene is considered an important principle to prevent humans from contracting diseases and also to protect the environment from contamination. Health workers are on the front line forces of the health system. Therefore, promoting the health of health workers has an important role in promoting community health. The aim of this study is to investigate the determinants of food hygiene based on the Health Belief Model (HBM) in health workers in Urmia. Methods: In this descriptive-analytical study, 300 health workers in rural health centers of Urmia city were selected and entered into the study by census method based on inclusion criteria. Data collection tools included 3 parts: demographic characteristics, knowledge questionnaire, attitude and behavior, and health belief model questionnaire. Data were collected and analyzed using interviews. Results: The mean age of the workers was 36.76±7.61 year. The attitude and behavior of observing food hygiene had a statistically significant relationship with work experience, knowledge, attitude, gender, marital status, and level of education (P<0.05). Based on linear regression test, in all studied constructs, 30% of the variance of food hygiene behavior was explained. The predictive power of perceived efficiency was higher than other constructs (β=0.45). Conclusion: In designing educational interventions, the variables of self-efficacy, perceived benefits, perceived susceptibility, and perceived sensitivity should be emphasized as the most important predictors of food hygiene behaviors in health workers. Keywords: Food hygiene; Health belief model; Health worker |
|
Article history: Received: 13 Dec 2021 Revised: 19 Mar 2022 Accepted: 19 Mar 2022 |
||
*Corresponding author: zareipoor _m@khoyums.ac.ir Department of Public Health, School of Health, Khoy University of Medical Sciences, Khoy, Iran. Postal code: 58167-53464 Tel: + 98 9141878294 |
Table 1. Frequency distribution of demographic characteristics of the participants. | |
Variables | N (%) |
Age (year) <30 30-35 35-40 <40 |
63 (21.0) 79 (26.3) 76 (25.3) 82 (27.3) |
Sex Male Female |
50 (16.7) 250(83.3) |
Work experience (year) <10 10-15 15-20 >20 |
126(42.0) 52(17.3) 48(16.0) 74 (24.7) |
Marital status Married Single Divorced/ Widowed |
239(79.7) 48(16.0) 13(4.3) |
Education Diploma Associate degree Bachelor and higher |
219(73.0) 34 (11.3) 47 (15.7) |
Nationality Turkish Kurdish |
176 (58.7) 124(41.3) |
The economic situation Good Average Weak |
28 (9.3) 194 (64.7) 78(26.0) |
Table 2. Mean (±SD) of score and standard deviation of the constructs of health belief model and food hygiene behavior in participants. | |||
Variables | Mean±SD | Range | Percentage of the maximum score |
knowledge | 28.64±3.51 | 15-45 | 63.6 |
Attitude | 38.41±3.15 | 15-75 | 51.2 |
Perceived susceptibility | 20.27±3.87 | 6-30 | 67.7 |
Perceived severity | 21.24±2.77 | 6-30 | 70.8 |
Perceived benefits | 20.39±2.90 | 6-30 | 67.9 |
Perceived barriers | 18.22±2.87 | 6-30 | 60.7 |
Cues to action | 19.12±3.01 | 6-30 | 63.7 |
Perceived self-efficacy | 21.58±2.98 | 6-30 | 71.9 |
Food hygiene behavior | 29.43±3.12 | 15-45 | 65.4 |
Table 3. Relationship between demographic variables and knowledge, attitude, and behavior of food hygiene. | ||||||
P-value | Behavior score | P-value | Attitude score | P-valueb | Awareness score | Variables |
0.2 |
30.14(6.7) 29.2 (6.63) 28.3 (4.69) 29.6 (7.35) |
0.1 |
36.2(11.31) 34.37 (7.87) 35.55 (7.38)
|
0.6 |
27.71±3.52a 29.01±3.75 28.52±3.76 29.32±3.51 |
Age (year) <30 30-35 35-40 >40 |
0.04 |
28.84 (6.17) 31.28(8.23) |
0.03 |
39.14 (8.93) 35.99(9.11) |
0. 02 |
30.04±3.91 27.63±3.62 |
Sex Male Female |
0.006 |
29.26±7.06 28.09±4.72 28.33±6.18 39.27±6.69 |
0.001 |
35.80±9.68 35.05±8.81 35.77±6.88 39.25±9.33 |
0.5 |
28.10±3.57 28.80±4.21 29.22±3.43 29.31±3.49 |
Work experience (year) <10 10-15 15-20 >20 |
0.01 |
38.69±10.01 28.65±6.03 29.66±6.42 |
0.01 |
43.23±10.43 36.02±8.78 37.18±9.97 |
0.02 |
30.22±3.82 27.78±3.64 27.92±3.83 |
Marital status Married Single Divorced/ Widowed |
0.08 |
29.08±7.01 30.14±6.58 29.36±4.44 |
0.04 |
37.18±9.97 36.02±8.78 43.23±10.43 |
0.05 |
26.22±3.83 27.78±3.64 31.92±3.83 |
Education Diploma Associate degree Bachelor and higher |
0.1 |
29.80±6.90 28.46±6.12 |
0.7 |
36.11±8.39 37.08±10.13 |
0.1 |
28.45±3.41 29.05±3.99 |
Nationality Turkish Kurdish |
0.06 |
30.92±8.33 29.10±6.48 29.00±6.23 |
0.5 |
37.96±9.83 36.01±9.03 37.26±9.18 |
0.7 |
27.96±3.53 28.71±3.62 28.93±3.85 |
Economic situation Good Moderate Weak |
a: Mean±SD; b: ANOVA test |
Table 4. Findings of linear regression model in predicting food hygiene behavior of the health workers. | |||||
Variables | r (correlation coefficient ) | SE | Beta | t | P-value |
knowledge | 0.064 | 0.091 | 0.036 | .74 | 0.4 |
Attitude | 0.19 | 0.157 | 0.09 | 1.22 | 0.22 |
Perceived susceptibility | 0.27 | 0.087 | 0.18 | 2.6 | 0.02 |
Perceived severity | 0.24 | 0.077 | 0.16 | 3.20 | 0.002 |
Perceived benefits | 0.39 | 0.090 | 0.33 | 3.971 | 0.001 |
Perceived barriers | - 0.22 | 0.15 | - 0.11 | 1.48 | 0.13 |
Cues to action | 0.12 | 0.086 | 0.07 | 1.45 | 0.14 |
Perceived self-efficacy | 0.58 | 0.098 | 0.45 | 4.20 | 0.0001 |
Rights and permissions | |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |