Table 2 Comparison of attitude level before and after the symposium about post exposure prophylaxis (PEP)
Before symposium n (%) | After symposium n (%) | McNemar’s test | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PEP is important for primary prevention | ||||
Agree | 286 (78.4) | 325 (89.7) | 35.99 | < 0.001 |
Disagree | 37 (10.1) | 31 (8.6) | ||
Don’t know | 42 (11.5) | 6 (1.7) | ||
Training of PEP important for change in clinical practice | ||||
Agree | 329 (90.1) | 354 (98) | 24.15 | < 0.001 |
Disagree | 6 (1.6) | 2 (0.6) | ||
Don’t know | 30 (8.2) | 5 (1.4) | ||
There should be PEP guideline in work areas | ||||
Agree | 340 (93.2) | 352 (97.2) | 14.33 | 0.001 |
Disagree | 7 (1.9) | 8 (2.2) | ||
Don’t know | 18 (4.9) | 2 (0.6) | ||
PEP reduce likelihood of being HIV positive | ||||
Agree | 290 (79.5) | 339 (94.2) | 51.28 | < 0.001 |
Disagree | 15 (4.1) | 16 (4.4) | ||
Don’t know | 60 (16.4) | 5 (1.4) | ||
PEP is indicated for sharp injuries during patient management | ||||
Agree | 247 (67.7) | 308 (84.9) | 57.02 | < 0.001 |
Disagree | 41 (11.2) | 44 (12.1) | ||
Don’t know agree | 77 (21.1) | 11 (3.0) | ||