94

Chapter 4PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter contains the discussion of the findings of the study with the corresponding analysis and interpretation. Included in this chapter are the following: demographic profile of respondents; prevailing knowledge on leptospirosis of the respondents; prevailing attitude on leptospirosis of the respondents; prevention and control strategies practiced by the respondents; extent to which the respondents practiced prevention and control; comparison of the level of knowledge on leptospirosis among the three groups of respondents; and comparison on the extent of prevention and control practiced by the three groups of respondents.sDemographic Profiles of Respondents

Tables 1 - 4 present the demographic profiles of the respondents, namely: health workers, barangay officials and barangay residents, in terms of their age, occupation, monthly income and educational attainment.

Age. Table 1 presents the demographic profile of the three groups of respondents in terms of age.

The table shows that the health workers clustered around 18 years of age to 65 years of age. Four of the seven respondents or 57.14 percent were Table 1

Age Distribution of Respondents

Age BracketHealth WorkersBarangay OfficialsResidents

No. of Respondents%No. of Respondents%No. of Respondents%

>650 0.003 5.0017 14.17

45 65 4 57.1430 50.0038 31.67

18 44 3 42.8624 40.0064 53.33

Not Stated0 0.003 5.001 0.83

Total7100.0060100.00120100.00

Mean44.93 years old43.35 years old45.50 years old

SD12.56 years15.67 years17.60 years

aged between 45 65 years old while three or 42.86 percent were aged between 18 44 years old.

The mean age of this group of respondent was pegged at 44.93 years old with a standard deviation (SD) of 12.56 years.

Table 1 further presents that the barangay officials clustered around 18 to 65 years old. The remaining three or 5.00 percent did not signify their ages for unknown reason.

The mean age of this group was pegged at 43.35 years old with a SD of 15.67 years.

Moreover, Table 1 presents that the barangay residents were clustered around 18 to >65 years old also. Sixty-four of them or 53.33 percent were aged between 18 44 years old, while 38 or 31.67 percent were aged between 45 65 years old, and 17 or 14.17 percent were aged >65 years old. Quite notable was the only one respondent or 0.83 percent who did not specify his/her age for personal reason.

The mean age of the barangay residents was calculated at 45.50 years old with a SD of 17.60 years.

The foregoing data denoted that the three groups of respondents were on their mid 40s and at age of maturity. This suggested that they were eligible respondents of the study.

Occupation. Table 2 shows the occupation of the health workers, barangay officials and barangay residents.

It can be gleaned from Table 2 that the health workers signified to have a work of health workers (of course). On the other hand, the barangay officials signified to have varied gainful occupations to sustain their respective families. Seven or 11.66 percent were farmers while three eachTable 2Occupation of Respondents

OccupationHealth WorkersBarangay OfficialsResidents

No. of Respondents%No. of Respondents%No. of Respondents%

Butcher0 0.003 5.000 0.00

Fisherman0 0.001 1.678 6.67

Health Worker7100.001 1.674 3.33

Meat Vendor0 0.003 5.0010 8.33

Farmer0 0.007 11.667 5.83

Teacher0 0.002 3.330 0.00

Office Worker0 0.000 0.004 3.33

Garbage Collector0 0.001 1.673 2.51

Others0 0.0036 60.0074 61.67

Not Stated0 0.006 10.0010 8.33

Total7100.0060100.00120100.00

or 5.00 percent each were butchers and meat vendors; two or 3.33 percent were teachers and one each or 1.67 percent each was either fisherman, health worker, or garbage collector. Thirty-six of the respondents or 60.00 percent disclosed that they have other gainful occupations other than those specifically listed and six or 10.00 percent did not state the kind of work they have for unknown reason.

On the part of the barangay residents, ten or 8.33 percent were meat vendors while eight or 6.67 percent were fishermen; seven or 5.83 percent were farmers; four each or 3.33 percent each were health workers and office workers; and three or 2.51 percent were garbage collectors. Of the remaining barangay resident-respondents, 74 or 61.67 percent signified to have other occupations not listed in this study, and 10 or 8.33 percent did not disclose their occupations for personal reason.

The foregoing data denoted that the respondents had gainful occupations where they sourced their income to defray the household expenses they incur monthly. The data further suggested that the respondents represented all ways of life that existed in the society.

Total Family Income. Table 3 reveals the total family income of the respondents.

It can be seen from the table, that five of the health workers or 71.43 percent earned family income between 15,001 20,000 and the remaining two or 28.57 percent earned between 20,001 25,000.

The mean total family income of the health workers was Php18, 929.07 with a SD of 2,439.75.

As gleaned from the same table, the barangay officials, 16 of them or 26.66 percent earned an income 25,000 and 15,001 20,000; and four or 6.67

Table 3Income of Respondents

Income BracketHealth WorkersBarangay OfficialsResidents

No. of Respondents%No. of Respondents%No. of Respondents%

>25,0000 0.007 11.679 7.50

20,001 25,0002 28.5713 21.6728 23.33

15,001 20,000 5 71.437 11.676 5.00

10,001 15,0000 0.004 6.678 6.67

6,001 10,0000 0.008 13.3311 9.17