Fatalities associated with pre and post SARS-CoV-2 infection in Peru

Having been previously infected does not guarantee that one is safe in this pandemic, therefore, it is important to estimate the change in perceptions. The aim was to determine the fatalistic perception of patients recovered from COVID-19 in Peru and to identify the sociodemographic differences that influence the fatalistic perception of recovered and uninfected patients. Observational, retrospective cohort. The exposure variable was whether the patient had already been infected by COVID-19, the dependent variable was the fatalistic perception in the event of becoming ill with COVID-19 (in the case of those who had already been ill, the question was asked in the event of reinfection);this was measured with a validated test and being fatalistic was defined as those who were in the upper third of the scores;analytical statistics were obtained. Of the 8957 respondents, 37% reported that they had already been infected by COVID-19. In bivariate analysis, there was no difference in fatalism according to having been previously infected (p=0.426). In multivariate analysis, there was a lower risk of fatalism among men (aRR: 0.85;95%CI: 0.80-0.90;p-value<0.001), but an increased risk among those who believed they could be reinfected (aRR: 1.39;95%CI: 1.23-1.56;p-value<0.001), adjusted for three variables. Un conclusion, there is no association between fatalistic perception of the pandemic and having been infected with COVID-19 in Peru. However, being a woman and believing in a possible reinfection were risk factors for presenting fatalistic ideas.

Association between being a vulnerable population and low level of knowledge about COVID-19 in 17 cities of Peru at the beginning of the pandemic

Knowledge is key to face any disease, but there are few baseline studies from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective was to determine the association between being a vulnerable population and the low knowledge of the population in 17 Peruvian cities at the beginning of the pandemic. Knowledge was measured using a nine-question scale, which asks about the mechanism, symptoms and consequences;this was crosschecked against socio-demographic variables using analytical statistics. Of the 3913 respondents, the lowest knowledge was about how to react to cold symptoms and what treatment a person with an initial non-severe coronavirus infection should follow (37% and 53% correct answers;respectively). In the multivariate analysis, those who had lower percentages of a poor level of knowledge of the disease were those with higher education (aPR: 0.74;95%CI: 0.62-0.88;p-value=0.001), among those with some postgraduate studies (aPR: 0.59;95%CI: 0.43-0.68;p-value<0.001), among those who were part of the health personnel (aPR: 0.15;95%CI: 0.05-0.46;p-value=0.001) and among women (aPR: 0.84;95%CI: 0.73-0.96;p-value=0.009), on the other hand, the older the age, the worse the level of knowledge of the disease (aPR: 1.012;95%CI: 1.005-1.018;p-value=0.001), adjusted by 4 variables. There was a low level of knowledge in some aspects and this is associated with some specific characteristics according to being considered a vulnerable population. © 2021 Instituto de Altos Estudios de Salud Publica. All rights reserved.

Perception of the public health measures implemented in peru to stop the spread of covid-19

Introduction: It is important to assess the popular perception of the impact of the measures taken by governments in response to the fast spread of the coronavirus. Objective: Determine the perception of the public health measures implemented by the Peruvian government to stop the spread of COVID-19. Methods: A multicenter cross-sectional analytical study was conducted based on a virtual survey applied to more than 4 000 people across the country. Results: The vast majority of respondents agreed that COVID-19 is a serious epidemic / pandemic (47% in agreement and 42% very much in agreement). However, only 22%, 21%, 17% and 46% thought that the country, the health sector, the hospitals and the doctors, respectively, were prepared to face it. The most widely supported migration measures were border closure (68% very much in agreement) and denying entrance to travelers returning from China or other countries with high rates of coronavirus infection (60% very much in agreement). Respondents agreed that mass gatherings should not be held for a while (69% very much in agreement), a figure followed by those proposing to declare a public health emergency (61% very much in agreement) and the closure of colleges and universities for some time (50% very much in agreement). Many statistical associations of these perceptions were found, according to sex, age or educational level (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The population supports most of the measures, those related to socioeducational characteristics receiving greater support. © 2021, Editorial Ciencias Medicas. All rights reserved.