Abstract
Rational and responsible self-medication (SM) is an essential core element for better health outcomes. It is influenced mainly by the level and adequacy of knowledge, attitude, and appropriateness of practice (KAP) towards SM. The present study explored the level and adequacy of KAP among residents of Riyadh city, Saudi Arabia. A convenient snowball sampling method was utilized to recruit the study participants. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 27. Six hundred and eleven participants completed the questionnaire. Residents with good knowledge, positive attitude, and proper practice were 43.7%, 33.1%, and 90.0%, respectively. The level of KAP was significantly influenced by the participant’s occupation, age, gender, nationality, marital status, presence of chronic disease, and COVID-19 infection status. The mean knowledge, attitude, and practice scores observed were 5.11 (SD = 1.27), 22.28 (SD = 2.6) and 5.20 (SD = 1.29), respectively. Pearson correlation and scattered plot matrix analysis revealed a significant positive weak correlation among KAP, indicating that residents with good knowledge possess better attitude (r = 0.142, p < 0.001) and follow the proper practice (r = 0.256, p < 0.001) towards SM. Multivariate linear regression revealed a significant (p < 0.001) negative (β = −0.059) influence of occupation, family members working in the health sector (p = 0.046, β= −0.426), Body Mass Index (p = 0.019, β = −0.049), and physical activity (p = 0.018, β = −0.292) on the overall KAP score. Understanding the residents’ level of KAP towards SM would enable the health care system to identify the gap and develop a mechanism to educate the people and make them knowledgeable about SM and self-care.
Keywords: self-medication, Riyadh, community, knowledge, attitude, practice, world health organization, United Nations, sustainable development goals
1. Introduction
Self-Medication (SM) refers to the use of medications to treat self-diagnosed disorders without seeking medical advice [1], by using over the counter (OTC) drugs, prescription-only drugs, pharmacist-only medicines, complementary and alternative medicine [2], taking medicines on the advice of a relative and others, or consuming leftover medicines available at home [3]. SM is practiced commonly both in developing and developed countries as a part of self-care [4]. Appropriate SM has numerous advantages, including preventing, treating, and providing affordable alternatives to manage minor illnesses [5]. Contrary to this, irrational SM, which includes error in self-diagnosis, selecting incorrect drug, failing to understand drug labels and leaflets, and lack of awareness about drug interactions will lead to non-effectiveness, drug resistance, severe side effects, drug and food interactions, drug allergy, delay in actual diagnosis, overdose, and drug toxicity [6,7].
SM is a global issue that can potentially contribute to various health hazards including antibiotic resistance [8]. However, its trends differ depending on various factors, such as socioeconomic factors, medical knowledge, satisfaction, people’s perception of the disease, easy access to drugs, increased ability to manage certain illnesses through self-care, and greater availability of medicinal products [6,9]. While the objective of SM is straightforward, most people practice it without adequate knowledge, attitudes, and background, especially in countries where the public bears their health expenses on their own. Although the government and insurance companies look after health expenses in Saudi Arabia for their citizens and residents, SM practice commonly uses drugs received through family and friends, leftover medications, and OTC drugs [10,11].
SM is prevalent among populations in developing countries, and according to several reports, prescription medications can be purchased without a prescription [12,13]. Similar to most other countries, in Saudi Arabia, private sector pharmacies are the most accessible healthcare facilities. The prevalence of SM in Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, ranges between 35% and 92% [14,15,16,17]. Various local studies have highlighted the prevalence of SM among residents of Saudi Arabia, including the use of antibiotics (34%) without a prescription, depending on advice from family and friends to use medications for self-care (68.6%) and self-use of medications to manage oral health problems (50.4%), manifesting the high prevalence and inappropriateness of SM practice [18,19,20]. Antibiotic misuse significantly threatens infectious disease control and public health in general. Lack of public awareness, knowledge, attitude, and practices about SM are potential risk factors for inappropriate drug use. Thus, researchers highlight irrational SM and related critical issues such as antibiotic resistance and potential adverse events, necessitating the imposition of healthcare initiatives to raise knowledge and awareness [21]. Most SM studies on KAP have been conducted among healthcare professionals or students, with only a few studies involving the public in Saudi Arabia [22,23,24].
The appropriateness and rationality of SM are greatly influenced by the individual’s level of knowledge, attitude, and type of practice (KAP). Studies of this kind can shed light on why patients engage in such irrational SM behavior and may aid policymakers and regulators in streamlining drug rules, updating the list of essential medicines, and addressing safety concerns with OTC medications. The proper knowledge about SM and medications used to treat self-diagnosed minor illnesses is vital in preventing health hazards, likewise, the level of attitude greatly influences SM practice and following proper practices such as storage of medications, checking expiration dates, and encouraging rational SM exercise. The Sustainable Development Goal (SGD) three of the 2030 agenda described by the United Nations (UN) recommends ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages, which could be effectively achieved through public education and awareness [25]. Considering this, a study was conducted among the community of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to assess their KAP about SM and to investigate the association and correlation between KAP and sociodemographic variables.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Population
This study was carried out from September to November 2021 among residents of Riyadh city, aged 18 years and older, to explore the knowledge, attitude, and practices towards SM. The study was approved with the registration number (02-20102021) from AlMaarefa University’s ethical board. The study location was segregated into five zones: North, South, East, West, and Central Riyadh. Those staying out of Riyadh, aged under 18 years, and residing in Riyadh on visit visas were eliminated from enrolling in this study. The purpose of the survey and the informed consent was set out at the start of an online questionnaire. Once participants read the consent form and study purpose, they could either continue to participate in the study by clicking on the “agree icon” or clicking on the “disagree icon” if they wished to not participate, thus making involvement completely voluntary. Disagreeing residents were directed to decline the participation section and exit from the survey.
2.2. Sample Size and Sampling Method
In 2021, the overall population of Riyadh was estimated to be about 8,175,378, according to the Saudi census department [https://portal.saudicensus.sa/portal/public/1/15/100645?type=TABLE (last accessed on 20 September 2023)]. The final minimum sample size of 385 was computed through the Raosoft sample size calculator using a formula x = Z(c/100)2r(100-r) where N is the population size, r is the fraction of responses, and Z(c/100) is the critical value for the confidence level c. We speculated a 5% level of precision, a margin of error of 5%, and a 95% confidence level to calculate the required sample size. We collected 625 responses warranting adequate representation. We mainly used a convenient sampling method to recruit the participants by visiting shopping malls, supermarkets, and other public places. The questionnaire was posted on various social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, WhatsApp Status). Moreover, we also adopted the snowball sampling technique through personal contact to obtain more significant responses.
2.3. Construction, Validation and Reliability of Study Tool
An extensive review of relevant literature was carried out to construct the initial questionnaire [7,15,26,27,28,29], followed by a comprehensive revision from experts in the field of community medicine, pharmacy, and epidemiology to ensure content validity. Since the study questionnaires were adopted from previously published relevant studies, the content validity index and construct validity tests were not performed. The study tool was divided into sections as follows; the first section depicted sociodemographic details about contributors, including age, education, nationality, gender, occupation, marital status, number of children at home, family members working in the health sector (people primarily engaged in enhancing health by providing preventive, curative, promotional, or rehabilitative health care services such as a physician, nurse, pharmacist, optometrist, occupational therapist, etc.), presence of chronic disease (conditions that last one year or more and require ongoing medical attention or limit activities of daily living or both) and so on. The second section documented the participant’s knowledge about SM using seven statements. The third section was embedded with six Likert scale statements to evaluate the attitude towards SM, and the last part measured the appropriateness of SM practice using seven statements. To ensure face validity, five participants aged 20–50 years were recruited indiscriminately from each zone of Riyadh city (a total of 25 participants) to participate in the pilot study. We simplified the English terminology and decreased the number of questions as a result of the comments from the pilot respondents. Additionally, the demographic question “number of children” was modified to “a number of children staying with you” since some participants mentioned they have children but are not staying with them in Riyadh city. The pilot study responses were not included in the final data analysis. Additionally, the reliability of each questionnaire domain was calculated using the following formulae and Cronbach’s alpha factor was found to be satisfactory (knowledge; 0.75, attitude; 0.8, and practice; 0.7).
α = (K/(K − 1)) × (1 − (∑Vi)/VT) | (1) |
where K is the number of variables, Vi is the variance of all items, and VT is the group total variance.
2.4. Data Collection and Categorization of KAP Using Cut-Off Points
The final bilingual questionnaire (English and Arabic) was disseminated through social media platforms and personal contacts. Participants’ knowledge and practice regarding SM were evaluated using 7 questions on a 7-point scale. Every question was scored 1 for correct and 0 for incorrect answers. The expected maximum cumulative score was 7. The level of knowledge was categorized as good, moderate, and poor using the original Bloom’s cut-off points (Good, 80–100%; Moderate, 50–79%; and Poor, <50%) [14]. A score of 6–7 points was regarded as good, 4–5 points was regarded as moderate, and ≤3 was regarded as poor. Likewise, the participant’s practice was classified as proper (≥4 points) and improper (≤3 points). Similarly, the attitude was evaluated using six statements on a Likert scale, from strongly agree (5), agree (4), neutral (3), disagree (2), to strongly disagree (1). The minimum possible expected score was 6 and the maximum was 30. The modified Bloom’s cut-off points were used to categorize the attitude levels. A score of 24–30 (80–100%) was considered positive, 18–23 (60–79%) was neutral, and <18 (<60%) was negative.
2.5. Statistical Analysis
The completeness and uniformity of the collected responses were checked before subjecting them to analysis. The responses that disagreed and had incomplete demographic details were excluded from the analysis. The data were analyzed using SPSS (version 27.0). We hypothesized the discrepancy in knowledge, attitude, and practice levels among study participants. The Chi-square test was applied to determine the significance and association between dependent and independent variables; the correlation between KAP was determined using Pearson’s correlation. Multiple linear regression determined the relationship between participants’ KAP and demographic variables. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
3. Results
3.1. Sociodemographic Details
Altogether, 625 responses were collected, of which only 611 were included in the data analysis. We excluded the 14 responses that were incomplete and disagreed by participants. The highest number of responses were recorded from the north zone (32.7%), followed by central (18%), east (17.7%), west (16.5%), and south (15.1%) of Riyadh city. Major contribution was observed from unmarried (52.4%); females (71.4%); Saudi citizens (88.4%), and staying with family (89.7%). About 89.2% of participants had received 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccination (Table 1).
Table 1.
Details about demographic characteristics of participants.
Demographic Variables | Demographic Characteristics (N) | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 175 | 28.6 |
Female | 436 | 71.4 | |
Age | 18–24 years | 231 | 37.8 |
25–44 years | 221 | 36.2 | |
45–60 years | 135 | 22.1 | |
61 years and above | 24 | 3.9 | |
BMI | Underweight | 38 | 6.2 |
Healthy | 241 | 39.4 | |
Overweight | 191 | 31.3 | |
Obese | 141 | 23.1 | |
Marital status | Unmarried | 320 | 52.4 |
Married | 273 | 44.7 | |
Divorced/separated | 18 | 2.9 | |
Number of children at home | No Children | 217 | 35.5 |
1 child | 104 | 17 | |
2 Children | 98 | 16 | |
3 Children | 76 | 12.4 | |
4 Children | 63 | 10.3 | |
5 Children | 26 | 4.3 | |
>5 children | 27 | 4.4 | |
Nationality | Saudi | 540 | 88.4 |
Non-Saudi | 71 | 11.6 | |
Residential status | Living with Family | 548 | 89.7 |
Living Alone | 63 | 10.3 | |
Education level | Pre-high school | 16 | 2.6 |
High school | 169 | 27.7 | |
College Graduate | 360 | 58.9 | |
Postgraduate | 66 | 10.8 | |
Health insurance | Yes | 281 | 46 |
No | 330 | 54 | |
Physical activity | Yes | 290 | 47.5 |
No | 321 | 52.5 | |
Distance to the nearest hospital | Less than 1 km | 93 | 15.2 |
1–5 km | 182 | 29.8 | |
5–10 km | 160 | 26.2 | |
More than 10 km | 176 | 28.8 | |
Distance to nearest pharmacy | Less than 1 km | 350 | 57.3 |
1–5 km | 213 | 34.9 | |
5–10 km | 34 | 5.6 | |
More than 10 km | 14 | 2.3 | |
Occupation | Student | 200 | 32.7 |
Homemaker | 79 | 12.9 | |
Retired | 66 | 10.8 | |
Health care | 66 | 10.8 | |
Education sector | 81 | 13.2 | |
Sale and Business | 22 | 3.6 | |
Construction | 1 | 0.2 | |
IT and telecom | 8 | 1.3 | |
Bank and account | 5 | 0.8 | |
Human Resources | 10 | 1.6 | |
Others | 73 | 11.9 | |
Residing in Saudi Arabia since | By birth | 542 | 88.7 |
5 years | 29 | 4.7 | |
10 years | 7 | 1.1 | |
More than 10 years | 33 | 5.4 | |
Family member in the health sector | Yes | 272 | 44.5 |
No | 339 | 55.4 | |
Chronic disease | No | 449 | 73.5 |
Yes | 159 | 26 | |
COVID-19 vaccine status | Two doses of vaccine | 545 | 89.2 |
One dose of vaccine | 46 | 7.5 | |
Have not received vaccine | 20 | 3.3 | |
COVID-19 infection status | Active | 7 | 1.1 |
Recovered | 131 | 21.4 | |
Have not infected by COVID-19 so far | 473 | 77.4 |
3.2. Resident’s Level of Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice about SM
The average knowledge score of residents was 5.11 (SD = 1.27) on a 7-point scale. Overall, the participants with good and moderate knowledge were almost similar, 267 (43.7%) and 277 (45.3%), respectively. About 67 (11%) displayed poor knowledge of SM (Table 2). Only the occupation significantly (p = 0.043) influenced the respondents’ knowledge level. Residents who are working in construction (7 points), IT and telecommunication (5.63 points), and the health sector (5.5 points) significantly displayed a good level of knowledge about SM compared to the residents who work in banks and accounts (4 points) and human resources (5 points) (Figure 1). Similarly, the mean attitude score was 22.28 (SD = 2.6) on a 30-point scale. More than half of the respondents, 391 (64%) and 18 (3%), have displayed a neutral and negative attitude towards SM, respectively. Nevertheless, 202 (33.1%) of the participants have shown a positive attitude toward SM Table 2. Association between demographic variables and adequacy of knowledge, attitude, and practice towards self-medication.
Table 2.
Association between demographic variables and adequacy of knowledge, attitude and practice towards self-medication.
Demographic Variables | Adequacy of Knowledge (N = 611) | Level of Attitude (N = 611) | Type of Practice (N = 611) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poor (%) |
Moderate (%) | Good (%) |
p Value | Negative (%) | Neutral (%) | Positive (%) |
p Value | Improper (%) | Proper (%) | p Value | ||
Gender | Male | 25 (4.1) | 80 (13.1) | 70 (11.5) | 0.198 | 7 (1.1) | 110 (18) | 58 (9.5) | 0.614 | 31 (5.1) | 144 (23.6) | <0.001 * |
Female | 42 (6.9) | 197 (32.2) | 197 (32.2) | 11 (1.8) | 281 (46) | 144 (23.6) | 30 (4.9) | 406 (66.4) | ||||
Age | 18–24 years | 31 (5.1) | 99 (16.2) | 101 (16.5) | 0.264 | 3 (0.5) | 132 (21.6) | 96 (15.7) | 0.001 * | 35 (5.7) | 196 (32.1) | <0.001 * |
25–44 years | 24 (3.9) | 109 (17.8) | 88 (14.4) | 5 (0.8) | 149 (24.4) | 67 (11) | 23 (3.8) | 198 (32.4) | ||||
45–60 years | 12 (2) | 58 (9.5) | 65 (10.6) | 9 (1.5) | 96 (15.7) | 30 (4.9) | 2 (0.3) | 133 (21.8) | ||||
61 years and above | zero | 11 (1.8) | 13 (2.1) | 1 (0.2) | 14 (2.3) | 9 (1.5) | 1 (0.2) | 23 (3.8) | ||||
BMI | Underweight | 4 (0.7) | 18 (2.9) | 16 (2.6) | 0.565 | zero | 20 (3.3) | 18 (2.9) | 0.322 | 3 (0.5) | 35 (5.7) | 0.346 |
Healthy | 29 (4.7) | 103 (16.8) | 109 (17.8) | 7 (1.2) | 148 (24.2) | 86 (14.1) | 30 (4.9) | 211 (34.5) | ||||
Overweight | 19 (3.1) | 82 (13.4) | 90 (17.7) | 6 (1) | 128 (20.9) | 57 (9.3) | 14 (2.3) | 177 (29) | ||||
Obese | 15 (2.5) | 74 (12.1) | 52 (8.5) | 5 (0.8) | 95 (15.5) | 41 (6.7) | 14 (2.3) | 127 (20.8) | ||||
Marital Status | Unmarried | 43 (7) | 137 (22.4) | 140 (22.9) | 0.293 | 5 (0.8) | 194 (31.8) | 121 (19.8) | <0.001 * | 47 (7.7) | 273 (44.7) | <0.001 * |
Married | 22 (3.6) | 131 (21.4) | 120 (19.6) | 10 (1.6) | 186 (30.4) | 77 (12.6) | 13 (2.1) | 260 (42.6) | ||||
Divorced/separated | 2 (0.3) | 9 (1.5) | 7 (1.1) | 3 (0.5) | 11 (1.8) | 4 (0.7) | 1 (0.2) | 17 (2.8) | ||||
Number of children at home | No Children | 27 (4.4) | 94 (15.4) | 96 (15.7) | 0.532 | 7 (1.2) | 132 (21.6) | 78 (12.8) | 0.928 | 29 (4.7) | 188 (30.8) | 0.095 |
1 child | 8 (1.3) | 51 (8.3) | 45 (7.4) | 4 (0.7) | 63 (10.3) | 37 (6.1) | 6 (1) | 98 (16) | ||||
2 Children | 12 (2) | 43 (7) | 43 (7) | 3 (0.5) | 67 (11) | 28 (4.6) | 7 (1.1) | 91 (14.9) | ||||
3 Children | 11 (1.8) | 33 (5.4) | 32 (5.2) | 1 (0.2) | 50 (8.2) | 25 (4.1) | 8 (1.3) | 68 (11.1) | ||||
4 Children | 4 (0.7) | 32 (5.2) | 27 (4.4) | 2 (0.3) | 45 (7.4) | 16 (2.6) | 6 (1) | 57 (9.3) | ||||
5 Children | zero | 11 (1.8) | 15 (2.5) | zero | 17 (2.8) | 9 (1.5) | zero | 26 (4.3) | ||||
>5 children | 5 (0.8) | 13 (2.1) | 9 (1.5) | 1 (0.2) | 17 (2.8) | 9 (1.5) | 5 (0.8) | 22 (3.6) | ||||
Nationality | Saudi | 58 (9.5) | 243 (39.8) | 239 (39.1) | 0.718 | 17 (2.8) | 336 (55) | 187 (30.6) | 0.041 * | 57 (9.3) | 483 (79.1) | 0.193 |
Non-Saudi | 9 (1.5) | 34 (5.6) | 28 (4.6) | 1 (0.2) | 55 (9) | 15 (2.5) | 4 (0.7) | 67 (11) | ||||
Residential status | Living with Family | 58 (9.5) | 246 (40.2) | 244 (39.9) | 0.413 | 15 (2.5) | 350 (57.3) | 183 (30) | 0.613 | 55 (9) | 493 (80.7) | 0.898 |
Living Alone | 9 (1.5) | 31 (5.1) | 23 (3.8) | 3 (0.5) | 41 (6.7) | 19 (3.1) | 6 (1.0) | 57 (9.3) | ||||
Educational qualification | Primary school | 2 (0.3) | 7 (1.2) | 7 (1.2) | 0.809 | zero | 10 (1.6) | 6 (1.0) | 0.626 | 2 (0.3) | 14 (2.3) | 0.292 |
High school | 20 (3.3) | 80 (13.1) | 69 (11.3) | 6 (1.0) | 104 (17) | 59 (9.7) | 23 (3.8) | 146 (23.9) | ||||
College Graduate | 39 (6.4) | 165 (27) | 156 (25.5) | 8 (1.3) | 237 (38.8) | 115 (18.8) | 30 (4.9) | 330 (54) | ||||
Postgraduate | 6 (1.0) | 25 (4.1) | 35 (5.7) | 4 (0.7) | 40 (6.5) | 22 (3.6) | 6 (1.0) | 60 (9.8) | ||||
Health insurance | Yes | 28 (4.6) | 123 (21.3) | 130 (21.3) | 0.463 | 8 (1.3) | 179 (29.3) | 94 (15.4) | 0.976 | 24 (3.9) | 257 (42) | 0.272 |
No | 39 (6.4) | 154 (25.2) | 137 (22.4) | 10 (1.6) | 212 (34.7) | 108 (17.7) | 37 (6.1) | 293 (48) | ||||
Physical activity | Yes | 32 (5.2) | 122 (20) | 136 (22.3) | 0.273 | 9 (1.5) | 192 (31.4) | 89 (14.6) | 0.495 | 23 (3.8) | 267 (43.7) | 0.108 |
No | 35 (5.7) | 155 (25.4) | 131 (21.4) | 9 (1.5) | 199 (32.6) | 113 (18.5) | 38 (6.2) | 283 (46.3) | ||||
Distance to nearest hospital | Less than 1 km | 9 (1.5) | 45 (7.4) | 39 (6.4) | 0.231 | 3 (0.5) | 57 (9.3) | 33 (5.4) | 0.606 | 11 (1.8) | 82 (13.4) | 0.410 |
1–5 km | 12 (2) | 91 (14.9) | 79 (12.9) | 4 (0.7) | 115 (18.8) | 63 (10.3) | 17 (2.8) | 165 (27) | ||||
5–10 km | 23 (3.8) | 64 (10.5) | 73 (11.9) | 8 (1.3) | 101 (16.5) | 51 (8.3) | 20 (2.3) | 140 (22.9) | ||||
More than 10 km | 23 (3.8) | 77 (12.6) | 76 (12.4) | 3 (0.5) | 118 (19.3) | 55 (9) | 13 (2.1) | 163 (26.7) | ||||
Distance to nearest pharmacy | Less than 1 km | 33 (5.4) | 157 (25.7) | 160 (26.1) | 0.587 | 10 (1.6) | 227 (37.2) | 113 (18.5) | 0.520 | 38 (6.2) | 312 (51.1) | 0.777 |
1–5 km | 27 (4.4) | 101 (16.5) | 85 (13.9) | 5 (0.8) | 134 (21.9) | 74 (12.1) | 18 (2.9) | 195 (31.9) | ||||
5–10 km | 6 (1) | 13 (2.1) | 15 (2.5) | 3 (0.5) | 21 (3.4) | 10 (1.6) | 4 (0.7) | 30 (4.9) | ||||
More than 10 km | 1 (0.2) | 6 (1.0) | 7 (1.1) | zero | 9 (1.5) | 5 (0.81) | 1 (0.2) | 13 (2.1) | ||||
Occupation | Student | 25 (4.1) | 84 (13.7) | 91 (14.9) | 0.043 * | 5 (0.8) | 112 (18.3) | 83 (13.6) | 0.214 | 31 (5.1) | 169 (27.7) | 0.003 * |
Home maker | 8 (1.3) | 34 (5.6) | 37 (6.1) | 1 (0.2) | 54 (8.8) | 24 (3.9) | 3 (0.5) | 76 (12.4) | ||||
Retired | 3 (0.5) | 31 (5.1) | 32 (5.2) | 2 (0.3) | 48 (7.9) | 16 (2.6) | 1 (0.2) | 65 (10.6) | ||||
Health care | 3 (0.5) | 27 (4.4) | 36 (5.9) | 3 (0.5) | 38 (6.2) | 25 (4.1) | 4 (0.7) | 62 (10.1) | ||||
Education sector | 9 (1.5) | 43 (7) | 29 (4.7) | 6 (1) | 54 (8.8) | 21 (3.4) | 3 (0.5) | 78 (12.8) | ||||
Sale and Business | 2 (0.3) | 13 (2.1) | 7 (1.1) | 1 (0.2) | 15 (2.5) | 6 (1) | 5 (0.8) | 17 (2.8) | ||||
Construction | zero | zero | 1 (0.2) | zero | 1 (0.2) | zero | zero | 1 (0.2) | ||||
IT and telecom | zero | 3 (0.5) | 5 (0.8) | zero | 5 (0.8) | 3 (0.5) | 1 (0.2) | 7 (1.1) | ||||
Bank and account | 2 (0.3) | 3 (0.5) | zero | zero | 3 (0.5) | 2 (0.3) | 1 (0.2) | 4 (0.7) | ||||
Human Resources | zero | 7 (1.1) | 3 (0.5) | zero | 8 (1.3) | 2 (0.3) | 1 (0.2) | 9 (1.5) | ||||
Others | 15 (2.5) | 32 (5.2) | 26 (4.3) | zero | 53 (8.7) | 20 (3.3) | 11 (1.8) | 62 (10.2) | ||||
Residing in Saudi Arabia since | By Birth | 57 (9.3) | 245 (40.1) | 240 (39.3 | 0.518 | 16 (2.6) | 339 (55.5) | 187 (30.6) | 0.330 | 54 (8.8) | 488 (79.9) | 0.735 |
5 years | 5 (0.8) | 15 (2.5) | 9 (1.5) | 1 (0.2) | 19 (3.1) | 9 (1.5) | 4 (0.7) | 25 (4) | ||||
10 years | 2 (0.3) | 3 (0.5) | 2 (0.3) | zero | 6 (1.0) | 1 (0.2) | zero | 7 (1.1) | ||||
More than 10 years | 3 (0.5) | 14 (2.3) | 16 (2.6) | 1 (0.2) | 27 (4.4) | 5 (0.8) | 3 (0.5) | 30 (4.9) | ||||
Family member in health sector | Yes | 24 (3.9) | 124 (20.3) | 124 (20.3) | 0.292 | 6 (1.0) | 170 (27.8) | 96 (15.7) | 0.402 | 28 (4.6) | 244 (39.9) | 0.819 |
No | 43 (7.0) | 153 (25) | 143 (23.4) | 12 (2.0) | 221 (36.1) | 106 (17.3) | 33 (5.4) | 306 (50) | ||||
Chronic disease | No | 54 (8.8) | 198 (32.4) | 197 (32.2) | 0.245 | 10 (1.6) | 282 (46.1) | 157 (25.7) | 0.054 | 53 (8.7) | 396 (64.8) | 0.015 * |
Yes | 12 (2.0) | 78 (12.8) | 69 (11.2) | 8 (1.3) | 108 (17.7) | 43 (7.0) | 8 (1.3) | 151 (24.7) | ||||
COVID-19 vaccine status | Got two doses | 59 (9.7) | 243 (39.8) | 243 (39.8) | 0.767 | 16 (2.6) | 344 (56.3) | 185 (30.3) | 0.152 | 52 (8.5) | 493 (80.7) | 0.302 |
Got first dose | 6 (1.0) | 23 (3.8) | 17 (2.8) | zero | 34 (5.6) | 12 (2.0) | 5 (0.8) | 41 (6.7) | ||||
Didn’t receive | 2 (0.3) | 11 (1.8) | 7 (1.1) | 2 (0.3) | 13 (2.1) | 5 (0.8) | 4 (0.7) | 16 (2.6) | ||||
COVID-19 infection status | Active | 2 (0.3) | 5 (0.8) | zero | 0.144 | 2 (0.3) | 2 (0.3) | 3 (0.5) | 0.001 * | zero | 7 (1.1) | 0.654 |
Recovered | 14 (2.3) | 63 (10.3) | 54 (8.8) | 3 (0.5) | 78 (12.8) | 50 (8.2) | 14 (2.3) | 117 (19.1) | ||||
No COVID-19 infection so far | 51 (8.3) | 209 (34.2) | 213 (34.9) | 13 (2.1) | 311 (50.9) | 149 (24.4) | 47 (7.7) | 426 (69.7) |
* Indicates significance with p value < 0.05.
Figure 1.
Knowledge, attitude, and practice scores against demographic variables.
Age, marital status, nationality, and COVID-19 infection status significantly influenced the participants’ attitudes (Table 2). Residents aged 18–24 years showed a significantly (p = 0.001) better attitude score (22.7 points) compared (21.7 points) to residents who were 61 years old and above. Likewise, unmarried respondents had a significantly (p < 0.001) better attitude score (22.5 points) compared to (20.6) divorced residents. Saudi nationals exhibited a significantly (p = 0.041) more excellent attitude score (22.3 points) compared to (21.9 points) non-Saudi residents. Comparably, respondents who recovered from COVID-19 infection displayed a significantly (p = 0.001) superior attitude score (22.5 points) compared to respondents (21.1 points) who had an active COVID-19 infection (Figure 1). Most respondents (n = 550,90%) exhibited proper practice toward SM. Gender, age, marital status, occupation, and presence of chronic disease significantly impacted the magnitude of practice toward SM (Table 2). The female participants showed significantly (p < 0.001) better practice scores (6 points) compared to their male counterparts (5.2 points). Residents above 61 years old displayed significantly (p < 0.001) superior practice scores (6.5 points) compared to younger adults (5.2 points). Married and divorced residents showed significantly (p < 0.001) more outstanding practice scores (6.2 points) compared to unmarried (5.4 points). Residents who were suffering from any long-term or chronic disease exhibited significantly (p = 0.015) better practice scores (6.1 points) compared to residents (5.7 points) who were healthy (Figure 1).
3.3. Basic Information about SM Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice
This study noted that more than 50% of respondents correctly identified the basic knowledge and practices of SM. However, it was found that less than 80% of respondents correctly answered the question on obtaining antibiotics for SM, information about OTC and prescription medications and characterizing SM as a safe exercise. Similarly, about 30% of participants still follow the improper way of SM practice, such as borrowing drugs and using prescription drugs for SM (Figure 2). In terms of attitude, more than 50% of respondents agree with statements such as “Basic knowledge about drugs and diseases are necessary to practice SM”, “inappropriate SM can lead to adverse health effects”, and “sometimes SM can lead to the selection of the wrong drug”, “SM is part of self-care”, and “discontinuing SM once symptoms have improved”. More than 50% of participants disagree with the statement that “SM with OTC drugs can lead to antimicrobial resistance” (Figure 3).
Figure 2.
Pattern of correct and incorrect answers about the knowledge and practice of SM.
Figure 3.
Attitude towards self-medication among residents of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
3.4. Correlation between Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice towards SM
The diagonal histograms in the scattered plot matrix show the normal data distribution in knowledge, attitude, and practice domains. The fit line in the scattered plot indicates a positive correlation between knowledge with attitude and practice, indicating that as knowledge increases the level of attitude and appropriateness of practice increase, and vice versa. However, the fit line of scattered plot in attitude and practice is not steep, indicating low positive correlation among them (Figure 4). Further significance of these correlations is confirmed by applying the Pearson correlation analysis. A correlation coefficient (r) value of less than 0.39 is considered a weak correlation. A significant positive weak (r = 0.142) correlation was observed between knowledge with attitude (p < 0.001) and knowledge with practice (r = 0.256, p < 0.001) about SM. This shows that the participants with a good level of knowledge about SM will have a positive attitude and follow proper practices and vice versa. However, no correlation was observed between attitude and practice as an r value less than 0.1 indicates no correlation among the variables (Table 3).
Figure 4.
Scattered plot matrix depicted the nature of correlation among knowledge, attitude, and practice about SM.
Table 3.
Pearson correlation between knowledge, attitude, and practices towards SM.
Variable | Knowledge | Attitude | Practice | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Correlation Coefficient (r) | p Value | Correlation Coefficient (r) | p Value | Correlation Coefficient (r) | p Value | |
Knowledge | ---- | ---- | 0.142 ** | <0.001 | 0.256 ** | <0.001 |
Attitude | ---- | ---- | 0.001 | 0.974 | ||
Practice | ---- | ---- |
** Significant correlation at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
3.5. Factors Affecting KAP Score-Multiple Linear Regression Analysis
The scores of knowledge, attitude, and practice are dependent variables. The multiple linear regression was performed on the factors influencing the total KAP score, such as gender, age, education, occupation, BMI, physical activity, and family members in the health sector. Table 4 depicts the results of the independent variables that significantly (p < 0.05) impacted the overall score of knowledge, attitude, and practice about SM. The resident’s occupation showed a significant (p < 0.001) negative impact (β= −0.059) on the knowledge score. Similarly, BMI (β= −0.049) and physical activity (β= −0.292) significantly negatively impacted the practice scores. Surprisingly, respondents with family members working in the health sector significantly negatively impacted their attitude. Conversely, participants’ age, gender, and education positively impacted knowledge and practice scores. The other independent variables such as marital status, number of children, nationality, and distance to nearest healthcare facility did not show any significant impact on the scores of knowledge, attitude, and practice (Table 4).
Table 4.
Multiple linear regression analysis of factors affecting participant’s knowledge, attitude, and practice towards SM.
Independent Variable | Regression Coefficient β | Standard Error | Standardized Regression Coefficient β | t | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge * | |||||
Constant term | 4.274 | 0.309 | --- | 13.823 | 0.000 |
Age ** | 0.166 | 0.061 | 0.112 | 2.725 | 0.007 |
Education ** | 0.198 | 0.080 | 0.103 | 2.467 | 0.014 |
Occupation ** | −0.059 | 0.017 | −0.152 | −3.561 | <0.001 |
Practice * | |||||
Constant term | 4.092 | 0.700 | --- | 5.845 | 0.000 |
Age ** | 0.552 | 0.079 | 0.293 | 7.007 | <0.001 |
Gender ** | 0.816 | 0.139 | 0.226 | 5.863 | <0.001 |
Education ** | 0.252 | 0.095 | 0.102 | 2.640 | 0.009 |
BMI ** | −0.049 | 0.021 | −0.098 | −2.351 | 0.019 |
Physical activity ** | −0.292 | 0.124 | −0.089 | −2.366 | 0.018 |
Attitude * | |||||
Constant term | 22.941 | 0.349 | 65.827 | 0.000 | |
Member in Health sector ** | −0.426 | 0.213 | −0.081 | −1.996 | 0.046 |
*—Continuous Variable; **—Categorical Variable.
4. Discussion
Although SM is a part of self-care and recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), its effectiveness depends on appropriateness and sensible application. Moreover, the appropriateness and rationality of SM practice are influenced mainly by the participant’s level of knowledge, attitude, and type of practice regarding SM. There are numerous health benefits of SM, but it depends on how it is practiced and who practices it.
In this study, participants have displayed sufficient overall knowledge, good attitude, and proper practices towards SM. The previous studies carried out in Riyadh city to explore the pattern, prevalence, and predictors of SM were “Self-medication in central Saudi Arabia: community pharmacy consumers perspective” in 2011 [12] and “Self-medication practice among patients in a public health care system” in 2009 [14]. Residents visiting community pharmacies were selected in the 2011 study, whereas people visiting primary healthcare centers were targeted in the 2009 study. In contrast, this study included residents from all over Riyadh city. The study conducted in Riyadh in 2009 included 500 adult patients attending primary health care, in which 55.8% were male, whereas the study conducted in 2011 collected data from 538 participants, in which 73% were male. The present study collected data from 611 participants, higher than those earlier studies, in which 71.4% were females.
The findings show that 43.7% of respondents had good knowledge regarding SM, which is higher than the earlier study conducted in Riyadh on community pharmacy consumers (30.3%) [12]. In contrast, studies conducted in the Ethiopian community [24] (83.4%) and Haikou, China [7] (63.48%), observed a higher number of participants with a good level of knowledge. Similarly, the present study noticed a higher number (33.1%) of respondents with positive attitudes compared to the residents of Haikou (16.6%), China. [7] However, an earlier study conducted in Riyadh (62.6%) among community pharmacy consumers [12] showed a high number of respondents with a positive attitude. This study participants with a neutral attitude were 64%, comparable to Haikou (60.7%), China, findings [7]. In contrast, present participants with proper practice towards SM were 90%, unlike the observations of Haikou (95%), China [7]. Present study demonstrated a significant (p = 0.043) impact of occupation on the level of knowledge regarding SM. A similar observation was noted in an earlier study conducted in Riyadh in 2011 [12] (p = 0.044). In the present study, we noticed the significant impact of nationality, marital status, age, and COVID-19 infection status on the level of attitude, unlike earlier findings in Riyadh among community pharmacy consumers [12], where no significant impact of any variable was noted.
Based on the univariant analysis, present findings indicated the significant impact of occupation on the adequacy of knowledge, unlike a study conducted in Haikou, China, which observed a significant impact of age, medical insurance, and education level. Additionally, participants’ nationality, marital status, and COVID-19 infection status significantly impacted the attitude towards SM, unlike findings from Haikou, China, which noted the impact of education, and occupation on the appropriateness of attitude [7]. The correlation between knowledge and attitude was weak, but it was significantly positive, indicating that as the knowledge about SM increases, the level of attitude also increases. Similarly, a weak positive significant correlation was observed between knowledge and practice about SM, which means as the knowledge about SM increases, the appropriateness about SM practice increases.
Additionally, we observed a significant impact of gender, age, marital status, occupation, and the presence of chronic disease on the appropriateness of practice, which are in line with the findings of China [7], which noted the impact of age, medical insurance, education, employment and occupation, etc. Moreover, multivariant linear regression analysis was performed to predict the confounding factors affecting KAP towards SM. This study noted a significant positive influence of age and education on knowledge score, which is in line with the findings of Haikou, China, where the level of education was positively correlated with knowledge. In contrast, age was negatively associated with knowledge scores in the same study. Similarly, we observed the significant positive impact of education on practice scores; similar findings were noted in a study in Haikou, China [7]. Overall, COVID-19 infection/recovery and being Saudi national showed to have a positive impact on the level of attitude towards SM. Similarly, age and education showed significantly positive impact on knowledge and practice towards SM. Hence, we assume, that being young, educated, Saudi national, and a previous COVID-19 infection status has a positive impact on KAP towards SM.
More than half of the participants (55.5%) considered SM as a safe practice, which is comparatively higher (33.5%) than findings from residents of Hail [26], Saudi Arabia, but lower compared to the findings of urban Pondicherry (66.6%), India [27]. The findings of this study revealed that more than 80% of residents check the expiry date of medication before using them, similar to the findings of Hail residents [26], Saudi Arabia (85.23%), and higher than the findings of the Ethiopian [24] community (63.7%). About 80% of respondents agree that SM may lead to an incorrect choice of therapy or drug. A similar outcome was mentioned in a study conducted in Hail [26] (83.4%), Saudi Arabia. More than 60% of participants knew that the medicine they used was prescription or OTC, similar to the findings of an earlier study conducted in Riyadh [12], community pharmacy consumers (68.2%), and the adult population of the eastern province (68.6%), Saudi Arabia [28]. The reason for better awareness regarding this statement could be the participant’s study location (pharmacy setting), making them more responsible while responding. Consulting pharmacists for more information regarding drugs used for self-care was stated by about 80% of participants, which is higher compared to the findings from earlier studies conducted in Riyadh, 2011 [12] (37.3%), the adult population of the eastern province, Saudi Arabia [28] (42.29%) and Hail [26], Saudi Arabia (70%). About 90% of participants mentioned that they do not share their medications with others, indicating their responsible behavior and best practice, which is higher than the Ethiopian [24] community (74.7%). Similarly, 90% of respondents stated reading drug instructions on drug packages before using them for self-care, which is a rational practice. Findings from other studies show the low practice of reading drug pamphlets and instructions such as Hail [26], Saudi Arabia (30%), the adult population of the eastern province [28], Saudi Arabia (23.49%), and Riyadh community pharmacy [12] consumers (60%) during 2011.
Irrational SM could lead to adverse health consequences, incorrect diagnosis, increasing the risk of disease exacerbation and increase the burden on the healthcare system. The knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding SM significantly influence the rationality and appropriateness of SM practice. Overall, residents of Riyadh city, Saudi Arabia, have displayed a desirable and satisfactory level of knowledge, attitudes, and practice towards SM. The strategies could be developed to improve the public knowledge and awareness about SM, which will have a direct impact on their health outcome. This includes but is not limited to awareness programs at public places, counselling by community pharmacists, advertisements, and pamphlets.
5. Conclusions
Overall, the residents of Riyadh city have demonstrated an adequate level of knowledge, attitude, and practice scores regarding SM, which would directly impact the rationality and responsibility towards SM practice. Age, education, gender, BMI, occupation, physical activity, and family members working in the healthcare sector were found to have a significant impact on the KAP of residents towards SM. One of the key elements to promote well-being to all ages is through education and awareness. The findings would serve to highlight the gaps in KAP pertaining to self-medication among the population. Consequently, it would be possible to formulate strategies aimed at enhancing the general population’s awareness and knowledge regarding self-medication, thereby directly influencing their health outcomes.
6. Strengths and Limitations
The present study has several strengths that are worth mentioning. We collected 611 complete responses, although a minimum sample of 385 was adequate. Participants were recruited from all the areas of Riyadh city, although the majority were from the north of Riyadh. We excluded the participation of AlMaarefa university students because they have recently participated in a similar study. Additionally, residents residing on visit visas were excluded from the participation due to their limited stay in the country and negligible impact on the healthcare system of the country.
One of the limitations was approaching the participants through a convenient snowball sampling technique. An online survey was distributed through personal contacts, social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, WhatsApp), and visiting selected public places (shopping malls, supermarkets, public parks). This study was conducted in Riyadh city; hence, the study observations cannot be generalized to the entire Saudi population. The study duration was limited to three months duration. A larger sample study with a longer duration is needed to further validate these findings.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to the Deanship of Scientific Research at Najran University for funding this work under the Research Priorities and Najran Research funding program grant code NU/NRP/MRC/12/37. The authors are also thankful to AlMaarefa University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for supporting this study.
Abbreviations
SM | Self-medication |
OTC | Over-the-counter drugs |
WHO | World health organization |
KAP | Knowledge, attitude, and practice |
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.M.A.-Q., B.A.M. and I.A.S.; Data curation, E.Y.G.; Formal analysis, N.S.A., B.F.A. and S.A.H.; Investigation, M.S.A.; Methodology, N.S.A., B.A.M., E.Y.G., I.A.S. and M.S.A.; Project administration, A.M.A.-Q.; Resources, N.S.A., E.Y.G. and I.A.S.; Software, B.A.M. and B.F.A.; Validation, S.A.H.; Writing—original draft, B.A.M. and I.A.S.; Writing—review and editing, A.M.A.-Q., E.Y.G., B.F.A., M.S.A. and S.A.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Institutional Review Board Statement
The study purpose and informed consent were displayed at the beginning of the online survey, and participants could either choose to agree and proceed or disagree and decline the participation, hence making this voluntary study participation. The institutional review board of AlMaarefa University (UM) approved the study on 23 October 2021 with the registration number (02-20102021).
Informed Consent Statement
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement
All relevant data has been included in the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest in this research.
Funding Statement
This research was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Najran University for funding this work under the Research Priorities and Najran Research funding program grant code NU/NRP/MRC/12/37. The authors are also thankful to AlMaarefa University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for supporting this study.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
References
- 1.Zeid W., Hamed M., Mansour N., Diab R. Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Self-Medication among Patients Attending El-Mahsama Family Practice Center, Ismailia, Egypt. Bull. Natl. Res. Cent. 2020;44:92. doi: 10.1186/s42269-020-00351-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Torres N.F., Chibi B., Middleton L.E., Solomon V.P., Mashamba-Thompson T.P. Evidence of Factors Influencing Self-Medication with Antibiotics in Low and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Scoping Review. Public Health. 2019;168:92–101. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2018.11.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Helal R.M., Abou-ElWafa H.S. Self-Medication in University Students from the City of Mansoura, Egypt. J. Environ. Public Health. 2017;2017:9145193. doi: 10.1155/2017/9145193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Alduraibi R.K., Altowayan W.M. A cross-sectional survey: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of self-medication in medical and pharmacy students. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2022;22:352. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07704-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.WHO Guidelines for the Regulatory Assessment of Medicinal Products for Use in Self-Medication. WHO Drug Information. [(accessed on 13 July 2022)];2000 Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/66154.
- 6.Bennadi D. Self-medication: A current challenge. J. Basic Clin. Pharm. 2014;5:19–23. doi: 10.4103/0976-0105.128253. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Wu Y.X., Wang E.H., Zhao X.J., Han F.X., Zhang J.G., Cui L., Chen J., Wu P.P. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of medication among Haikou residents. Ann. Palliat. Med. 2021;10:6883–6891. doi: 10.21037/apm-21-1295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Center for Drug Evaluation Research Drug Applications for Over-the-Counter (OTC) Drugs. [(accessed on 30 July 2022)]; Available online: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/drug-applications-over-counter-otc-drugs.
- 9.Klemenc-Ketis Z., Hladnik Z., Kersnik J. A Cross Sectional Study of Sex Differences in Self-Medication Practices among University Students in Slovenia. Coll. Antropol. 2011;35:329–334. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Makeen H.A., Albarraq A.A., Banji O.J.F., Taymour S., Meraya A., Alqhatani S., Banji D. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward self-medication in a rural population in south-western Saudi Arabia. Saudi J. Health Sci. 2019;8:54–59. doi: 10.4103/sjhs.sjhs_9_19. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Ocan M., Obuku E.A., Bwanga F., Akena D., Richard S., Ogwal-Okeng J., Obua C. Household antimicrobial self-medication: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the burden, risk factors and outcomes in developing countries. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:742. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2109-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Aljadhey H., Assiri G.A., Mahmoud M.A., Al-Aqeel S., Murray M. Self-Medication in Central Saudi Arabia. Community Pharmacy Consumers’ Perspectives. Saudi Med. J. 2015;36:328–334. doi: 10.15537/smj.2015.3.10523. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kagashe G.A., Francis L. Dispensing of Drugs with and without a Prescription from Private Pharmacies in Dar Es Salaam. Tanzan. Med. J. 2004;19:36–39. doi: 10.4314/tmj.v19i1.39199. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Alghanim S.A. Self-Medication Practice among Patients in a Public Health Care System. East. Mediterr. Health J. 2011;17:409–416. doi: 10.26719/2011.17.5.409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Al-Qahtani A.M., Shaikh I.A., Shaikh M.A.K., Mannasaheb B.A., Al-Qahtani F.S. Prevalence, Perception, and Practice, and Attitudes towards Self-Medication among Undergraduate Medical Students of Najran University, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy. 2022;15:257–276. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S346998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Abahussain E., Matowe L.K., Nicholls P.J. Self-Reported Medication Use among Adolescents in Kuwait. Med. Princ. Pract. 2005;14:161–164. doi: 10.1159/000084633. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.James H., Handu S.S., Al-Khaja K.A.J., Otoom S., Sequeira R.P. Evaluation of the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Self-Medication among First-Year Medical Students. Med. Princ. Pract. 2006;15:270–275. doi: 10.1159/000092989. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Alghadeer S., Aljuaydi K., Babelghaith S., Alhammad A., Alarifi M.N. Self-medication with antibiotics in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Pharm. J. 2018;26:719–724. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2018.02.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Al-Ghamdi S., Alfauri T.M., Alharbi M.A., Alsaihati M.M., Alshaykh M.M., Alharbi A.A., Aljaizani N.S., Allehiby I.A., Alzahrani M.A., Alharbi A.S. Current self-medication practices in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: An observational study. Pan Afr. Med. J. 2020;37:51. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2020.37.51.24098. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Gowdar I.M., Alhaqbani M.M., Almughirah A.M., Basalem S.A., Alsultan F.I., Alkhathlan M.R. Knowledge and Practice about Self-Medication for Oral Health Problems among Population in Riyadh Region, Saudi Arabia. J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci. 2021;13((Suppl. S1)):S246–S250. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_702_20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Suleiman A. Self-Medication and the Advisory Role of Pharmacists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Arch. Pharm. Pract. 2013;4:180–185. doi: 10.4103/2045-080X.123228. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Almalak H., Albluwi A.I., Alkhelb D.A., Alsaleh H.M., Khan T.M., Hassali M.A.A., Aljadhey H. Students’ Attitude toward Use of over-the-Counter Medicines during Exams in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Pharm. J. 2014;22:107–112. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2013.02.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Albusalih F.A., Naqvi A.A., Ahmad R., Ahmad N. Prevalence of Self-Medication among Students of Pharmacy and Medicine Colleges of a Public Sector University in Dammam City, Saudi Arabia. Pharmacy. 2017;5:51. doi: 10.3390/pharmacy5030051. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Shafie M., Eyasu M., Muzeyin K., Worku Y., Martin-Aragon S. Prevalence and determinants of self-medication practice among selected households in Addis Ababa community. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0194122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.United Nation’s Department of Economic and Social Affairs Sustainable Development for Health and Population. SDG-3. [(accessed on 3 November 2022)]; Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/topics/health-and-population.
- 26.Ansari M., Alanazi A., Moin A. Consumers’ awareness, attitude and associated factors towards self-medication in Hail, Saudi Arabia. PLoS ONE. 2020;15:e0232322. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232322. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Selvaraj K., Kumar S.G., Ramalingam A. Prevalence of self-medication practices and its associated factors in Urban Puducherry, India. Perspect. Clin. Res. 2014;5:32–36. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.124569. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Ali M.D., Ahmad A., Lewis S., Kannan L., Sadek F.A., Al-Tawal Z.A., Ansari M.S. Evaluation of Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) about Self-medication among Adult Population of Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. J. Pharm. Res. Int. 2022;34:59–70. doi: 10.9734/jpri/2022/v34i27A35997. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Mannasaheb B.A., Al-Yamani M.J., Alajlan S.A., Alqahtani L.M., Alsuhimi S.E., Almuzaini R.I., Albaqawi A.F., Alshareef Z.M. Knowledge, attitude, practices and viewpoints of undergraduate university students towards self-medication: An institution-based studsy in Riyadh. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021;18:8545. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18168545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
All relevant data has been included in the manuscript.