Table 3 Hygiene practices among farmers on small-scale swine farms in Chancay and Tumbesa
From: Interspecies interactions and potential Influenza A virus risk in small swine farms in Peru
Protective Clothing | Chancay (N = 20) % (n) | Tumbes (N = 16) % (n) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
Footwear | Â | Â | p < 0.001 |
Barefoot | 0% (0) | 25.0% (4) | Â |
Flip-flops | 40.0% (8) | 62.5% (10) | Â |
Closed-toed, not boots | 0% (0) | 12.5% (2) | Â |
Boots | 60.0% (12) | 0% (0) | Â |
Handwear | Â | Â | p = 1.000 |
Bare hands | 95.0% (19) | 100.0% (16) | Â |
Gloves | 5.0% (1) | 0% (0) | Â |
Face protection | Â | Â | p = 1.000 |
Mask | 0% (0) | 0% (0) | Â |
Hand-Washing Practices | % (n/N) | % (n/N) | p = 0.731 |
No washing | 45.0% (9/20) | 56.3% (9/16) | Â |
Water only | 25.0% (5/20) | 25.0% (4/16) | Â |
Water and soap | 20.0% (4/20) | 6.2% (1/16) | Â |
Water and detergent | 10.0% (2/20) | 12.5% (2/16) | Â |
Face Touching | % (n) | n/a | n/a |
No face touching | 55.0% (11/20) | n/a | Â |
Touched forehead | 44.4% (4/9) | n/a | Â |
Touched nose | 55.6% (5/9) | n/a | Â |
Touched mouth | 0% (0) | n/a | Â |